Search

Begin New Search Topic Legal Theory Political Geography North America

1. Beyond Justices The Legal Culture of Judges in Mexico

Author:
Azul Aguiar Aguilar
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Global and Area Studies
Abstract:
Judges’ ideas, beliefs, and values are central to adjudication. Empowering the courts was a crucial step in third‐wave democracies and, after some unfulfilled promises regarding the potential of the judicialization of politics for rights expansion, we need to learn more about the individuals that were empowered and what their legal culture can tell us about judicial behavior. Do judges consider themselves political actors having a legislative role? What type of legal culture do they have? To advance our understanding of these key determinants of judicial behavior, I use a survey with federal judges in Mexico to explore to what extent judges adhere to a positivist or a principle‐based constitutionalist legal culture. Findings suggest that there is a tension in the judiciary, with some judges embracing the idea of legislating from the bench while others prefer to play the role of being “the mouthpiece of the law.”
Topic:
Culture, Democracy, Legal Theory, and Judiciary
Political Geography:
North America and Mexico

2. Legal Conservatism and the Progressive Blame Game

Author:
Jesse Merriam
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Humanitas
Institution:
The Center for the Study of Statesmanship, Catholic University
Abstract:
In a recent essay in The Independent Review, I praised Bruce Frohnen and George Carey’s Constitutional Morality as “one of the best, if not the best, constitutional law books of the last decade.” As I explained in that review essay, Constitutional Morality is distinct from many other excellent pieces of constitutional law scholarship in both its ideological breadth and analytical depth. By “ideological breadth,” I am referring to how, as compared to other works in constitutional law and theory, Constitutional Morality resists partisan tropes and examines how both conservatives and liberals alike have derogated their constitutional duties. The book thereby exposes the deficiencies of the bipartisan consensus supporting our constitutional order. Constitutional Morality’s publication in 2016 is thus particularly apt, as the presidential election that year represents a reconsideration of the commitments and coalitions underlying our national political parties and institutions
Topic:
Legal Theory, Conservatism, Ideology, Progressivism, Legal Sector, and Partisanship
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

3. Reflections on Judicial Duty

Author:
Patricia M. Lines
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Humanitas
Institution:
The Center for the Study of Statesmanship, Catholic University
Abstract:
In this timely study Bruce Frohnen and George Carey uncover serious lapses in the operation of our federal government—lapses which constitute a depressing failure to be true to the Constitution. The authors charge all three branches of the federal government with neglect of their constitutional duties and, all too often, exceeding their constitutional authority. Congress has delegated law-making responsibilities to administrative agencies and has not exercised oversight of the agencies it has created. Presidents have usurped lawmaking functions through executive orders, and the Supreme Court has failed to check the reach of the legislative and executive branches. I applaud the authors’ efforts to call attention to these serious problems. While I agree with the Frohnen and Carey concerning the Court’s failure to check the excesses of the executive and legislative branches, especially during the New Deal, I respectfully disagree that the Supreme Court has exceeded its judicial power. To make their case, our authors focus on just one highly controversial and unpopular case, Roe v. Wade. I will argue that the Court in this matter has remained within its constitutional boundaries, following common law and its own self-imposed rules.
Topic:
Governance, Legal Theory, Judiciary, Legal Sector, and Abortion
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

4. A Response to Critics

Author:
Bruce P. Frohnen
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Humanitas
Institution:
The Center for the Study of Statesmanship, Catholic University
Abstract:
My thanks to the participants in this symposium. I know that my co-author, George Carey, would be as gratified as I am at the serious consideration given, here, to Constitutional Morality and the Rise of Quasi-Law. At first I was puzzled by William Gangi’s summation of our book as one that addresses the adage that “a constitution originating in one country may not be transplanted to another country and be expected to work in the same manner as it had in the country of origin.” The book includes some comparative analysis of constitutions to show their reliance on the underlying culture for their success and the importance of the fit between tradition and text. Still, it focuses on the American Constitution, not on the application of any country’s constitution to other countries. Then again, as Gangi notes, in a more fundamental sense our book is about the interaction between the written constitution of the United States and the unwritten constitution of institutions, beliefs, and practices that shaped the American people, the American culture, and the constitutional morality that until fairly recently held officials to their public duties. This is a particular instance of the universal problem of “fit” between constitution and culture.
Topic:
Governance, Constitution, Legal Theory, and Legal Sector
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

5. Universal Representation: Systemic Benefits and the Path Ahead

Author:
Lindsay Nash
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
At a time when politics, financial considerations, and a push for expediency put pressure on the US immigration system, it can be difficult to have faith in the adjudicatory process. Case resolution quotas, directives that constrain courts’ ability to render justice in individual cases, and executive decisions that contract immigration judges’ discretion contribute to an immigration system that looks less and less like judicial adjudication of some of the highest-stakes cases in our legal system and more like a ministerial claims-processing scheme. A ray of hope exists, however, in the proliferation of public defender–style systems that offer universal representation to those facing deportation. This essay describes the genesis and expansion of the universal representation movement — a project based on the idea that indigent individuals should be entitled to counsel regardless of the apparent merits or political palatability of their case. It describes the benefits of such a program to the immigration adjudication system writ large. Beyond the oft-cited increase in success rates for individuals represented and the benefits to the communities in which such programs are located, universal representation promotes the integrity of the court system and strengthens an adjudicatory procedure that, for too long, has functioned primarily to expeditiously churn through cases. Finally, looking forward, it considers some of the challenges this movement faces as it grows and it identifies areas for further expansion.
Topic:
Immigration, Border Control, and Legal Theory
Political Geography:
United States and North America

6. Reforming Investor-State Arbitration by Recourse to the Domestic Courts of Host States

Author:
Armand de Mestral and Lukas Vanhonnaeker
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI)
Abstract:
In response to concerns raised about investor-state arbitration (ISA), different proposals for reform of this means of dispute settlement have been proposed. One such proposal is to entrust domestic courts with the resolution of investment disputes. Although opting for the resolution of investment disputes before domestic courts has led to some discussion about the advantages and difficulties of this approach, very few studies have analyzed the specificities of domestic regimes in this regard. Many questions remain unanswered, including whether foreign investors have, in practice, access to domestic courts in the host state and whether the remedies available domestically are comparable to those available in ISA. In an attempt to answer some of these questions, a questionnaire was prepared and answered by respondents in 17 countries, in addition to Canada, from different regions of the world.
Topic:
Reform, Democracy, Legal Theory, and Investment
Political Geography:
United States, Canada, South America, North America, Mexico, and Peru

7. Frontier Justice: A New Approach for U.S. Rule of Law Assistance

Author:
Robert M. Perito and Donald J. Planty
Publication Date:
05-2018
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Public International Law Policy Group
Abstract:
United States rule of law assistance is failing to help recipient governments provide good governance, security and justice. This is particularly true in three categories of states in crisis: (1) states that are experiencing extreme levels of organized criminal violence; (2) states where international Islamist terrorism is attempting to impose extreme versions of Shariah law; and (3) states where corrupt authoritarian governments have morphed into kleptocracies. Though conditions have changed in these countries, U.S. rule of law assistance continues to employ a fragmented and technocratic approach to improving foreign criminal justice systems. Dedicated officials, civil society leaders, and concerned citizens in these countries want to establish the rule of law. In many cases, our current assistance does not help them change the prevailing paradigm. What new approaches for U.S. rule of law assistance are required to provide them with the support needed to change the system? In countries threatened by criminal violence, terrorism, and corrupt authoritarian rule, the study found that those working to promote a democratic political process believed rule of law was the essential element in providing good governance, security, and justice. They pointed out that law enforcement authorities and the criminal justice system were primary targets for those seeking to impose despotic regimes. They looked to the United States as a natural ally sharing common values and providing a model of what they can achieve. These individuals confirmed the critical importance of U.S. assistance in preventing further deterioration in the local conditions and to providing any hope that the situation might be improved. In all cases, these activists lamented the fact that U.S. rule of law assistance programs were often not strategically focused, culturally relevant, or adequately resourced. They made clear that more—not less—U.S. help is required to move forward. Indeed, they called for increased use of U.S. political and diplomatic leverage, closer consultations on program selection and development, and more intelligent targeting of financial resources. Whether aimed at establishing justice, enabling economic development, or promoting foreign investment, U.S. rule of law assistance has been a tool of U.S. foreign and national security policy since the end of World War II. The Obama Administration, however, subordinated rule of law programming to assistance for promoting democracy, protecting human rights, and enabling good governance. There also was a sharp drop in the financial resources devoted to aiding the justice sector. Outside of large programs in Iraq and Afghanistan, funding for aid to courts and corrections fell from several billion dollars to $1.9 billion in 2013 to less than $500 million in 2016. At the same time, rule of law assistance became ‘securitized’ with assistance increasingly focused on convicting and incarcerating drug traffickers and terrorists. The study identified other conditions and practices that undermined the effectiveness of U.S. rule of law programming. From the Washington perspective there is no readily knowable number for the total amount the United States spends annually on rule of law assistance, nor is there a common policy, doctrine, strategy, or coordinating mechanism for this aid. Funding is provided from a number of legislative funding sources, allocated to various government departments, and then spread among numerous implementing partners, primarily non- governmental organizations (NGOs) and commercial contractors. Assistance programs militarize civilian security forces and train prosecutors to charge terrorism suspects and jailors to prevent radicalization. Government agencies concerned with the rule of law programming utilize staff with legal and law enforcement backgrounds largely as advisors and rely upon generic program officers to handle program design, funding and program management. As a result, establishing the rule of law is less a tool than an end state that hopefully will result from programs to ensure free elections, fight drug trafficking, and counter violent extremism. In the field, the study found the administration of U.S. rule of law assistance is neither strategically focused nor designed to produce sustainable change. U.S. programs fail to emphasize that state building efforts are political initiatives and not technical exercises. Program funding is not concentrated to achieve objectives and mobilize sufficient local support. In areas where criminals, jihadists, and insurgents operate without respect for national borders, U.S. assistance does not have a regional perspective. Project implementation is also affected by a lack of U.S. government staff with legal and law enforcement backgrounds on the ground and by risk adverse State Department personnel policies that restrict the movement of U.S. officials making it difficult for them to meet with counterparts and visit project sites to access progress.
Topic:
Security, Governance, Legal Theory, Rule of Law, Borders, and Legal Sector
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

8. Making Enhanced CACs the Rule: A Proposed Amendment of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act

Author:
Gregory Makoff
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI)
Abstract:
The recent rise in sovereign debt litigation in the US Federal Court System is an unintended consequence of the US Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 related to an unanticipated shift of the international sovereign debt market from a narrow loan market to a global bond market. Collective action clauses (CACs) — developed in 2003 and “enhanced” in 2014 — are, in theory, an effective contract-based tool to facilitate orderly debt restructurings and control the holdout creditor problem. However, compliance by countries is voluntary and may not be sustained. To assure sustained compliance and to reduce the future incidence of holdout creditor litigation, the US Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act should be amended to provide that only bonds with enhanced CACs will be subject to suit and enforcement in the US courts.
Topic:
Debt, Legal Theory, Credit, and Global Bond Market
Political Geography:
United States and North America

9. DECOLONIZATION IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM: INDIGENOUS RIGHTS AND LEGAL PLURALISM, A COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN BOLIVIA, COLOMBIA, AND ECUADOR

Author:
Sergio Miranda Hayes
Publication Date:
05-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The New School Graduate Program in International Affairs
Abstract:
In the academic world, scientific literature comes mainly from the western part of the globe. Ramón Grossfoguel believes that knowledge is determined by power relations in the "post-colonial" era (Grossfoguel, 2002: 16). This means that Western powers dominate the academic world. In constitutional law, this is not the exception. However, while we can accept that it is true that many constitutional provisions, doctrine, jurisprudence and theories of Western constitutional law have influenced Latin American countries, most of these countries have also developed their own constitutional systems that have specific and new features, whose unique identity differentiates them from other systems in the world. In this paper, I will try to study the special features that Bolivia, Ecuador, and Colombia have in the recognition of indigenous rights and legal pluralism, whose discursive axis entails a “decolonizing” spirit which is the retrieval of their own institutions against the trends of hegemonic governance of the western culture as I will explain later. Latin America has faced numerous problems concerning social differentiation. In the opinion of one of the most cited authors in Latin American constitutional law, Raquel Yrigoyen, the disadvantaged were left behind from the social, economic and political issues through legal measures created by people of a favored minority, in order to maintain privileges (Yrigoyen, 2011: 139). In the case of Latin America, many of the disadvantaged match to be those survivors of the brutal Spanish conquest; the native Indians. I have chosen these three countries since they have a significant indigenous population; more than 36.6 million indigenous people in the region. In Bolivia, the number rises to 4,115,222 natives, in Ecuador 1018176,and in Colombia 1392623. (World Bank, 2014: 24-25) The Constitutions of Colombia (1991), Ecuador (2008) and Bolivia (2009) reflect the new “decolonizing” ideology; Colombia through its jurisprudence, on the one hand, and Bolivia and Ecuador, proclaiming themselves "Plurinational”countries on the other. All made great strides in recognizing indigenous rights and, consequently, in gaining their social inclusion. (Gargarella, 2014: 175) Constitutional systems are a product of history and the struggle of peoples. In these cases, the effort to include indigenous peoples in the economic, political and social spheres resulted in these new constitutional models which can be understood through a comparative study.By understanding this, advantages and disadvantages of each country to improve social inclusion of indigenous peoples in all the mentioned spheres can be found. In the first title, I will talk about the meaning of legal pluralism. In the second, I will discussthe new models of statewhich are conditioned by legal pluralism and indigenous rights. In the third, I will address indigenous autonomies and jurisdictions that are the subject of our study. And in the remaining two titles, I will discuss the most distinctive features, and rights arising from the recognition of this unique legal pluralism. All this with the purpose of exposing the new constitutional spirit of "decolonization" of these countries.
Topic:
Human Rights, Post Colonialism, Legal Theory, Colonialism, Decolonization, and Economic Inequality
Political Geography:
United States, Colombia, South America, Latin America, North America, Ecuador, and Bolivia

10. The DACA Era and the Continuous Legalization Work of the US Immigrant-Serving Community

Author:
Donald Kerwin, Roberto Suro, Tess Thorman, and Daniela Alulema
Publication Date:
02-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
In June 2016, the Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS), with support from the Open Society Foundation’s Emma Lazarus Fund II (OSF / ELF II), initiated a study on the work of non- governmental and community-based organizations (NGOs and CBOs) and their public and private partners to build capacity and to prepare to implement a large legalization program. Over a three-month period, the CMS team interviewed more than 40 agencies and 66 individuals, and intensively analyzed the work of five communities on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, expanded DACA (known as DACA-plus), and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). The study assessed the progress of the NGO/ CBO community in building capacity to promote maximum participation in DACA, to enlist DACA beneficiaries in service, advocacy and community organizing work, and to prepare for a future large-scale legalization program. The study covers the period from DACA’s inception in 2012 to the eve of the presidential election. The prospects for any kind of legalization in the short term have darkened with the election of Donald J. Trump, and the prospects for widespread and potentially draconian enforcement actions have heightened. Although this project was commissioned, conceived, and executed with a legalization program in mind, its findings on the capacity of the immigrant-serving sector remain timely and relevant. This report presents a narrative of how the sector developed over the past four years and assesses its capabilities. As such, it presents a valuable catalogue of assets as the sector considers how it will respond to the challenges ahead. Building greater capacity to serve immigrant communities has become an even more urgent task since the presidential election. Recommendations formulated for a potential legalization program can serve as a starting point for the development of strategies to contend with the Trump administration’s immigration and refugee policies.
Topic:
Immigration, Legal Theory, Humanitarian Crisis, and DACA
Political Geography:
United States, Central America, and North America