Columbia Law Review最新文献_第10页

IF 2.9 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

Columbia Law Review

Pub Date : 2003-01-01 DOI: 10.2307/1123697

Michael C. Dorf

In Regulating Intimacy: A New Legal Paradigm, Jean Cohen synthesizes liberal and egalitarian justifications for a right to sexual privacy. Cohen proposes that regulation of sexual privacy, where permissible, be accomplished through "reflexive law." This Review Essay expresses broad sympathy for Cohen's project, while suggesting an expansion. In Cohen's reflexive paradigm, the sovereign in its lawmaking capacity sets general standards that steer primary actors but simultaneously leave them with a substantial zone of freedom in which to engage in self-regulation. Although it permits substantial autonomy, Cohen's conception of reflexive law is essentially topdown. This Review Essay offers an amended account of reflexive law in which data drawn from experience at the relatively local level are continually refined and transmitted to the relatively central standard-setter, which uses the data continually to update the standards all must meet. This amended account is accordingly both top-down and bottom-up, and for that reason it may be particularly well-suited to contexts-such as regulation of issues touching on sexual privacy-where the simple announcement of a controversial legal norm would meet with substantial opposition.

在《规范亲密关系:一种新的法律范式》一书中，吉恩·科恩综合了性隐私权的自由主义和平等主义正当性。科恩建议，在允许的情况下，通过“反身法”来规范性隐私。这篇评论文章表达了对科恩项目的广泛同情，同时建议进行扩展。在科恩的反身性范式中，拥有立法能力的主权设定了一般标准，指导主要行为者，但同时给他们留下了一个实质性的自由区域，让他们参与自我监管。虽然它允许实质的自治，但科恩的反身法概念本质上是自上而下的。这篇评论文章提供了对反身性法律的修正说明，在反身性法律中，从相对地方层面的经验中提取的数据不断得到提炼，并传递给相对中心的标准制定者，后者不断使用这些数据来更新所有人必须满足的标准。这种修正后的解释相应地是自上而下和自下而上的，因此它可能特别适合于这样的环境——比如涉及性隐私的问题的监管——在这种情况下，简单地宣布一项有争议的法律规范会遭到大量反对。

{"title":"The Domain of Reflexive Law","authors":"Michael C. Dorf","doi":"10.2307/1123697","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/1123697","url":null,"abstract":"In Regulating Intimacy: A New Legal Paradigm, Jean Cohen synthesizes liberal and egalitarian justifications for a right to sexual privacy. Cohen proposes that regulation of sexual privacy, where permissible, be accomplished through \"reflexive law.\" This Review Essay expresses broad sympathy for Cohen's project, while suggesting an expansion. In Cohen's reflexive paradigm, the sovereign in its lawmaking capacity sets general standards that steer primary actors but simultaneously leave them with a substantial zone of freedom in which to engage in self-regulation. Although it permits substantial autonomy, Cohen's conception of reflexive law is essentially topdown. This Review Essay offers an amended account of reflexive law in which data drawn from experience at the relatively local level are continually refined and transmitted to the relatively central standard-setter, which uses the data continually to update the standards all must meet. This amended account is accordingly both top-down and bottom-up, and for that reason it may be particularly well-suited to contexts-such as regulation of issues touching on sexual privacy-where the simple announcement of a controversial legal norm would meet with substantial opposition.","PeriodicalId":51408,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Law Review","volume":"103 1","pages":"384"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2003-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/1123697","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68284029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 10

Who's watching the watchdogs? Responding to the erosion of research ethics by enforcing promises. 谁在监视看门狗?通过履行承诺来应对研究伦理的侵蚀。

IF 2.9 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

Columbia Law Review

Pub Date : 2003-01-01

Lori A Alvino

For more than thirty years, federal regulations--collectively known as the "Common Rule"--have governed all federally funded medical research involving human subjects. The Common Rule requires, inter alia, that any research facility receiving federal funds submit a Federal Wide Assurance (FWA) to the department or agency from which funding is sought. The FWA is a contract in which the research facility promises to abide by the Common Rule for all its research that involves human subjects, whether it is privately or federally funded. Drawing upon other instances in which third-party beneficiaries have successfully enforced government contracts, this Note argues that, upon discovery that a contract of assurance has been breached in the course of federally or privately funded research, a research subject should be able to maintain an action against the research institution as a third-party beneficiary to that contract.

30多年来，联邦法规——统称为“共同规则”——管理着所有联邦资助的涉及人体受试者的医学研究。除其他外，共同规则要求任何接受联邦资金的研究机构向寻求资金的部门或机构提交联邦范围保证(FWA)。FWA是一份合同，在这份合同中，研究机构承诺所有涉及人类受试者的研究都遵守共同规则，无论是私人资助还是联邦资助。参考第三方受益人成功执行政府合同的其他实例，本说明认为，在发现在联邦或私人资助的研究过程中违反了保证合同时，研究主体应能够作为该合同的第三方受益人对研究机构提起诉讼。

引用次数: 0

USING MERGER REVIEW TO CURE PRIOR CONDUCT: THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION'S GE/HONEYWELL DECISION 利用并购审查纠正先前的行为:欧盟委员会对通用电气/霍尼韦尔的决定

IF 2.9 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

Columbia Law Review

Pub Date : 2003-01-01 DOI: 10.2307/1123703

Erin E. Holland

引用次数: 1

Who's watching the watchdogs? Responding to the erosion of research ethics by enforcing promises. 谁在监视看门狗?通过履行承诺来应对研究伦理的侵蚀。

IF 2.9 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

Columbia Law Review

Pub Date : 2003-01-01 DOI: 10.2307/1123780

Lori A Alvino

For more than thirty years, federal regulations--collectively known as the "Common Rule"--have governed all federally funded medical research involving human subjects. The Common Rule requires, inter alia, that any research facility receiving federal funds submit a Federal Wide Assurance (FWA) to the department or agency from which funding is sought. The FWA is a contract in which the research facility promises to abide by the Common Rule for all its research that involves human subjects, whether it is privately or federally funded. Drawing upon other instances in which third-party beneficiaries have successfully enforced government contracts, this Note argues that, upon discovery that a contract of assurance has been breached in the course of federally or privately funded research, a research subject should be able to maintain an action against the research institution as a third-party beneficiary to that contract.

30多年来，联邦法规——统称为“共同规则”——管理着所有联邦资助的涉及人体受试者的医学研究。除其他外，共同规则要求任何接受联邦资金的研究机构向寻求资金的部门或机构提交联邦范围保证(FWA)。FWA是一份合同，在这份合同中，研究机构承诺所有涉及人类受试者的研究都遵守共同规则，无论是私人资助还是联邦资助。参考第三方受益人成功执行政府合同的其他实例，本说明认为，在发现在联邦或私人资助的研究过程中违反了保证合同时，研究主体应能够作为该合同的第三方受益人对研究机构提起诉讼。

引用次数: 8

CONTRACTS WITH OPEN OR MISSING TERMS UNDER THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE AND THE COMMON LAW: A PROPOSAL FOR UNIFICATION 统一商法典和普通法下条款公开或遗漏的合同:统一的建议

IF 2.9 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

Columbia Law Review

Pub Date : 2003-01-01 DOI: 10.2307/1123702

Nellie Eunsoo Choi

Historically, all contracts with open or missing terms were found void for indefiniteness unless there was partial performance. The Uniform Com? mercial Code (U.C.C. or Code) departedfrom the common law and permitted the enforcement of sale-ofgoods contracts with open or missing terms, pro? vided that certain requirements were met. Today, the treatment ofopenand missing-term contracts in the service context is inconsistent: Some jurisdic? tions apply the traditional common-law doctrine to hold such contracts inva? lid for indefiniteness, while others apply the U.C.C. analysis to hold such contracts enforceable. This Note considers the arguments supporting both the traditional common-law rule and modern U. C. C. approach. It argues that in light of modern commercial reality, the courts should apply the U. C. C. analysis to both sale-of-goods and service contracts. This unified approach would eliminate confusion in the current state oflaw and promote flexibility in commercial transactions for both goods and services.

从历史上看，除非有部分履行，否则所有带有公开条款或遗漏条款的合同都被视为无限期无效。制服网?商法典(ucc或Code)脱离了普通法，允许执行带有公开条款或遗漏条款的货物销售合同。我发现满足了某些要求。今天，在服务环境中，对未到期合同和未到期合同的处理是不一致的:一些法律?我们运用传统的普通法原则来认定这类合同不可侵犯。而其他人则采用ucc的分析来维持此类合同的可执行性。本注考虑了支持传统普通法规则和现代加州大学法学院方法的论点。它认为，鉴于现代商业现实，法院应该将加州大学的分析适用于商品销售合同和服务合同。这种统一的办法将消除目前情况下的混乱，并促进商品和服务商业交易的灵活性。

引用次数: 3

Speedy Fred Taylor and the Ironies of Enterprise Liability 斯皮迪·弗雷德·泰勒和企业责任的讽刺

IF 2.9 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

Columbia Law Review

Pub Date : 2003-01-01 DOI: 10.2307/1123701

J. Witt

Neither the academic literature nor the tort reform lobby has observed a deep irony in the American law of enterprise liability. The intellectual roots of enterprise liability lie in a late nineteenth-century movement to reengineer the workplace, a movement whose best known exponent was scientific manager Frederick Winslow Taylor. Along with a generation of managerial engineers, Taylor popularized broad ideas about managerial responsibility for the operations of enterprise - ideas that when loosed on the decentralized institutions of American tort law ultimately found one of their strongest expressions in the law of enterprise liability. Enterprise liability thus stands as one of the great twentieth-century examples of the unanticipated consequences of social action.

无论是学术文献还是侵权改革游说团体，都没有注意到美国企业责任法中存在深刻的讽刺意味。企业责任的理论根源在于19世纪后期的一场重新设计工作场所的运动，这场运动最著名的代表人物是科学经理弗雷德里克·温斯洛·泰勒(Frederick Winslow Taylor)。随着一代管理工程师的发展，泰勒普及了关于企业经营管理责任的广泛理念——当这些理念在美国侵权法的分散制度中得到放松时，最终在企业责任法中得到了最有力的体现。因此，企业责任是20世纪社会行动的不可预见后果的伟大例子之一。

引用次数: 11

The Ossification of American Labor Law 美国劳动法的僵化

IF 2.9 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

Columbia Law Review

Pub Date : 2002-12-13 DOI: 10.2307/1123792

C. Estlund

This article argues that the ineffectuality of American labor law and the shrinking scope of collective representation and collective bargaining are partly traceable to the law's "ossification" - to its having been essentially sealed off both from democratic revision and renewal and from local experimentation and innovation to a remarkably complete extent and for a remarkably long time. The elements of this process of ossification are various and familiar; yet, once assembled, they make up an impressive set of barriers to innovation. Most obviously, the National Labor Relations Act has been virtually unamendable for over forty years due to an exceptionally durable congressional deadlock. But the labor law scheme has also been effectively cut off from "market"-driven competition by employers; from the entrepreneurial energies of individual plaintiffs and the plaintiff's bar, and the creativity they can sometimes coax from the courts; from variation and experimentation at the state or local level by representative or judicial bodies; from the winds of changing constitutional doctrine; and from emerging transnational legal norms. Finally, the National Labor Relations Board - the designated institutional vehicle for adjusting the labor laws to modern conditions - is increasingly hemmed in by the age of the text and the large body of judicial interpretations that has grown up over the years. While the argument may seem to counsel only pessimism about the prospects for reform, it may also help to identify potential pathways of change that have not been fully appreciated. Indeed, some of those pathways are being paved by the process of ossification itself. By impelling private parties to find their own paths outside of the existing regime, the ossification of labor law may be setting in motion the very forces that may eventually lead toward legal change.

本文认为，美国劳动法的无效以及集体代表和集体谈判范围的缩小，在一定程度上可以追溯到法律的“僵化”——在相当长的一段时间里，它基本上与民主修订和更新以及地方实验和创新隔绝了。这种骨化过程的要素是多种多样和熟悉的;然而，一旦组装起来，它们就构成了一系列令人印象深刻的创新障碍。最明显的是，由于国会异常持久的僵局，《国家劳工关系法》实际上四十多年来一直无法修改。但劳动法方案也被有效地切断了雇主“市场”驱动的竞争;从单个原告和原告律师的创业精神，以及他们有时能从法庭上哄出的创造力;在州或地方一级由代表机构或司法机构进行的变化和试验;从不断变化的宪法原则的风向;以及新兴的跨国法律规范。最后，国家劳工关系委员会- -被指定为调整劳动法以适应现代条件的机构- -越来越受到文本时代和多年来形成的大量司法解释的限制。虽然这一论点似乎只是让人对改革的前景感到悲观，但它也可能有助于确定尚未得到充分认识的潜在变革途径。事实上，其中一些途径是由僵化过程本身铺就的。通过推动私人团体在现有制度之外寻找自己的道路，劳动法的僵化可能正在推动可能最终导致法律变革的力量。

{"title":"The Ossification of American Labor Law","authors":"C. Estlund","doi":"10.2307/1123792","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/1123792","url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that the ineffectuality of American labor law and the shrinking scope of collective representation and collective bargaining are partly traceable to the law's \"ossification\" - to its having been essentially sealed off both from democratic revision and renewal and from local experimentation and innovation to a remarkably complete extent and for a remarkably long time. The elements of this process of ossification are various and familiar; yet, once assembled, they make up an impressive set of barriers to innovation. Most obviously, the National Labor Relations Act has been virtually unamendable for over forty years due to an exceptionally durable congressional deadlock. But the labor law scheme has also been effectively cut off from \"market\"-driven competition by employers; from the entrepreneurial energies of individual plaintiffs and the plaintiff's bar, and the creativity they can sometimes coax from the courts; from variation and experimentation at the state or local level by representative or judicial bodies; from the winds of changing constitutional doctrine; and from emerging transnational legal norms. Finally, the National Labor Relations Board - the designated institutional vehicle for adjusting the labor laws to modern conditions - is increasingly hemmed in by the age of the text and the large body of judicial interpretations that has grown up over the years. While the argument may seem to counsel only pessimism about the prospects for reform, it may also help to identify potential pathways of change that have not been fully appreciated. Indeed, some of those pathways are being paved by the process of ossification itself. By impelling private parties to find their own paths outside of the existing regime, the ossification of labor law may be setting in motion the very forces that may eventually lead toward legal change.","PeriodicalId":51408,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Law Review","volume":"14 1","pages":"1527-1612"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2002-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/1123792","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68284902","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 116

'THE SUPREME ... CRIME' AND ITS ORIGINS: THE LOST LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE CRIME OF AGGRESSIVE WAR “至高无上的……犯罪及其起源:侵略战争罪缺失的立法历史

IF 2.9 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

Columbia Law Review

Pub Date : 2002-12-01 DOI: 10.2307/1123729

Jonathan A. Bush

引用次数: 61

GARDEN LEAVE: A POSSIBLE SOLUTION TO THE UNCERTAIN ENFORCEABILITY OF RESTRICTIVE EMPLOYMENT COVENANTS 花园休假:限制性雇佣契约不确定可执行性的可能解决方案

IF 2.9 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

Columbia Law Review

Pub Date : 2002-12-01 DOI: 10.2307/1123728

Greg T. Lembrich

引用次数: 10

Dual Resident Voting: Traditional Disenfranchisement and Prospects for Change 双重居民投票:传统的剥夺公民权和变革的前景

IF 2.9 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

Columbia Law Review

Pub Date : 2002-11-01 DOI: 10.2307/1123664

A. Ostrow

In modern times, a large and growing number of Americans qualify as bona fide residents of two or more locales. These dual residents are subject to local taxes and ordinances and are profoundly affected by policies that concern their second-home community. Yet, in most states, individuals are prohibited from voting in more than one location through voting statutes that equate residence with domicile. Recently, the Second Circuit upheld a New York election law that prevents second-home owners from voting in both of their residential districts. This Note argues that extending the franchise in local elections to individuals who qualify as bona fide residents of a community, regardless of whether they already qualify to vote in another community, is required under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Such an extension is also supported by normative arguments arising from the democratic tradition of government by the consent of the governed and against taxation without representation.

在现代，越来越多的美国人有资格成为两个或两个以上地区的真正居民。这些双重居民受当地税收和法规的约束，并受到与他们第二家园社区有关的政策的深刻影响。然而，在大多数州，通过将居住地等同于住所的投票法规，个人被禁止在一个以上的地方投票。最近，第二巡回法院支持了纽约的一项选举法，该法律禁止第二套住房的所有者在他们的两个居住区投票。本照会认为，根据第十四修正案的平等保护条款，将地方选举的选举权扩大到有资格成为一个社区真正居民的个人，而不管他们是否已经有资格在另一个社区投票。这种延伸也得到了由被统治者同意的政府民主传统和反对无代表征税的规范性论点的支持。

引用次数: 10