The Problem That Is Global Warming: Introduction

Global warming poses significant challenges to society at every level, evading easy definitions that would make the usual instrumental approaches to policymaking and regulation a relatively straightforward task. The embeddedness of the carbon economy in contemporary methods of industrialization and development means that climate protection is at once a problem of environment, the global economy, and human rights. It requires us to understand the strengths and limitations of a regulatory approach, to tease apart the intricacies of international law and governance to find ways to turn economic, legal, and cultural norms toward creating climate justice. Sector specific approaches to dealing with human rights and refugees, as well as international relations based on interstate relations, also have limitations. These include insufficient capacity to appreciate the differentiated responsibility of various actors in the creation of this ecological crisis as well as creating obstacles in finding appropriate ways to motivate those with the most ability to reduce our impact on the climate. Mutual reinforcement and “virtuous” arbitrage across fragmented regulatory regimes might create new synergies with potentially positive transformative effects for climate protection. To achieve this, the development and maintenance of legitimacy is central. The articles in this edition tackle these issues and, taken as a whole, provide a springboard for future scholarship.     

The Use of Logical Models in Legal Problem Solving*

Abstract. The authors describe a logic programming approach to the representation of legislative texts. They consider the potential uses of simple systems which incorporate a single, fixed interpretation of a text. These include assisting in the routine administration of complex areas of the law. The authors also consider the possibility of constructing more complex systems which incorporate several, possibly conflicting interpretations. Such systems are needed for dealing with ambiguity and vagueness in the law. Moreover, they are more suitable than single interpretation systems for helping to test proposed legislation and for helping to give citizens advice.     

权利相互性理论概说——法经济学的本体性阐释

作为法经济学的本体性应用和检验,本文对由法律本身的特质所引申出来的关于法律诸要素的内在涵义及其实践问题予以说明。通过对当前人类社会交往日益密切这一新的时代特征进行哲学（认识论和主体间性）和经济学（科斯社会成本理论）的分析,揭示出全球化下法律关系的新特点,即法律权利和义务的相互性和相对性。从而为探索权利冲突的基本成因和相关表现,找解决权利冲突的法律途径奠定了坚实基础。     

我国环境权实现模式的反思与重构

环境权实现模式,即环境权实现制度的结构或框架,而不是具体的制度设计。针对我国现有环境权实现模式理论的不足,我国环境权实现模式的新构想尤其要注意公民环境权利的合理设置、公民环境义务的合理分配、国家或政府环境管理职责的加强、环境诉讼机制的建立和完善。     

Rethinking Criminal Libel: An Empirical Study

The prevailing view of criminal libel among communication law scholars in the United States is that there are very few prosecutions, that most of the prosecutions are about politics or public issues, and that none of the prosecutions are necessary because victims of defamation can sue for civil libel. The results of an empirical study of all Wisconsin criminal libel cases from 1991 through 2007, however, suggest that criminal libel is prosecuted far more often than realized, that most criminal libel prosecutions have nothing to do with political or public issues, and that the First Amendment is an effective shield on the rare occasions when a criminal libel prosecution is politically motivated. This article concludes that criminal libel can be a legitimate way for the law to deal with expressive deviance that harms the reputations of private figures in cases that have nothing to do with public issues.     

Critical Rationalism: The Problem of Method in Social Sciences and Law*

Abstract. The author characterizes the model of rationality devised by critical rationalism in opposition to the classic model of rationality and as an alternative to this. He illustrates and criticizes the trichotomous theory of knowledge which, going back to Max Scheler, is received in a secularized version by Habermas and Apel, also under the influence of the hermeneutic tradition of Heidegger and Gadamer and of the so-called “critical theory” of Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno. The author criticizes historicism as it expects to be an alternative to naturalism and not to make use of the method based on scientific laws. The author proposes as an example of technological social science the model developed in economics starting from Adam Smith. With regard to legal theories, natural law is rejected because of its sociomorphic cosmology. It is proposed that legal science as social technology has two parts. One part aims at efficient interpretations of valid law (for the space-time region concerned) and a second part aims at the construction of efficient norms for the modification of valid law by legislation     

Rethinking The Ends of Harm

In The Ends of Harm, Victor Tadros claims that the general justifying aim of the criminal law should be general deterrence. He also takes seriously that we cannot use people as a means, and thus he argues that we may only punish people in the name of general deterrence who have a ‘duty’ to suffer. Tadros claims that this duty arises as follows: An offender initially has a duty not to harm the victim. If the offender violates that duty, the offender still has a duty to stop the harm from occurring (so that, for example, an offender would have to jump in front of his own bullet). And if the harm does occur, then the offender has a duty to rectify that harm. This duty to rectify, argues Tadros, requires the defendant not only to compensate the victim but also to protect the victim to the extent that he would have been able to have been harmed to prevent the threat from occurring. Tadros further advances intricate arguments for why the state may therefore punish the offender to protect other potential victims to the extent of the offender’s duty to rectify. This symposium contribution seeks to explore three problems with Tadros’ analysis, ultimately arguing that Tadros’ theory fails on its own terms. First, attempts present a substantial problem for Tadros’ regime because attempts do not give rise to duties to prevent harm because there is no harm to be prevented. Tadros’ attempt to account for attempts, as completed offenses of diversions of security resources, ultimately leads to punishments that bear little resemblance to the crime attempted. Such a wildly counterintuitive result creates problems for a regime premised on general deterrence, which must be understood and respected. Second, Tadros’ regime will often exempt the rich from suffering criminal punishment. Tadros claims that duties to prevent harms from occurring (by jumping in front of bullets) are only enforceable when compensation will be inadequate. However, affluent offenders may be able to fully compensate. Moreover, since the scope of the duty to suffer will be determined by what remains of the duty after the victim is compensated, affluent offenders will be able to compensate more and thereby suffer less. Again, the actual sentences will thereby bear little resemblance to the rationale for criminalization, thus threatening the deterrent message of the law. Moreover, a system that exacerbates distributive inequalities will not achieve public respect. Third, Tadros cannot justify taking the duty that the defendant owes to the victim and forcing the victim to transfer this asset to the state. In his quest to articulate a theory that does not impermissibly use defendants, he ultimately endorses a theory that impermissibly uses their victims. He thus fails to achieve the very goal he sets for himself, which is to achieve general deterrence without impermissibly using anyone.     

惩治、防范恐怖主义犯罪的反思与应对

国际社会打击惩治恐怖主义犯罪存在诸多问题:法律理念和法律规范的差异、狭隘的主权和民族利益观的影响、文化冲突的催化、超国家机构的作用有待完善、国内立法存在缺陷。对此,我们可以通过以下措施应对:逐步淡化主权意识;加强惩治恐怖主义犯罪的国际合作;减少恐怖主义犯罪产生的文化原因;尽快将国际恐怖主义犯罪纳入国际刑事法院的管辖范围;采取各种措施完善国内反恐立法。     

Judicial Waivers of Parental Consent for Abortion: Tennessee's Troubles Putting Policy into Practice*

According to the U.S. Supreme Court, minors seeking abortions are entitled to petition for relief from state‐mandated parental consent. To facilitate the actualization of this right, Tennessee included procedural mechanisms that go beyond those in effect in most states in its parental consent statute. This paper examines whether these additional mechanisms allow Tennessee to succeed where other states have failed. Our findings indicate that these mechanisms mitigate to some extent the sort of implementation failure observed in other states. However, the magnitude of this mitigation is not sufficient to establish that parental consent statutes can be implemented in accordance with Supreme Court requirements.     

Two Schools of Legal Idealism: A Positivist Introduction*

Abstract. The author focuses his attention on two schools of legal idealism: the so‐called Sheffield School and the “discourse ethics” school. In order to emphasize the valuable facets of each school, the author analyzes four different points: (1) the claim to correctness as a necessary feature of law, (2) the connection between correctness and validity, (3) the qualifying or classifying status of this connection, (4) and the desirability of adopting the “Radbruch’s Formula.” Finally, the author analyzes the weaknesses of each theory. **     

The Neurobiology of Fairness and Social Justice: An Introduction

The study of social justice has always been an interdisciplinary undertaking, but in recent years neurobiologists have joined scholars and scientists from other areas to tackle complex questions concerning fairness, empathy, equality, hierarchy, and ideological conflict and polarization. By synthesizing insights from multiple, mutually informative levels of analysis, it is possible to shed new light on basic biological processes that reflect, inspire, and inhibit the pursuit of a more just society. With this special issue we highlight groundbreaking research on the neurobiology of fairness and social justice, bringing together six articles that address core themes of social justice, including individual variability in definitions of fairness, the genetic basis of economic egalitarianism, neural bases of empathy in environmental and intergroup domains, and the neural and genetic correlates of ideological polarization. Taken in conjunction, these diverse contributions bring multiple theoretical perspectives and research methods to bear on the shared goal of understanding and promoting social justice.