Bankruptcy vs. Environmental Protection: A Case Study in Normative Conflict

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-276
Author(s):  
H. Hamner Hill

Environmental protection laws are a recent legal development. As soon as these statutes first began to appear, it was evident that the fundamental principles of environmental protection would conflict, at some point, with fundamental principles from other, older, substantive bodies of law. In the American legal system, nowhere has the conflict been more serious than between environmental protection law and the law of bankruptcy. While this problem has attracted significant attention in the law reviews, it has been little noticed outside legal circles. This conflict sheds important light on the nature of normative conflicts generally, and points to the need for a well-developed theory of conflict resolution which courts can use when deciding cases. The root of the problem lies in a conflict between the underlying policy goals of these substantive bodies of law such that satisfying one policy objective necessarily undercuts the other. As such, the conflict between bankruptcy and environmental protection should be classified as a normative collision. This discussion examines this normative collision as it exists in American law in some detail. Such an examination provides interesting insights into the nature and pervasiveness of normative conflicts in our legal system. It also serves to illuminate both the theoretical and practical need for a coherent, well developed mechanism for resolving normative conflicts when conflicts arise.

1996 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-74
Author(s):  
Alan Meisel

AbstractIn the 20 years that have passed since the Karen Quinlan case exposed a simmering clinical issue to the light of day — more precisely, to the press and to judicial process — a consensus has developed in American law about how end-of-life decisionmaking should occur. To be sure, there are dissenting voices from this consensus, but they are often (though not always) about minor issues. By illustrating how this consensus has evolved, this paper explores how law is made in the American legal system and the roles that different legal and extra-legal institutions play in lawmaking.


1986 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 442
Author(s):  
Tim Kaye ◽  
Herbert Hill ◽  
Christopher L. Tomlins ◽  
Michael Poole

2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 427-454
Author(s):  
Hassan Jabareen

This review essay challenges three main claims about originalism in American legal thought. While it affirms that originalism could be the Law of a legal system, it first challenges the mainstream idea that American originalism is the paradigmatic case in theory and in practice. Second, the essay confronts the normative justification that originalism ensures democracy based on the rule of law. Third, it interrogates the dichotomy between living constitutionalism and originalism regarding the use of history by arguing that originalism is a form of hegemony. The case study analysed in this article is Israeli legal thought and practice after the enactment of the 1992 Basic Laws, with the focus on the right of equality.


1982 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 989-1071 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frances Kahn Zemans

The American legal system, structured in an entrepreneurial mode, relies upon the individual actor to personally evaluate the burdens and benefits of invoking the law on his or her own behalf. Without discounting the contribution to our understanding of legal mobilization which has been made by the access-to-justice movement, the author argues that focusing on the poor and the distribution of legal services has limited our understanding of the legal system.The article presents an alternative analytic framework for examination of citizen use of the law. The model of legal mobilization presented focuses on demands rather than needs, on citizens rather than lawyers or judges, on decision making rather than access, and on invoking the law rather than compliance with it. Drawing on the literature and available empirical evidence, the author attempts to analytically clarify the complex process of legal mobilization by organizing relevant variables into a decision-making model that focuses on the individual actor and the factors weighed in deciding whether and how to proceed in mobilizing the law.


Author(s):  
Tatiana Letuta

The object of the research is civil relations arising in the process of environmental harm prevention. The subject of the research is the standards of civil law and regional trials as well as researches. The author of the article pays special attention to answering the question whether Article 1065 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes environmental protection means as fully as possible, what means of civil protection can be used by complainants and whether the structure of Article 1065 of the Civil Code is efficient enough. Based on the research objectives, the author of the article has used such research methods as systems analysis allowing to cover a wide range of materials and to discover gaps and inconsistencies of references rules in The Law On Environmental Protectino and Civil Code as well as analysis and generalisation to work with trial materials and to make conclusions. The main conclusinos of the research are the following provisions. There is no direct mechanism for the implementation of provisions of The Law on Environmental Protection through Civil Code rules. Thus, the author offers better ways of implying civil means including protection of estates and property rights. Letuta offers her own variant of civil protection means that can be used to prevent environmental harm in certain cases. The author also gives her own variants of amendments and changes in the civil law that would ensure better implementation of the provisions of Articles 34, 56 and 80 of The Law on Environmental Protection. 


Author(s):  
Justin A. Joyce

Gunslinging justice explores American Westerns in a variety of media alongside the historical development of the American legal system to argue that Western shootouts are less overtly “anti-law” than has been previously assumed. While the genre’s climactic shootouts may look like a putatively masculine opposition to the codified and mediated American legal system, this gun violence is actually enshrined in the development of American laws regulating self-defense and gun possession. The climactic gun violence and stylized revenge drama of seminal Western texts then, seeks not to oppose "the law," but rather to expand its scope. The book’s interdisciplinary approach, which seeks to historicize and contextualize the iconographic tropes of the genre and its associated discourses across varied cultural and social forms, breaks from psychoanalytic perspectives which have long dominated studies of film and legal discourse and occluded historical contingencies integral to the work cultural forms do in the world. From nineteenth century texts like Cooper's The Last of the Mohicans (1826) and Reconstruction era dime novels, through early twentieth century works like The Virginian, to classic Westerns and more recent films like Unforgiven (1992), this book looks to the intersections between American law and various media that have enabled a cultural, social, and political acceptance of defensive gun violence that is still with us today.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document