Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Legal Philosophy (5)
- Jurisprudence (4)
- Law and Society (3)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (2)
- Philosophy (2)
-
- Civil Rights (1)
- Clinton (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Criminal Sentencing (1)
- Election Law (1)
- Immigration (1)
- Law and Economics (1)
- Law and History (1)
- Law and Philosophy/Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and Social Sciences (1)
- Legal Profession (1)
- Legal Writing and Research (1)
- Lying (1)
- Mental Health Law (1)
- Politics (1)
- Privacy Law (1)
- Psychology and Psychiatry (1)
- Race (1)
- Separation of Powers (1)
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Hazards Of Legal Fine Tuning: Confronting The Free Will Problem In Election Law Scholarship, Michael A. Fitts
The Hazards Of Legal Fine Tuning: Confronting The Free Will Problem In Election Law Scholarship, Michael A. Fitts
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Not So Hard (And Not So Special), After All: Comments On Zimring's "The Hardest Of The Hard Cases", Stephen J. Morse
Not So Hard (And Not So Special), After All: Comments On Zimring's "The Hardest Of The Hard Cases", Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Preempting Oneself: The Right And The Duty To Forestall One's Own Wrongdoing, Leo Katz
Preempting Oneself: The Right And The Duty To Forestall One's Own Wrongdoing, Leo Katz
All Faculty Scholarship
Economists and philosophers working on problems of rational choice have for some time been concerned with various puzzles raised by so-called "Ullysean" configurations: actors who rationally cause themselves to act irrationally. (e.g., the person who swallows Thomas Schelling's famous irrationality pill to preempt an attempted robbery). What has attracted less attention is that these configurations present fascinating problems for morality, most especially for non-consequentialist morality. This article undertakes the exploration of some of these problems and the implications they hold for the morality of preemptive detention, preemptive self-defense, the creation of prophylactic crimes (like our drug laws) and a variety …
Lying To Protect Privacy, Anita L. Allen
Lying To Protect Privacy, Anita L. Allen
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Neither Desert Nor Disease, Stephen J. Morse
Neither Desert Nor Disease, Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Social Contract Theory In American Case Law, Anita L. Allen
Social Contract Theory In American Case Law, Anita L. Allen
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Crazy Reasons, Stephen J. Morse
Personal Fulfillment In The Changing World Of Law Practice: Opportunities And Obstacles, Howard Lesnick
Personal Fulfillment In The Changing World Of Law Practice: Opportunities And Obstacles, Howard Lesnick
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Deadweight Costs And Intrinsic Wrongs Of Nativism: Economics, Freedom, And Legal Suppression Of Spanish, William W. Bratton, Drucilla L. Cornell
Deadweight Costs And Intrinsic Wrongs Of Nativism: Economics, Freedom, And Legal Suppression Of Spanish, William W. Bratton, Drucilla L. Cornell
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
On The Obligation Of The State To Extend A Right Of Self-Defense To Its Citizens, Claire Oakes Finkelstein
On The Obligation Of The State To Extend A Right Of Self-Defense To Its Citizens, Claire Oakes Finkelstein
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The New Etiquette Of Federalism: New York, Printz, And Yeskey, Matthew D. Adler, Seth F. Kreimer
The New Etiquette Of Federalism: New York, Printz, And Yeskey, Matthew D. Adler, Seth F. Kreimer
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Threats And Preemptive Practices, Claire Oakes Finkelstein
Threats And Preemptive Practices, Claire Oakes Finkelstein
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
On Hate And Equality, Alon Harel, Gideon Parchomovsky
On Hate And Equality, Alon Harel, Gideon Parchomovsky
All Faculty Scholarship
Hate crime legislation has sparked substantial political controversy and scholarly discussion. Existing justifications for hate crime legislation proceed on the premise that the rationale supporting such legislation must be found either in the greater gravity of the wrongdoing involved or in the perpetrator's greater degree of culpability. This premise stems from a fundamental theory that dominates criminal law scholarship: the wrongfulness-culpability hypothesis. The wrongfulness-culpability hypothesis posits that the only two grounds that may justify disparate treatment of offenses are the greater wrongfulness of the act or the greater culpability of the perpetrator. Yet, all attempts to demonstrate that hate crimes …