U.S. Social Structure and Imprisonment

An article by Joubert, Picon and McIntosh (1981) is found to contain several serious methodological flaws. A second analysis using a similar data set suggests that these methodological problems may have caused them to draw erroneous conclusions regarding the effects of social structural variables on prison admission and release rates.     

Technology transfer between the U.S.A. and Europe

The premise is that technology gaps have an important impact on the economic life of nations and also have political consequences. Expressions of concern about the technology gap between Europe and the United States have become steadily less frequent in the recent years. The purpose of this paper is to find out whether some of the lessons that can be drawn from the European technology gap of the '60s contribute to the understanding of the present United States-European technology exchange controversies. This is accomplished by (1) reviewing the European arguments, (2) trying to find out how revelant they have proven to be after a few years, (3) investigating better ways to assess the impact of technological differences with reference to current United States arguments about technology export, and (4) attempting to derive some conclusions on policy implications of transferring technology. It was concluded that important policy decisions have been made and are still being made by technology importing countries with little analytical background on the cost and advantages of achieving a technological capacity. In addition, policy decisions by technology exporting countries are most likely to be made with little knowledge of the real phenomena involved.     

对"牛吃麦"案例的另一维度的解释——英、美土地制度和财产制度的变迁

科斯定理是从经济效益的角度来分配权利的,它的"拍卖式"法律价值取向贯穿于美国土地制度与财产制度的发展历程.在与科斯定理相关的"牛吃麦"案例上,美国初始选择了"圈出"规则,后又转向"圈入"规则,其规则的变动始终遵循着"经济效益最大化"原则;而英国自始至终选择了"圈入"规则,早期是为了维护公共财产利益,之后是为了维护私有财产利益,在这过程中,"权利保护原则"是其不变的宗旨.科斯定理纯粹从经济效益的角度来解释有着相同法治渊源与传统的英、美两国在"牛吃麦"案例上所适用规则的差异性,欠缺历史维度的法律分析.     

Keegstra and R.A.V.: A Comparative Analysis of the Canadian and U.S. Approaches to Hate Speech Legislation

This article argues that the similarities and differences in the approaches and outcomes of the Canadian and United States cases on hate speech are reflective of the similarities and differences in two basic worldviews-communitarianism and liberalism. The article briefly explores the two views, sets out the Keegstra and R.A.V. cases and concludes that the approach in Keegstra reflects a communitarian philosophy while the approach in R.A.V. reflects the liberal philosophical position.     

Review of S. B. Chetverikov,Who Makes U.S. Policy and How

This book is devoted to current problems in the working of the organs of government and administration of the United States, the functioning of the mechanism for the development, adoption, and implementation of its political decisions, and the interrelation and coordination of the actions of various links in its governmental machinery. It is a thorough investigation of questions of public law in the United States. The author makes clear the distinguishing features of the development of the governmental mechanism in the USA during the present period, the internal processes occurring in the political system of the imperialist state, and the contradictions inherent in it. Chetverikov directs the reader's attention to a number of issues in the present development of the system of governmental administration in the USA that have been inadequately treated in the Soviet legal literature. They include the rising political role of the bureaucracy and the tendency for it to elude control by the higher authorities, including the president; the unique character of the present stage of the fusion of the government machinery and the monopolies; the formation of a "triple alliance" made up of permanent bureaucracy, monopolist "interest groups" (consisting of lobbying organizations exercising "influence" favorable to the monopolies on government bodies), and the working machinery of Congress; the inflation of the governmental machinery and its "monopolist degeneration."     

U.S. v. Glatfelter and NCR Co. v. George A. Whiting Paper Co.: Seventh Circuit's Latest Interpretation of CERCLA Liabilities

Although a crucial part of the federal government's legal arsenal against polluters in environmental enforcement actions, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) is nevertheless an ambiguously and confusingly drafted statute requiring constant judicial interpretations of its application in litigation. Last year, several decisions delivered by the Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit have provided the latest interpretations, particularly further distinguishing between sections 107 and 113 claims, as well as clarifying apportionment and allocation of liabilities. This article discusses these decisions and tries to analyze their impact on future CERCLA litigations.