Law Commons^™

Replies To Professor Chemerinsky, David W. Levy, Harry F. Tepker Jr., Arthur G. Lefrancois, Kevin W. Saunders, Michael A. Scaperlanda, Katheleen R. Guzman, Lindsay G. Robertson

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Further Thoughts, Erwin Chemerinsky

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Just So Stories: Posnerian Methodology, Jeanne L. Schroeder

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Meaning, Intention, And The Hearsay Rule., Paul F. Kirgis

Faculty Law Review Articles

In this Article, I draw on insights from the linguistic discipline of pragmatics to offer another way to understand and apply the definition of hearsay in the Federal Rules of Evidence. Pragmatics is concerned with how we use language in real-world contexts to accomplish various objectives.' By identifying the conventions that govern language usage, pragmatics provides ways to analyze what a speaker means when he says something and how meaning is conveyed through language.5 Pragmatics thus has obvious utility for the study of hearsay.

The philosopher Paul Grice looms over the field of pragmatics. His theory of conversational implicature revolutionized …

"Shut Up He Explained", Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Part I of this Commentary examines the conversational model of politics. I argue that the virtues Bennett finds in the conversational model exist only when, and to the extent that, participants in civil and political society can engage in undominated conversation. The requirement that conversation be undominated generates a substantial set of social prerequisites, mostly dealing with equality. And yet, determining what social arrangements actually satisfy those prerequisites is itself a matter of constitutional controversy. Resolving such controversies through politics is no solution, because the political arena is where we seek to ensure that nondomination prevails in civil society, and, …

Hegel's Theory Of Quality, David Gray Carlson

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Conflicts Empiricism, Gene R. Shreve

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Pushing Evolutionary Analysis Of Law Or Evolving Law: Design Without A Designer, Jeffrey E. Stake

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The European Court Of Human Rights’ Jurisprudence On Issues Of Forced Disappearances, Gobind Singh Sethi

Human Rights Brief

No abstract provided.

Latcrit At Five: Institutionalizing A Postsubordination Future, Elizabeth M. Iglesias, Francisco Valdes

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Talmudic Rule Against Self-Incrimination And The American Exclusionary Rule: A Societal Prohibition Versus An Affirmative Individual Right, Suzanne Darrow-Kleinhaus

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Interpretive Communities: The Missing Element In Statutory Interpretation, William S. Blatt

Articles

No abstract provided.

Cook V. Gralike: Easy Cases And Structural Reasoning, Vicki C. Jackson

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Cook v Gralike, the Court - unanimous as to result - struck down a Missouri initiative amending the state constitution to require that the failure of candidates for U.S. Congress to support a particular term-limits amendment to the United States Constitution be noted on the ballot. In an opinion joined by seven Justices, the Court held that the Missouri law exceeded the scope of states' powers to regulate the "time, place and manner" of holding congressional elections . . . The opinions are analyzed preliminarily in Part I. Part II below suggests that even if there were no Elections …

Joseph In Lawyerland, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

As Alice wanders through Wonderland in an unreal space in real time-a dream-learning backward truths from illogical creatures who speak in paradoxes, so Joseph figuratively wanders through lawyerland in an unreal time, but in a very real space-Manhattan-conversing with his thinly fictionalized friends, all of whom happen to be lawyers, about their lives and practices in law. As Joseph's lawyers talk with him about the law they practice, they uncover, through White Rabbit and Cheshire Cat-like illogical precision, a chaotic, unkempt, unconscionably reckless, often cruel, and sometimes pathological legal wilderness. The legal terrain these lawyers occupy is not an inviting …

Applying Just War Jus Bello Doctrine To Reprisals: An Afghan Hypothetical, Michael F. Noone Jr.

Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

As Justice And Prudence Dictate: The Morality Of America’S War Against Terrorism—A Response To James V. Schall, S.J.,, William J. Wagner

Scholarly Articles

This response to Father Schall's article explores just how three principles, which he proposes in general terms as central to integrity in moral reasoning and decision over the use of military force, serve, in fact, to organize an assessment of the rights and wrongs of actions by states and individuals within a conflict like the one coming to a crisis on September 11th. In the course of its analysis, the article means to show that prudence has a role, not only once the requirements of justice are satisfied, as a too casual reading of Father Schall's article might perhaps imply, …

Getting Beyond Formalism In Constitutional Law: Constitutional Theory Matters, Erwin Chemerinsky

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Politics And Denial, Pierre Schlag

Publications

No abstract provided.

Rule Of Law And The Limits Of Sovereignty: The Private Prison In Jurisprudential Perspective, Ahmed A. White

Publications

No abstract provided.

Reasoning With Rules, Joseph Raz

Faculty Scholarship

What is special about legal reasoning? In what way is it distinctive? How does it differ from reasoning in medicine, or engineering, physics, or everyday life? The answers range from the very ambitious to the modest. The ambitious claim that there is a special and distinctive legal logic, or legal ways of reasoning, modes of reasoning which set the law apart from all other disciplines. Opposing them are the modest, who claim that there is nothing special to legal reasoning, that reason is the same in all domains. According to them, only the contents of the law differentiate it from …

The Principles Of Justice, In Symposium, Propter Honoris Respectum: John Finnis, Richard W. Wright

All Faculty Scholarship

Many theorists claim that justice is a question-begging concept that has no inherent substantive content. They point to disagreements among justice theorists themselves about basic aspects of the justice theory, such as the nature of corrective justice and the distinction between it and distributive justice, as even further reason to dismiss the concept of justice or to fill it with their preferred theoretical content. Yet most persons perceive that the concept of justice is not an empty shell. Since ancient times it has been thought to encompass not merely a formal equality (treating like cases alike), but also a substantive …

Concurring In Result Without Written Opinion: A Condemnable Practice, Ira Robbins

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Business Partners As Fiduciaries: Reflections On The Limits Of Doctrine, Robert W. Hillman

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Assessing The New Judicial Minimalism, Christopher J. Peters

All Faculty Scholarship

In this article, which has been published in slightly revised form at 100 Colum. L. Rev. 1454 (2000), I critique some recently prominent arguments for "judicial minimalism" in constitutional decisionmaking. Current minimalist arguments, I contend, are primarily "policentric," that is, focused on the role the judiciary can play in bolstering the accountability and deliberativeness of the political branches. Drawing in part on a previous article, I offer an alternative approach to minimalism that is "juricentric" - focused on the inherent democratic legitimacy of the adjudicative process and the unique competence of that process to produce decisions about individual rights. I …

First Amendment—Campaign Finance Reform—The Supreme Court Halts The Eighth Circuit's Invalidation Of State Campaign Contribution Limits. Nixon V. Shrink Missouri Government Political Action Committee, 120 S. Ct. 897 (2000)., Erin Buford Vinett

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Treaty Power And American Federalism, Part Ii, Curtis A. Bradley

Michigan Law Review

In an article published in this Review two years ago, I described and critiqued what I called the "nationalist view" of the treaty power. Under this view, the national government has the constitutional power to enter into treaties, and thereby create binding national law by virtue of the Supremacy Clause, without regard to either subject matter or federalism limitations. This view is reflected in the writings of a number of prominent foreign affairs law scholars, as well as in the American Law Institute's Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law of the United States. In my article, I argued that this …

Disentangling Deregulatory Takings, Jim Rossi, Susan G. Rose-Ackerman

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Constitutional takings protections, such as those in the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, create a potential for state liability for changes in regulatory policy by governments. This Article critiques takings jurisprudence in the context of two infrastructure investment issues: the stranded cost problem facing United States utility industries, which has given rise to claims of compensation for deregulatory takings; and the development of standards to protect direct foreign investment in developing countries. In both contexts, traditional legal doctrines do not adequately provide for the type of remedy sought so courts are in need of standards to assist them …

Checking Congress And Balancing Federalism: A Lesson From Separation-Of-Powers Jurisprudence, Keith Werham

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Legal Institutions In Professor H.L.A. Hart's Concept Of Law, Robert S. Summers

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Legal Hermeneutics At A Crossroads: Giuseppe Zaccaria's Questioni Di Interpretazione (1996), Ioannis S. Papadopoulos, Mark Tushnet

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article explores the potential for enriching U.S. legal scholarship through engagement with European legal hermeneutics, particularly the work of Giuseppe Zaccaria. It argues that while U.S. legal thought has been influenced by various movements like legal realism and critical legal studies, it often lacks the deeper philosophical underpinnings found in continental scholarship. Zaccaria's work, rooted in hermeneutic theory, offers a bridge between European and American legal thought, emphasizing the role of practical reason, language, and community in legal interpretation.