This book addresses issues concerning the shifting contemporary meaning of legal certainty. The book focuses on exploring the emerging tensions that exist between the demand for legal certainty and the challenges of regulating complex, late modern societies. The book is divided into two parts: the first part focusing on debates around legal certainty at the national level, with a primary emphasis on criminal law; and the second part focusing on debates at the transnational level, with a primary emphasis on the regulation of transnational commercial transactions. In the context of legal modernity, the principle of legal certainty-the idea that the law must be sufficiently clear to provide those subject to legal norms with the means to regulate their own conduct and to protect against the arbitrary use of public power-has operated as a foundational rule of law value. Even though it has not always been fully realized, legal certainty has functioned as a core value and aspiration that has structured normative debates throughout political modernity, both at a national and international level. In recent decades, however, legal certainty has come under increasing pressure from a number of competing demands that are made of contemporary law, in particular the demand that the law be more flexible and responsive to a social environment characterized by rapid social and technological change. The expectation that the law operates in new transnational contexts and regulates every widening sphere of social life has created a new degree of uncertainty, and this change raises difficult questions regarding both the possibility and desirability of legal certainty. This book compiles, in one edited volume, research from a range of substantive areas of civil and criminal law that shares a common interest in understanding the multi-layered challenges of defining legal certainty in a late modern society. The book will be of interest both to lawyers interested in understanding the transformation of core rule of law values in the context of contemporary social change and to political scientists and social theorists.

Americans have a deeply ambivalent relationship to guns. The United States leads all nations in rates of private gun ownership, yet stories of gun tragedies frequent the news, spurring calls for tighter gun regulations. The debate tends to be acrimonious and is frequently misinformed and illogical. The central question is the extent to which federal or state governments should regulate gun ownership and use in the interest of public safety. In this volume, David DeGrazia and Lester Hunt examine this policy question primarily from the standpoint of ethics: What would morally defensible gun policy in the United States look like? Hunt's contribution argues that the U.S. Constitution is right to frame the right to possess a firearm as a fundamental human right. The right to arms is in this way like the right to free speech. More precisely, it is like the right to own and possess a cell phone or an internet connection. A government that banned such weapons would be violating the right of citizens to protect themselves. This is a function that governments do not perform: warding off attacks is not the same thing as punishing perpetrators after an attack has happened. Self-protection is a function that citizens must carry out themselves, either by taking passive steps (such as better locks on one's doors) or active ones (such as acquiring a gun and learning to use it safely and effectively). DeGrazia's contribution features a discussion of the Supreme Court cases asserting a constitutional right to bear arms, an analysis of moral rights, and a critique of the strongest arguments for a moral right to private gun ownership. He follows with both a consequentialist case and a rights-based case for moderately extensive gun control, before discussing gun politics and advancing policy suggestions. In debating this important topic, the authors elevate the quality of discussion from the levels that usually prevail in the public arena. DeGrazia and Hunt work in the discipline of academic philosophy, which prizes intellectual honesty, respect for opposing views, command of relevant facts, and rigorous reasoning. They bring the advantages of philosophical analysis to this highly-charged issue in the service of illuminating the strongest possible cases for and against (relatively extensive) gun regulations and whatever common ground may exist between these positions.

Current Legal Issues, like its sister volume Current Legal Problems, is based upon an annual colloquium held at University College London. Each year, leading scholars from around the world gather to discuss the relationship between law and another discipline of thought. Each colloquium examines how the external discipline is conceived in legal thought and argument, how the law is pictured in that discipline, and analyses points of controversy in the use, and abuse, of extra-legal arguments within legal theory and practice.
Law and Philosophy, the latest volume in the Current Legal Issues series, contains a broad range of essays by scholars interested in the interactions between law and philosophy. It includes studies examining the themes of the nature of law; and interactions between State, the citizen, and the law.

This book raises awareness about gender perspective in political and legal theories and historical analysis. The impacts of feminist political and legal theories, as well as critical legal studies, have been embedded in all the papers in different ways and degrees. Differences among feminist political and legal ideas are visible in the different approaches. The ongoing issue of defining gender, for example, is a recurring theme in the texts. Some papers question the binary basis of the gender issue and the notion of gender as such, while others start from the binary dichotomy and attempt to expand the consideration towards a multi-dimensional understanding of gender identities. The main focus is on a feminist reconsideration of all relevant fields of legal knowledge. The primary aim is to demystify the seemingly neutral character of legal norms and legal knowledge and highlight the power relations at different layers, beginning with male and female legal subjects of Western heredity (in terms of culture, ethnicity, and race), then moving on to different needs and power relations among female persons of different races and classes, and finally addressing differentiating gender relations and identities beyond the framework of the women-men binary codification, i.e., also taking into consideration the multiple options of intersex, transgender, queering, etc. Taking seriously the issue of the "maleness" of political and legal theories is indeed a challenging and relevant endeavor for legal scholars. The male bias is present not only throughout history but also in the present, given that our "universal" categories of political and legal thought are still overburdened by unequal power relations. It is also important to open our minds and knowledge production for a gender-sensitive and gender-competent intersectional approach, which would also include various queer-, race- and class-based considerations. These tasks should be of interest not only to critical legal scholars but also all those belonging to mainstream legal and political thought.

This "Open Access" book investigates the legal reality of the church through a sociological lens and from the perspective of canon law studies, the discipline which researches the law and the legal structure of the Catholic Church. It introduces readers from various backgrounds to the sociology of canon law, which is both a legal and a theological field of study, and is the first step towards introducing a new subdiscipline of the sociology of canon law. As a theoretical approach to mapping out this field, it asks what theology and canon law may learn from sociology; it discusses the understanding of "law" in religious contexts; studies the preconditions of legal validity and effectiveness; and based on these findings it asks in what sense it is possible to speak of canon "law". By studying a religious order as its struggles to find a balance between continuity and change, this book also contributes to the debates on religious law in modernity and the challenges it faces from secular states and plural societies. This book is of interest to researchers and students of the sociology of law, legal studies, law and religion, the sociology of religion, theology, and religious studies. This is an open access book.

The increasing transnationalisation of regulation - and social life more generally - challenges the basic concepts of legal and political theory today. One of the key concepts being so challenged is authority. This discerning book offers a plenitude of resources and suggestions for meeting that challenge. Chapters by leading scholars from a wide variety of disciplines confront the limits of traditional state-based conceptions of authority, and propose new frameworks and metaphors. They also reflect on the methodological challenges of the transnational context, including the need for collaboration between empirical and conceptual analysis, and the value of historicising authority. Examining the challenge offered by transnational authority in a range of specific contexts, including security, accounting, banking and finance, and trade, Authority in Transnational Legal Theory analyzes the relations between authority, legitimacy and power. Furthermore, this book also considers the implications of thinking about authority for other key concepts in transnational legal theory, such as jurisdiction and sovereignty. Comprehensive and engaging, this book will appeal to both legal academics and students of law. It will also prove invaluable to political scientists and political theorists interested in the concept of authority as well as social scientists working in the field of regulation. Contributors include: P.S. Berman, R. Cotterrell, K. Culver, M. Del Mar, M. Giudice, N. Jansen, N. Krisch, S.F. Moore, H. Muir Watt, H. Psarras, S. Quack, N. Roughan, M. Troper, N. Walker

This volume offers a selection of the lectures delivered at the 1995 EAPL Conference in Budapest. The chapters demonstrate current results in the research and practice of judicial psychology. The findings are useful both for researchers and practising psychologists and address the most significant areas of judicial psychology: the problems of witness testimony; the psychological aspect of decision making in the court; the characteristics and treatment of offenders; the psychological impacts of prisons on prisoners; victimization; crime and public; and the history and prospects of this relatively new and complex science. For the first time the European Association of Psychology and Law organized its conference in a country of central-eastern Europe; consequently, this volume contains several articles on the scientific findings of psychologists working in the region.

Political theory is traditionally concerned with the justification and limits of state power. It asks: Can states legitimately direct and coerce non-consenting subjects? If they can, what limits, if any, constrain sovereign power? Public law is concerned with the justification and limits of judicial power. It asks: On what grounds can judges 'read down' or 'read in' statutory language against the apparent intention of the legislature? What limits, if any, are appropriate to these exercises of judicial power? This book develops an original constitutional theory of political authority that yields novel answers to both sets of questions. Fox-Decent argues that the state is a fiduciary of its people, and that this fiduciary relationship grounds the state's authority to announce and enforce law. The fiduciary state is conceived of as a public agent of necessity charged with guaranteeing a regime of secure and equal freedom. Whereas the social contract tradition struggles to ground authority on consent, the fiduciary theory explains authority with reference to the state's fiduciary obligation to respect legal principles constitutive of the rule of law. This obligation arises from the state's possession of irresistible public powers. The author begins with a discussion of Hobbes's conception of legality and the problem of discretionary power in administrative law. Drawing on Kant, he sketches a theory of fiduciary relations, and develops the argument through three parts. Part I shows that it is possible for the state to stand in a public fiduciary relationship to its people through a discussion of Crown-Native fiduciary relations recognized by Canadian courts. Part II sets out the theoretical underpinnings of the fiduciary theory of the state. Part III explores the implications of the fiduciary theory for administrative law and common law constitutionalism. The final chapter situates the theory within a broader philosophical discussion of the rule of law.

The essays in this volume answer to anxieties that the pragmatist tradition has had little to say about justice. While both the classical and neo-pragmatist traditions have produced a conspicuously small body of writing about the idea of justice, a common subtext of the essays in this volume is that there is in pragmatist thought a set of valuable resources for developing pragmatist theories of justice, for responding profitably to concrete injustices, and for engaging with contemporary, prevailing, liberal theories of justice. Despite the absence of conventionally philosophical theories of justice in the pragmatist canon, the writings of many pragmatists demonstrate an obvious sensitivity and responsiveness to injustice. Many pragmatists were and are moved by a deep sense of justice-by an awareness of the suffering of people, by the need to build just institutions, and a search for a tolerant and non-discriminatory culture that regards all people as equals. Three related and mutually reinforcing ideas to which virtually all pragmatists are committed can be discerned: a prioritization of concrete problems and real-world injustices ahead of abstract precepts; a distrust of a priori theorizing (along with a corresponding fallibilism and methodological experimentalism); and a deep and persistent pluralism, both in respect to what justice is and requires, and in respect to how real-world injustices are best recognized and remedied. Ultimately, Pragmatism and Justice asserts that pragmatism gives us powerful resources for understanding the idea of justice more clearly and responding more efficaciously to a world rife with injustice.

In the essays that follow, Fred Berger argues for freedom of expression, civil disobedience, affirmative action and what he calls liberal judicial activism and against sex-role stereotyping, paternalism and the censorship of pornography. Underlying his liberalism is a unified theory. That theory consists of a conception of rights, a theory of value and a theory of government. The conception of a right that Berger defends derives from J ohn Stuart Mill and is captured by what he calls "the rights formula" to have a right is to have important interests that society ought to protect as a matter of general rule (pp. 2, 7, 17-18, 19, 95). Since rights are to be protected by general rule, case-by-case consideration of consequences is ruled out (pp. 3, 18, 96) and neither modest increases in the general welfare, nor majority opinion, can justify the violation of a right (pp. 14-15; 17-18). Berger combines this view of the nature of a right with an objective theory of value according to which the important interests that ought to be protected are ones that people have "whether they know them or not, whether they desire that in which they have an interest or not" (p."

It contributes to the field of posthumanism through its application of posthuman feminism to international law Interdisciplinary approach. Will appeal to students and scholars with interests in legal, feminist, and posthuman theory, as well as those concerned with the contemporary challenges faced by international law.

A fresh and provocative perspective on the judicial process and the transmission of ideas into law. Professors McIntosh and Cates demonstrate, through the actions and writings of such diverse jurists as Louis Brandeis, Sandra Day O'Connor, Jerome Frank, and Hans Linde, how judges' pet intellectual projects become the fodder for new ideas in the law.

Through a series of case studies, Professors McIntosh and Cates argue for the assessment of judicial activity from a fresh perspective. They focus on the appellate system and those judges who help to move the law-i.e., entrepreneurs. Appeals court judges are in a unique position in that they are presented with real opportunities to influence the shape and meaning of law.

Jurists have special interests, some areas of the law that particularly attract them. When questions arise in these fields, jurists are likely to seize the moment, allowing them to express their expertise and be creative. This is not only a natural course for highly motivated individuals, but also a mode of operation that is important to the development of our law. Through an examination of the actions and writings of such diverse jurists as Louis Brandeis, Sandra Day O'Connor, Jerome Frank, and Hans Linde, the authors explore this concept of entrepreneurship, in which judges take on and promote their pet projects. Of great interest to scholars and researchers in political science and law, and those concerned with judicial process and behavior, and court policymaking.

How should liberal democratic governments respond to citizens as religious believers whose values, norms and practices might lie outside the cultural mainstream? Some of the most challenging political questions arising today focus on the adequacy of a policy of 'live and let live' liberal toleration in contexts where disputes about the metaphysical truth of conflicting world-views abound. Does liberal toleration fail to give all citizens their due? Do citizens of faith deserve a more robust form of accommodation from the state in the form of 'recognition'. This issue is far from settled. Controversies over the terms of religious accommodation continue to dominate political agendas around the world. This is the first edited collection to provide a sustained examination of the politics of toleration and recognition in an age of religious pluralism. The aftermath of the events of September 11th have dramatised the urgency of this debate. It has also surfaced, nationally and globally, in disputes about terrorism, security and gender and human rights questions in relation to minority communities. This volume brings together a group of new and established scholars from the fields of law and philosophy, who all present fresh and challenging perspectives on an urgent debate. It will be indispensable reading for advanced researchers in political and legal philosophy, religious and cultural studies and related disciplines.

For courses in criminal justice administration. #1 market choice for justice administration courses Using an active-learning approach and real-world examples, Justice Administration: Police, Courts, and Corrections Management examines all relevant facets of the criminal justice system and includes practical exercises in most chapters. The text flows logically, from basic justice administration, to police, courts, and corrections, and finally, ethical, financial, and technological influences. The 9th edition focuses on accountability - particularly of the police, in the aftermath of police shootings of unarmed minorities - and includes a new chapter on homeland security.

Farrelly argues against the principled paradigm of ideal theory and champions instead a virtue-oriented theory of justice entitled 'civic liberalism'. He critically assesses the main contemporary theories of justice and tackles a number of applied topics, ranging from constitutional design and free speech to welfare reform and economic incentives. "Justice, Democracy and Reasonable Agreement" is a plea for political philosophers to take seriously a range of non-ideal considerations such as scarcity, pervasive disadvantage, non-compliance, indeterminacy, disagreement and fallibility.

In recent years, philosophical discussions of free will have focused largely on whether or not free will is compatible with determinism. In this challenging book, David Hodgson takes a fresh approach to the question of free will, contending that close consideration of human rationality and human consciousness shows that together they give us free will, in a robust and indeterministic sense. In particular, they give us the capacity to respond appositely to feature-rich gestalts of conscious experiences, in ways that are not wholly determined by laws of nature or computational rules. The author contends that this approach is consistent with what science tells us about the world; and he considers its implications for our responsibility for our own conduct, for the role of retribution in criminal punishment, and for the place of human beings in the wider scheme of things.
Praise for David Hodgson's previous work, The Mind Matters
"magisterial...It is balanced, extraordinarily thorough and scrupulously fair-minded; and it is written in clear, straightforward, accessible prose." --Michael Lockwood, Times Literary Supplement
"an excellent contribution to the literature. It is well written, authoritative, and wonderfully wide-ranging. ... This account of quantum theory ... will surely be of great value. ... On the front cover of the paper edition of this book Paul Davies is quoted as saying that this is "a truly splendid and provocative book." In writing this review I have allowed myself to be provoked, but I am happy to close by giving my endorsement to this verdict in its entirety " --Euan Squires, Journal of Consciousness Studies
"well argued and extremely important book." --Sheena Meredith, New Scientist
"His reconstructions and explanations are always concise and clear." --Jeffrey A Barrett, The Philosophical Review
"In this large-scale and ambitious work Hodgson attacks a modern orthodoxy. Both its proponents and its opponents will find it compelling reading." --J. R. Lucas, Merton College, Oxford

While it has many connections to other topics in normative and applied ethics, discrimination is a central subject in philosophy in its own right. It plays a significant role in relation to many real-life complaints about unjust treatment or unjust inequalities, and it raises a number of questions in political and moral philosophy, and in legal theory. Some of these questions include: what distinguishes the concept of discrimination from the concept of differential treatment? What distinguishes direct from indirect discrimination? Is discrimination always morally wrong? What makes discrimination wrong? How should we eliminate the effects of discrimination? By covering a wide range of topics, and by doing so in a way that does not assume prior acquaintance, this handbook enables the reader to get to grips with the omnipresent issue. The Routledge Handbook of the Ethics of Discrimination is an outstanding reference source to this exciting subject and the first collection of its kind. Comprising over thirty chapters by a team of international contributors the handbook is divided into six main parts: * conceptual issues * the wrongness of discrimination * groups of 'discriminatees' * sites of discrimination * causes and means * history of discrimination. Essential reading for students and researchers in applied ethics and political philosophy the handbook will also be very useful for those in related fields, such as law, sociology and politics.

Based on legal-philosophical research, and informed by insights gleaned from empirical case studies, this book sets out three central claims about integration requirements as conditions for attaining increased rights (ie family migration, permanent residency and citizenship) in Europe: (1) That the recent proliferation of these (mandatory) integration requirements is rooted in a shift towards 'individualised' conceptions of integration. (2) That this shift is counterproductive as it creates barriers to participation and inclusion for newcomers (who will most likely permanently settle); and is normatively problematic insofar as it produces status hierarchies between native-born and immigrant citizens. (3) That the remedy for this situation is a firewall that disconnects integration policy from access to rights. The book draws on perspectives on immigrant integration in multiple EU Member States and includes legal and political reactions to the refugee/migrant crisis.

This book outlines a theory of communication and justice for the digital age, updating classic positions in political philosophy and ethics, and engaging thinkers from Aristotle through Immanuel Kant and the American pragmatists to John Rawls, Jürgen Habermas, and Amartya Sen. In communication seeking to define justice and call out injustice, there is such a thing as the last word. The chapters in this book trace the historical emergence of communication as a human right; specify the technological resources and institutional frameworks necessary for exercising that right; and address some of the challenges following from digitalization that currently confront citizens, national regulators, and international agencies. Among the issues covered are public access to information archives past and present; local and global networks of communication as sources of personal identities and imagined communities; the ongoing reconfiguration of the press as a fourth branch of governance; and privacy as a precondition for individuals and collectives to live their lives according to plans, and to make their own histories. The book will be of interest to students and researchers in media and communication studies, cultural studies, political philosophy and ethics, and interdisciplinary fields examining the ethical and political implications of new information and communication infrastructures.

Law and Evil presents an alternative evolutionary picture of man, focusing on the origins and nature of human evil, and demonstrating its useful application in legal-philosophical analyses. Using this representation of human nature, Wojciech Zaluski analyses the development of law, which he interprets as moving from evolutionary ethics to genuine ethics, as well as arguing in favour of metaethical realism and ius naturale. Zaluski argues that human nature is undoubtedly ambivalent: human beings have been endowed by natural selection with moral, immoral, and neutral tendencies (the first ambivalence), and the moral tendencies themselves are ambivalent (the second ambivalence), giving rise to an inferior form of ethics called 'evolutionary ethics' Introducing a novel distinction between two types of evil, primary and secondary, this book explores the differences between evolutionary ethics and genuine ethics in order to analyse the history of legal systems and the controversy between natural law and legal positivism. Engaging and thought-provoking, this insightful book will be vital reading for both legal scholars and philosophers, especially those of law and moral philosophy. Evolutionary biologists with an interest in a philosophical interpretation of the results of evolutionary biology will also find this book an important read.

This book offers an examination of physician-assisted death, but it also extends the discussion to a broader range of end-of-life decisions including suicide, palliative care and sedation until death.

The focus of this book is on the epistemological and hermeneutic implications of data science and artificial intelligence for democracy and the Rule of Law. How do the normative effects of automated decision systems or the interventions of robotic fellow 'beings' compare to the legal effect of written and unwritten law? To investigate these questions the book brings together two disciplinary perspectives rarely combined within the framework of one volume. One starts from the perspective of 'code and law' and the other develops from the domain of 'law and literature'. Integrating original analyses of relevant novels or films, the authors discuss how computational technologies challenge traditional forms of legal thought and affect the regulation of human behavior. Thus, pertinent questions are raised about the theoretical assumptions underlying both scientific and legal practice.

In this wide-ranging investigation of many prominent issues in contemporary legal, political, and moral philosophy, Matthew Kramer combines penetrating critiques with original theorising as he examines the writings of numerous major theorists (including Ronald Dworkin, H.L.A. Hart, Alan Gewirth, Ronald Coase and Richard Posner). Among the many topics covered by Kramer's essays are the relative merits of legal positivism and natural-law theory, the appropriate understanding of justice, the role of consequences in moral decision-making, and the ultimate foundations of moral judgements.

This book illuminates methodology in legal research by bringing together interdisciplinary scholars, who employ a diverse set of methodologies, to address a specific shared research challenge: 'the body'. The contributors were asked a question: if you were invited to contribute to an edited book on 'the body', where would you start and then where would you go? The result is a self-reflective discussion of how and where researchers engage with methodological practices. The contributors draw on their own interdisciplinary research experiences to explore how 'the body' might be addressed in their work, and the resources they would deploy in order to carry out the task. This 'book within a book' is innovative in both content and format. It provides a rare insight into how top interdisciplinary legal scholars go about making decisions about their research. The shared device of 'the body' allows the volume to trace a number of rich approaches into the process of research as practiced by these diverse scholars. In presenting thinking and research in action, the volume offers a new, self-reflective view on the much-addressed theme of the body, as well as taking a fresh approach to the historically vexed problem of research methodology in legal studies.