Law Commons^™

The Positive Criteria Of Legal Norms, Claudio Bozzi Dr

Claudio Bozzi Dr

With the publication of Faktizitat und Geltung Jurgen Habermas sought to extend his normative critical arguments to jurisprudence. In this work he argues that the law can mediate and coordinate valid social integration in complex modern societies because it is capable of receiving normative inputs from the public sphere, which are then translated into the administrative system. Throughout his extensive writings, Habermas has referred to a principle of the universalisation of the valid norm. Its role in pluralist societies is therefore not to offer a substantial value, but to guide in the character of a regulative idea. This idea would …

The Positive Criteria Of Legal Norms, Claudio Bozzi Dr

Claudio Bozzi Dr

This paper argues that Habermas’s principle of universalisation, which is posited not as a substantive value but a regulative idea which mediates impartially amongst a plurality of goods, fails to maintain the impartiality of the discourse. Rather, positive assumptions about goods are unavoidable entailments of a situated and historical norm. The laws’ coordinating role achieved by translating the normative inputs it receives from the public sphere and applying them to administrative purpose must be understood not as a universal consensus but in deliberative terms whereby the mediation of particular audiences is considered an element of rationality. But normativity cannot simply …

Can You Provide Evidence Of Insufficient Evidence? The Precautionary Principle At The Wto, Elisa Vecchione

Elisa Vecchione

This paper aims to demonstrate that the WTO jurisprudence on science-related trade disputes has become entangled with a specific vision of science that has prevented any possible application of the precautionary principle. This situation is due to reasons of both legal procedures specific to the WTO dispute settlement system and the substantive nature of precautionary measures. Indeed, their foundation on “insufficient scientific evidence” dramatically complicates the question of the probative value of science for the purpose of legal adjudication and creates a seemingly contradictory situation, of which the Panel on the EC-Biotech case confirmed to be a victim: that of …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Friendly Fire Casualties Of American Civil Liberty In The War On Terror: Humanitarian Law Project V. Holder And The Erosion Of Free Speech, Alicia C. Armstrong Esq.

Alicia C Armstrong

The holding in Humanitarian Law Project (HLP) v. Holder marks a significant shift in First Amendment doctrine, unprecedented since the early twentieth century “Red Scare” cases. The HLP decision suggests that free speech principles which have been developing for over half a century—culminating in the paramount protection of “subversive advocacy”—are less deserving of adherence in the face of terrorism than in times of relative peace. Throughout the past several decades, the Court has retreated from the notion that speech which is disturbing to public opinion but benign in its capability to incite imminent lawless action deserves lower legal protection. To …

Immigrant Laws, Obstacle Preemption And The Lost Legacy Of Mcculloch, Lauren Gilbert

Lauren Gilbert

Using Congress’ perceived failure to enforce the immigration laws as a backdrop, this paper will explore how the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Chamber of Commerce v.Whiting upholding the Legal Arizona Workers Act exposes some of the tensions and contradictions in modern preemption doctrine. Examining the relationship among express, field, impossibility and obstacle preemption, I explore three emerging trends, all evident in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting. The first is an increasing reluctance of the Court to find implied obstacle preemption. The second related trend is an inclination to expand the scope of impossibility preemption beyond the physical impossibility cases. …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

The Development Of Charity: Anti-Poverty Measures Of Ancient Jewish Law & Jurisprudence, William H. Byrnes Iv

William H Byrnes IV

This article describes the ancient Jewish practices, codified in Biblical law and later legal commentary, to protect the needy. The Jews’ anti-poverty measures - including regulation of agriculture, loans, working conditions, and customs for sharing at feasts - were a significant development in the jurisprudence of charity. The first half begins with a brief history of ancient Jewish civilization, providing context for the development of charity by exploring the living conditions of the poor. The second half concludes with a description of the Jewish laws, Mishnah and Talmudic commentary, as well as the practice and codification of Rabbinical teaching that …

Incommensurability, Practices And Points Of View: Revitalizing H.La. Hart’S Practice Theory Of Rules, Eric J. Miller

Eric J. Miller

The standard reading of H.L.A. Hart’s practice theory of rules is that it failed to provide a sufficient normative basis for a theory of law. That standard reading rests upon a significant misunderstanding: that Hart has an exclusionary reason approach to law. Instead, Hart understands law to be a social practice, one capable of generating valid norms that not only block the operation of moral norms, but which are wholesale incommensurable with them.

Wholesale incommensurability entails that law, as a form of social practice, constitutes a discrete normative system in which the truth-conditions of legal propositions are distinct from the …

The Invisible Man: How The Sex Offender Registry Results In Social Death, Elizabeth B. Megale

Elizabeth B. Megale

This Article establishes that overcriminalization serves to marginalize unwanted groups of society, and particularly regarding the sex offender registry, it results in social death. The author relies upon the notion of crime as a social construct to establish that the concept of “sex offense” changes over time as society and culture evolve. From there, the author incorporates the work of Michele Foucault involving the relationship of power, knowledge, and sexuality to show how the trend toward more repressive social controls over sex-related activity is related to a shift in this relationship. The Author identifies three characteristics and the associated traits …

Contract + Tort = Property: The Trade Secret Illustration, Matthew E. Cavanaugh Mba Cpa Esq.

Matthew E. Cavanaugh MBA CPA Esq.

This article commences with an introduction to the use of Hegel’s famous dialectical method as an arithmetic analysis of law. It reviews Hegel’s assertion that the sum of property and contract is tort and crime, and then suggests a better dialectic is that contract plus tort equals property. This article then reviews the doctrines of contract, tort, and property, focusing on the plaintiff’s rights and remedies, and who can be defendants in each of the three doctrines. The article next reviews the law of one particular type of intellectual property, trade secrets, because this article uses trade secrets as a …

Freezing Assets In The War On Terror: Ofac And The Fourth Amendment, Rebecca Kagan Sternhell

Rebecca Kagan Sternhell

In 2001, President Bush issued Executive Order 13224 declaring a state of national emergency and triggering an array of emergency powers. Chief among these powers was the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”), which permits the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (“OFAC”) to freeze the assets and accounts of suspected terrorists and their affiliates. Recently OFAC has gone after U.S. charities. Three US charities filed suit alleging Fourth Amendment violations. Each organization received a different judicial determination on the Fourth Amendment question. The paper discusses these three cases and demonstrates no consensus on the Fourth Amendment issue. There …

Why The Demands Of Formalism Will Prevent New Originalism From Furthering Conservative Political Goals, Daniel James Hornal

Daniel Hornal

Proponents of New Originalism propose that their modifications solve the indeterminacy and predictability problems inherent in early conceptions of originalism. This paper argues that excluding extrinsic evidence and relying only on the formal implications of the text merely switches one indeterminacy and predictability problem for another. Rules inherently carry implications unknown to rule writers. In the case of open-textured rules such as those in the Constitution, a broad reading can occupy whole fields of law, whereas a narrow reading can have almost no real-world effects. Because they must ignore extrinsic evidence, new originalists are almost unbound in their choice of …

Variable Multipolarity And Un Security Council Reform, Bart M.J. Szewczyk

Bart M.J. Szewczyk

One of the fundamental international law questions over the past two decades, and an integral issue for US policy, has been the structure of the United Nations Security Council. In a world of variable multipolarity, whereby changing crises demand different combinations of actors with relevant resources and shared interests, the Council’s reform should be based not on expanded permanent membership—as mistakenly held by conventional wisdom—but on inclusive contextual participation in decision-making. The Council’s five permanent members continue to have collective resources relative to the rest of the world that are not significantly different than at the founding of the UN. …

Hermeneutics And Judicial Interpretation, Fernando Armando Ribeiro

fernando armando ribeiro

Modern hermeneutics teaches us that everything which is perceived and represented by human beings refers to a process of interpretation, and that the world comes to mind through language. Therefore, Law depends on the hermeneutic mediation. Without hermeneutics there is no law, only normative texts. This paper makes use of the philosophical hermeneutics by Gadamer to investigate the limits and possibilities of judicial interpretation. The paper explores the contribution of philosophical hermeneutics to a new model of rationality and how it can influence the application of Law, and not only legal theory. Therefore, we will examine some of the most …

The Distorted Reality Of Civil Recourse Theory, Alan Calnan

Alan Calnan

In their recent article Torts as Wrongs, Professors John C.P. Goldberg and Benjamin C. Zipursky offer their most complete and accessible explanation of the civil recourse theory (CRT) of tort law. A purely descriptive account, CRT holds that tort law is exclusively a scheme of private rights for the redress of legal wrongs and is not a pragmatic mechanism for imposing strict liability or implementing public policy. The present paper challenges this view by revealing critical errors in its perspective, methodology, and analysis. It shows that Goldberg and Zipursky do not objectively observe tort law and uncritically report what they …

Results-Oriented Jurisprudence: A Second Circuit Panel Meets J. D. Salinger Coming Through The Rye, Kathleen (Kate) M. O'Neill

Kathleen M. O'Neill

ABSTRACT The Second Circuit’s 2010 decision in Salinger v. Colting has been widely noticed for vacating a preliminary injunction J. D. Salinger obtained against distribution in the U.S. of Fredrik Colting’s novel, 60 YEARS LATER – COMING THROUGH THE RYE. In an opinion by Judge Guido Calabresi, the panel adopted the standard for equitable relief from eBay, Inc. v. MercExchange (U.S. 2006), overruled circuit precedent, and held that henceforth district courts must find, not presume, that irreparable harm is in fact likely before enjoining a copyright defendant’s activities. This is the first article to observe that what the Second Circuit …

Localizing Religion In A Jewish State, Yishai Blank Prof.

Yishai Blank

Cities in Israel are regulating religion and controlling religious liberty. They decide whether to close down roads during the Sabbath, whether to limit the selling of pork meat within their jurisdiction, whether to prohibit sex stores from opening, and whether to allocate budgets and lands to religious activities. They do all that by using their regular local powers as well as special enablement laws which the Israeli parliament enacts from time to time. The immediacy of these issues, the fact that the traditional powers—business licensing, traffic and road control, spending and more—of local authorities touch upon many of them, and …

Safeguarding The Safeguards: The Extension Of Structural Protection To Non-Fundamental Liberties, Abigail R. Moncrieff

Abigail R. Moncrieff

As the lawsuits challenging the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) have evolved, one feature of the litigation has proven especially rankling to the legal academy: the incorporation of substantive libertarian concerns into the structural federalism analysis. The breadth and depth of scholarly criticism is surprising, however, given that judges frequently choose indirect methods, including structural and process-based methods of the kinds at issue in the ACA litigation, for protecting substantive constitutional values. Indeed, indirection in the protection of constitutional liberties is a well-known and well-theorized strategy, which one scholar recently termed “semisubstantive review” and another recently theorized as …

Does 'Sorry' Incriminate? Evidence, Harm And The Meaning Of Apologies, Jeffrey S. Helmreich

Jeffrey S. Helmreich

Apology has proven a dramatically effective means of resolving conflict and preventing litigation. Still, many injurers, particularly physicians, withhold apologies because they have long been used as evidence of liability. Recently, a majority of states in the U.S. have passed “Apology Laws” designed to lift this disincentive, by shielding apologies from evidentiary use. However, most of the new laws protect only expressions of benevolence and sympathy (such as “I feel bad about what happened to you”). They exclude full apologies, which express regret, remorse or self-criticism (“I should have prevented it,” for example). The state measures thereby reinforce a prevailing …

(Dis)Owning Religious Speech, Jessie Hill

Jessie Hill

To claims of a right to equal citizenship, one of the primary responses has long been to assert the right of private property. It is therefore somewhat troubling that, in two recent cases involving public displays of religious symbolism, the Supreme Court embraced property law and rhetoric when faced with the claims of minority religious speakers for inclusion and equality. The first, Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, is a free speech case in which the defendant evaded a finding that it was discriminating against the plaintiff’s religious speech by claiming a government speech defense. In the process, it claimed as …

New Custom: Customary Law As A Progressive Force In Contemporary International Law, Elizabeth Campbell

Elizabeth Campbell

This paper examines the emergence of a new form of customary international law and its use as a progressive law making tool in the field of international law. It discusses the definitional problems with the orthodox tests of customary law, state practice and opinio juris, and how these ambiguities have been exploited by States wishing support for a particular norm they feel should get customary law status. It is argued that through this laxity, customary international law has inadvertently provided a new forum for the development of progressive law. The paper begins with an examination of the difficulties in defining …