JournalTOCs

Publisher: Yale University (Total: 7 journals) [Sort by number of followers]

Showing 1 - 7 of 7 Journals sorted alphabetically
	Jonathan Edwards Studies (Followers: 1)
	Yale Human Rights & Development Law J. (Followers: 18)
	Yale J. of Intl. Law (Followers: 18)
	Yale J. of Law & the Humanities (Followers: 10)
	Yale J. of Law and Technology (Followers: 12)
	Yale J. on Regulation (Followers: 19)
	Yale Law J. (Followers: 62, SJR: 3.575, CiteScore: 2)

Most Followed Journals

Top Publishers

Top Subjects

Similar Journals

Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities
Number of Followers: 10

This is an Open Access Journal

Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 1041-6374
Published by Yale University

[7 journals]

The University in the Mirror of Justices
- Abstract: The University in the Mirror of JusticesSitze, AdamIn its 1915 Declaration of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) set forth a limited analogy between the professoriate and the judiciary. The purpose of this article is to explore this analogy’s genesis, basis, implications, and limits. Its claim is that the judicial analogy deserves renewed attention and consideration in the contemporary debate over the future of academic freedom.Winter 2022 Volume 33, Issue 1
  PubDate: 2022-01-01T00:00:00Z
Removal of Context: Blackstone, Limited Monarchy, and the Limits of
Unitary Originalism
- Abstract: Removal of Context: Blackstone, Limited Monarchy, and the Limits of Unitary OriginalismHandelsman Shugerman, JedThe Supreme Court's recent decisions that the President has an unconditional or indefeasible removal power rely on textual and historical assumptions and a “removal of context.” This article focuses on the “executive power” part of the Vesting Clause and particularly the unitary theorists' misuse of Blackstone. Unitary executive theorists overlook the problems of relying on England’s limited monarchy: the era’s rise of Parliamentary supremacy over the Crown and its power to eliminate or regulate (i.e., make defeasible) royal prerogatives. Unitary theorists provide no evidence that executive removal was ever identified as a “royal prerogative" or a default royal power. The structure of their historical comparison is flawed: the Constitution explicitly limits many royal powers, such war, peace (treaties), and the veto, so that the President is weaker than the king, but they still infer from Article II other unnamed “executive powers” (like removal) that would make a President stronger than a king.Winter 2022 Volume 33, Issue 1
  PubDate: 2022-01-01T00:00:00Z
Resisting Renoviction and Displacement Through Cultural Land Trusts: Art
and Performance Spaces, Pop-Ups, DIYs, and Protest Raves in Vancouver
- Abstract: Resisting Renoviction and Displacement Through Cultural Land Trusts: Art and Performance Spaces, Pop-Ups, DIYs, and Protest Raves in VancouverRoss, SaraThis Article draws on ethnographic fieldwork to explore the use of cultural land trusts as local urban resistance to the displacement of arts and culture spaces in Vancouver. Cultural land trusts shift power back to relationally marginalized and displaced communities whose voices frequently fail to figure equitably within decision-making processes affecting their urban landscape. Cultural land trusts draw on the community land trust and community ownership structure with the goal of preserving affordable access to land and space for arts and culture in the city. As previously marginalized portions of the city space are “retaken” by a city, areas that have provided affordable performance, rehearsal, and live/work spaces for the arts sector are becoming less available. Their absence threatens the economic and cultural potential of art and the physical dimensions necessary for the sustainability of urban art and culture.Winter 2022 Volume 33, Issue 1
  PubDate: 2022-01-01T00:00:00Z
Legal Principles, Law, and Tradition
- Abstract: Legal Principles, Law, and TraditionJiménez, FelipeLegal reasoning and legal discourse take place within historical traditions that develop over time. Law is characterized by the authoritative presence of those historical traditions. This observation vindicates the basic positivist insight that law is ultimately grounded in social facts. These social facts include the history of the legal tradition, the work and shared understanding of legal scholars, and the moral reasoning of legal participants—all of which have been mistakenly left aside by many legal positivists and their usual focus on coercive institutions. I use the Hart-Dworkin debate as a starting point for reclaiming the notion of law as a historically grounded practice. The Hart-Dworkin debate highlights that philosophical reflection about law becomes impoverished without history. A closer look at history shows that both Dworkin and Hart were partially right. As Dworkin argued, law is not only a matter of purely source-based legal rules, but also incorporates principles with weight and a less straightforward connection to social facts. However, the ubiquity of legal principles and their operation show that a socially grounded conception of law, as the one defended by le al positivism, is entirely consistent with the existence of legal principles.Winter 2022 Volume 33, Issue 1
  PubDate: 2022-01-01T00:00:00Z