Legal reasoning, pronouncements of judgment, the design and implementation of statutes, and even constitution-making and discourse all depend on timing. This compelling study examines the diverse interactions between law and time, and provides important perspectives on how law's architecture can be understood through time. The book revisits older work on legal transitions and breaks new ground on timing rules, especially with respect to how judges, legislators and regulators use time as a tool when devising new rules. At its core, The Timing of Lawmaking goes directly to the heart of the most basic of legal debates: when should we respect the past, and when should we make a clean break for the future?
In Lawmaking under Pressure, Giovanni Mantilla analyzes the origins and development of the international humanitarian treaty rules that now exist to regulate internal armed conflict. Until well into the twentieth century, states allowed atrocious violence as an acceptable product of internal conflict. Why have states created international laws to control internal armed conflict? Why did states compromise their national security by accepting these international humanitarian constraints? Why did they create these rules at improbable moments, as European empires cracked, freedom fighters emerged, and fears of communist rebellion spread? Mantilla explores the global politics and diplomatic dynamics that led to the creation of such laws in 1949 and in the 1970s. By the 1949 Diplomatic Conference that revised the Geneva Conventions, most countries supported legislation committing states and rebels to humane principles of wartime behavior and to the avoidance of abhorrent atrocities, including torture and the murder of non-combatants. However, for decades, states had long refused to codify similar regulations concerning violence within their own borders. Diplomatic conferences in Geneva twice channeled humanitarian attitudes alongside Cold War and decolonization politics, even compelling reluctant European empires Britain and France to accept them. Lawmaking under Pressure documents the tense politics behind the making of humanitarian laws that have become touchstones of the contemporary international normative order. Mantilla not only explains the pressures that resulted in constraints on national sovereignty but also uncovers the fascinating international politics of shame, status, and hypocrisy that helped to produce the humanitarian rules now governing internal conflict.
This book explores why some members of Congress are more effective than others at navigating the legislative process and what this means for how Congress is organized and what policies it produces. Craig Volden and Alan E. Wiseman develop a new metric of individual legislator effectiveness (the Legislative Effectiveness Score) that will be of interest to scholars, voters, and politicians alike. They use these scores to study party influence in Congress, the successes or failures of women and African Americans in Congress, policy gridlock, and the specific strategies that lawmakers employ to advance their agendas.
This book explores the close, complex and consequential – yet to a large extent implicit – relationship between international law and time. There is a conspicuous discrepancy between international law’s technical preoccupation with the mechanics of temporal rules and the absence of more foundational considerations of how time – both as an irrepressible physical dimension manifesting in the passage of time, and as a social construct shaped by diverse social and cultural factors – impacts and interacts with international law. Divided into five parts and 21 chapters, this book explores key aspects of the relationship between international law and time and puts the spotlight on time’s fundamental significance for international law as a legal order and as a discipline. Pursuing diverse approaches to international law, the authors consider the notion, significance, manifestations, uses and implications of time in international law in a wide range of contexts, and offer insights into the various ways in which international law and international lawyers cope with time, both in terms of constructing narratives and in devising and employing particular legal techniques.
Most major measures wind their way through the contemporary Congress in what Barbara Sinclair has dubbed “unorthodox lawmaking.” In this much-anticipated Fifth Edition of Unorthodox Lawmaking, Sinclair explores the full range of special procedures and processes that make up Congress’s work, as well as the reasons these unconventional routes evolved. The author introduces students to the intricacies of Congress and provides the tools to assess the relative successes and limitations of the institution. This dramatically updated revision incorporates a wealth of new cases and examples to illustrate the changes occurring in congressional process. Two entirely new case study chapters—on the 2013 government shutdown and the 2015 reauthorization of the Patriot Act—highlight Sinclair’s fresh analysis and the book is now introduced by a new foreword from noted scholar and teacher, Bruce I. Oppenheimer, reflecting on this book and Barbara Sinclair’s significant mark on the study of Congress.
"The Economics of Lawmaking explores the relative advantages and limits of alternative sources of law. Francesco Parisi and Vincy Fon explore the process of legal rule production while considering issues of institutional design from a law and economics point of view." "The authors provide a comprehensive overview of the four fundamental sources of law: legislation, judge-made law. customary law, and international law. The defining features of these four sources are then dissected and closely examined using economic analysts and public choice theory. Each part includes an introduction into the lawmaking process for each source, and goes on to discuss such other issues as the optimal specificity of law in legislation to the theories of legal precedent, and to changes in customary lawmaking."--BOOK JACKET.
Offering a unique perspective on an overlooked subject – the relationship between time, change, and lawmaking – this edited collection brings together world-leading experts to consider how time considerations and social, political and technological change affect the legislative process, the interpretation of laws, the definition of the powers of the government and the ability of legal orders to promote innovation. Divided into four parts, each part considers a different form of interaction between time and law, and change. The first part offers legal, theoretical and historical perspectives on the relationship between time and law, and how time shaped law and influences legal interpretation and constitutional change. The second part offers the reader an analysis of the different ways in which courts approach the impact of time on law, as well as theoretical and empirical reflections upon the meaning of the principle of legal certainty, legitimate expectations and the influence of law over time. The third part of the book analyses how legislation and the legislative process addresses time and change, and the various challenges they create to the legal order. The fourth and final part addresses the complex relationship between fast-paced technological change and the regulation of innovations.
Human reason is limited. Given the scarcity of reason, how should the power to make constitutional law be allocated among legislatures, courts and the executive, and how should legal institutions be designed? In Law and the Limits of Reason, Adrian Vermeule denies the widespread view, stemming from Burke and Hayek, that the limits of reason counsel in favor of judges making "living" constitutional law in the style of the common law. Instead, he proposes and defends a "codified constitution" - a regime in which legislatures have the primary authority to develop constitutional law over time, through statutes and constitutional amendments. Vermeule contends that precisely because of the limits of human reason, large modern legislatures, with their numerous and highly diverse memberships and their complex internal structures for processing information, are the most epistemically effective lawmaking institutions.
From the Affordable Care Act to No Child Left Behind, politicians often face a puzzling problem: although most Americans support the aims and key provisions of these policies, they oppose the bills themselves. How can this be? Why does the American public so often reject policies that seem to offer them exactly what they want? By the time a bill is pushed through Congress or ultimately defeated, we’ve often been exposed to weeks, months—even years—of media coverage that underscores the unpopular process of policymaking, and Mary Layton Atkinson argues that this leads us to reject the bill itself. Contrary to many Americans’ understandings of the policymaking process, the best answer to a complex problem is rarely self-evident, and politicians must weigh many potential options, each with merits and drawbacks. As the public awaits a resolution, the news media tend to focus not on the substance of the debate but on descriptions of partisan combat. This coverage leads the public to believe everyone in Washington has lost sight of the problem altogether and is merely pursuing policies designed for individual political gain. Politicians in turn exacerbate the problem when they focus their objections to proposed policies on the lawmaking process, claiming, for example, that a bill is being pushed through Congress with maneuvers designed to limit minority party input. These negative portrayals become linked in many people’s minds with the policy itself, leading to backlash against bills that may otherwise be seen as widely beneficial. Atkinson argues that journalists and educators can make changes to help inoculate Americans against the idea that debate always signifies dysfunction in the government. Journalists should strive to better connect information about policy provisions to the problems they are designed to ameliorate. Educators should stress that although debate sometimes serves political interests, it also offers citizens a window onto the lawmaking process that can help them evaluate the work their government is doing.
This book addresses the lively interaction between the disciplines of law and economics. The contributions encompass some of the core controversial issues in the disciplines arising from interactions between legal orderings and economic institutions.
