Given that no two acts, events, situations, and legal cases are identical, precedential constraint necessarily involves determining which two different cases and situations are relevantly similar. One traditional view posits that these determinations are made on the basis of the rationale in the earlier case, another traditional view sees similarity in the facts of the earlier case plus the outcome, and the Legal Realist view insists that determinations of similarity are ex post attributions based on a judge’s outcome or policy preferences. In contrast to all of these positions, however, is a view informed by research in cognitive psychology. This research supports the conclusion that outcome-independent perceptions of similarity, perceptions based on the experiences and background of the perceiver, not only play a role in the determination of similarity, but often lead precedential reasoners to reason from particular to particular without the conscious mediation of any rule or principle.
A distinct set of six institutions and traditions makes the country hard to subjugate to an authoritarian’s will.
Virtue jurisprudence is an approach to normative legal theory that answers normative questions about law from a perspective that is centred on the...
Reconstructing Parentage is a comprehensive investigation into what makes someone a parent. Drawing on liberal-egalitarian philosophy, the book argues...
Lack of criminal responsibility due to “legal insanity” is probably one of the most misunderstood concepts in the criminal legal system. Contrary to...
In theoretical linguistics the word “pragmatics” refers to the roles of context and communicative intentions in the production of meaning. Those roles...
We introduce altruism into standard models of bargaining and explore its implications for the Coase Theorem. A strict interpretation of the Coase...
This Article develops a new way of understanding the law in order to address contemporary debates about judicial practice and reform. The...
A large segment of the political left identifies as “progressive,” but what does a belief in progress entail? This short essay, written for a...
Societies worldwide are polarized over social justice, with identity-based status hierarchies manifesting inequalities at both individual and...
In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court acknowledged the difficulties in applying its constitutional originalism to the...
The history of public policy is littered with failures to solve large-scale social problems using interventions derived from behavioral science...
Memory issues stemming from criminal trials that involve the reliability of eyewitnesses are well-known. However, the relevance of memory to law...
Detailed descriptions of violent postictal episodes are rare. We provide evidence from an index case and from a systematic review of violent postictal...
Our perceptions of what we owe each other turn somewhat on whether we consider “another” to be “an other”—a stranger and not a friend. In this essay...
Professor Elizabeth Scott, the chief reporter of the American Law Institute’s (ALI) Restatement of Children and the Law, has often observed that the...
Constitutional theory is a mess. Disagreements about originalism and living constitutionalism have become intractable. Constitutional theorists make...
Moore v. United States raises the question whether unrealized gains, such as an increase in property value or a stock portfolio, constitute “incomes...
Evidence law controls what information will be admissible in court and when, how, and by whom it may be presented. It shapes not only the trial...