Lies Matter

Law and Philosophy -     

Does Chevron Matter?

In this article we evaluate whether the Supreme Court's much-discussed decision in Chevron v Natural Resources Defense Council (1984) signaled a lasting difference in how the justices decide administrative law cases, by comparing and testing the predictions of three distinct theories of Supreme Court behavior. The legal model predicts an increase in deference to administrative agencies. This prediction is shared by the jurisprudential regime model, which also predicts that the justices evaluate key case factors differently before and after Chevron . The attitudinal model predicts no change in the justices' behavior as a result of Chevron . Although we find that attitudes matter, the fact that we also find support for the legal and jurisprudential regime models undermines the assertion of the attitudinal model that law cannot explain Supreme Court votes on the merits.     

When lawyers question children

This study assessed the impact of some complex question forms frequently used by attorneys who examine and cross-examine witnesses in the courtroom. Fifteen males and 15 females from each of four student populations (kindergarten, fourth grade, ninth grade, and college) viewed a videotaped incident and then responded to questions about the incident. Half the questions were asked in “law-yerese” (i.e., using complex question forms); the remaining half asked for the same information using simply phrased question forms of the same length. Lawyerese confused children, adolescents, and young adults alike. Questions that included multiple parts with mutually exclusive responses were the most difficult to answer; those that included negatives, double negatives or difficult vocabulary also posed significant problems. Results suggest that complex question forms impede truth-seeking and should be prohibited in court.     

When functionality is not fatal

The Court of Appeal has confirmed that, under both UK and EuropeanCommunity law, functional designs can be protected by unregistereddesign right provided that there exist other means of achievingthe same purpose.     

When sanctions convey moral norms

Sanctions not only have the instrumental function of deterring people from undesired behavior but they also have the ability to convey moral norms. As such, they may create a moral motivation not to engage in the sanctioned behavior. This is desirable as this makes the success of a sanctioning system depend less on quality of enforcement. However, sanctions may not always succeed in conveying moral norms. In this paper, three conditions are highlighted that, in the psychology literature, have been empirically proven to influence whether a sanction succeeds to evoke moral norms. First, a sanction should not be regarded as a way to make up for the negative consequences of a transgression a sanction. So, they should be communicated in a retributive way rather than in a compensatory way. Second, as punishments communicate an obligatory rule and rewards communicate a voluntary rule, punishments are a better way to incur moral norms than rewards. Third, severe sanctions more strongly convey a moral norm than mild ones as long as these severe sanctions are not unreasonably severe, are installed by trustworthy authorities and in a fair way. The value of the moral expressive function of sanctions, as well as its drawbacks, are discussed.     

论道德教育的城市遭遇

城市化是当代人的遭遇,也是道德教育的遭遇.城市是一个陌生的世界,城市里充满着陌生人.陌生的都市人有两副面孔,一副是自由与理性,一副是冷漠与孤独.在一个城市主导人类生活的时代,教育不能没有城市精神,又不能迁就城市伦理.在适应城市生活的同时,超越陌生人伦理,是道德教育的当代使命之一.     

When EU Citizens become Foreigners

Although EU citizenship has matured as an institution, a combination of hope and caution ought to accompany the tale of its evolution. Contradictory processes of inclusion and greater equalisation coexist with exclusionary logics. These would have to be taken into account, and be addressed, by assessments of its present state and its future evolution. A focus on three key manifestations of state sovereignty, namely, the erasure of citizenship status, expulsion and the disappearance of individuals owing to extraordinary rendition, sheds light onto the edges of EU citizenship and the undesirable effects of untrammelled state power on the lives of individuals. Probing into the moments when EU citizens are treated as aliens or foreigners, and the troublesome ambiguities, tensions and limitations surrounding them, reveals the gaps in the protection of EU citizens and the constraints that stand in the way of change in the institutional scheme of things.