Search: Affective Justice: Book Symposium: A Response

14 Apr A Response to Brian Cheffins

Many thanks to Professor Cheffins for his thoughtful response, in which he highlights an important challenge in evaluating the degree of shareholder-centrism in differing corporate governance systems—the difficulty of quantifying the impact of varying legal strategies for protecting shareholders’ interests. In this reply to the issues raised by Professor Cheffins, I distinguish various metrics of shareholder-centrism and consider the degree to which they are amenable to straightforward cross-border comparison. Professor Cheffins agrees that U.K. shareholders possess greater governance rights than U.S. shareholders do, but rightly observes that rules of civil...

08 Mar Jens Ohlin Posts Response to Ryan Goodman Paper on Capture Over Kill

...the title, given the conclusions of the article). Jens has been hard at work, and has just posted to SSRN a response to Ryan, a short, fifteen page paper responding directly to Ryan’s paper as well as taking up some of the issues raised by CBJJ. Here is the abstract (graf break added) to Jens’s paper, The Capture-Kill Debate, at SSRN. Highly recommended (as we Proud Followers of Larry Solum say): In a recent essay, Ryan Goodman offers a vigorous defense of the duty to capture under the law of...

10 Jan Somalia and Self-Defense — “The Lawyers Always Ask For Details”

...to the ongoing investigations in Kenya, Tanzania and the United States to apprehend the perpetrators of these cowardly criminal acts and to bring them swiftly to justice.” But I doubt that “justice” necessarily equates to gunship attacks. And, given that the U.S. explanation seems keyed to the 1998 attacks, I wonder whether that precludes the United States from relying on any later U.N. Security Council resolutions that might have broader language with respect to authorizing the use of force to combat terrorism. And what of self-defense? Certainly, the United States...

27 Jan In Defense of Minimalism: A Response to Vlad Perju

[Dr. Oliver Gerstenberg is Reader in Law at the University of Leeds. Dr. Gerstenberg is one of the leading scholars in this field.] Would the European Court of Justice (ECJ), as Vlad Perju suggests, benefit from a “discursive turn” (338); brought about by “allow[ing] its members to enter separate opinions” (309); in an effort to “politicize” EU law (327)—with the long-term objective of “enhanc[ing] the citizenry’s sense of a shared political identity” (329)? Consider some background: The ECJ is primarily an economic court. Yet its role has changed dramatically. Drawing...

04 Nov A Response to Mark Drumbl

if viewed as a general normative framework for evaluating state responses to mass atrocity. I nevertheless reluctantly endorse Moreno-Ocampo’s insistence on traditional prosecutions for the accused because I am skeptical of the ICC’s ability to safeguard its legitimacy while making the kinds of judgments that Mark’s approach demands. In other words, my position hinges on distinguishing the specific institutional setting of the ICC from a general normative framework for transitional justice. To elaborate on the source of my unease, I proceed from the realization that legal responses to mass atrocity...

08 Jun A Response to Anne Gallagher by Jean Allain

has now been rejected.” That material is my 2008 The Slavery Conventions. In April 2008, I was contacted by the Australian Human Rights and Equality Commission (HREOC), which was looking to intervene in a case, and asked if I might assist. I provided them with a copy of the galley proofs of my book, as The Slavery Conventions, which had yet to be published. In May, the online newspaper, The Australian stated that, “Brett Walker SC, the counsel for HREOC, quotes a book by a certain Monsieur Allain.” Holding up...

06 Nov A Response to Katherine Stone

I would like to thank Kathy Stone for commenting on my Article and agreeing to participate in this symposium. She has sharply characterized the main arguments of my paper and made two very helpful criticisms. Both of these are great prods for future work. Let me respond to each of these suggestions in turn. Stone is right that I devoted most of my attention analyzing Doing Business’ main agenda, which I called substantive flexibility: increasing employers’ ability to fire, hire, and set working conditions, thereby decreasing employers overall labor costs....

28 Apr A Sane and Intelligent Debate on Interrogation Policies and Torture?

...Ben: I didn't think your question was provocative. I think it's a good question. Patrick S. O'Donnell dmv, Obviously, something new is being said, which was my point. My response was to your specific comments regarding the discussion at hand, which claimed 1) The writers are all repeating the same points on each side, over and over again, and then talking past each other, by and large. That, simply, is not true. 2) You will note, if you read the posts, that no one concedes anything that they were unwilling...