From Liability Shields to Democratic Theory: What We Need from Tort Theory Now

In the United States, one startling response to COVID-19 has been a push for so-called “liability shields,” laws modifying tort doctrine so as to largely eliminate tort liability for negligently causing COVID-19. Though not enacted at the federal level, such changes have been adopted in numerous states. This article excavates and articulates the tort theory that lies behind this puzzlingly response to a pandemic. I call the theory “tort deflationism.” Grounded in modern American conservatism and with a doctrinal pedigree dating back to the 1970s, tort deflationism explains and justifies only minimal tort liability, out of deference to non-governmental actors – especially family, church, and business—and suspicion of government competence and power. Other tort theories should reckon with tort deflationism, and I discuss some challenges of doing so. The contest between tort deflationism and other theories speaks to ongoing debates about the legitimacy of law in pluralist democracies. I urge tort theorists to enter these debates and to consider their implications for tort law itself.

Three Dimensions of American Conservative Political Orientation Differentially Predict Negativity Bias and Satisfaction With Life

Numerous studies have linked political conservatism with negativity bias, whereas others have linked conservatism with indicators of positive adjustment. This research sought to reconcile this seeming contradiction by examining whether distinct dimensions of conservatism differentially predicted measures of negativity bias and positive adjustment. In two studies, we used an empirically derived and validated Attitude-Based Political Conservatism (ABPC) Scale that captures three correlated but distinct factors of American conservatism: Libertarian Independence, Moral Traditionalism, and Ethnic Separateness. In both studies ( N = 1,756), Libertarian Independence was linked with indicators of positive adjustment, whereas Moral Traditionalism and Ethnic Separateness were linked with indices of negativity bias. By identifying which dimensions of conservatism predict negativity bias and positive adjustment, this work illuminates the unique psychological foundations of distinct strands of conservatism in America.

E pluribus unum Shrugged: Ayn Rand Against American Conservatism and Libertarianism

The past decade has witnessed a renewed interest in the works of twentieth-century Objectivist philosopher Ayn Rand. Political events ranging from the rise of the Tea Party to the 2016 election of Donald J. Trump have only helped to spur this resurgence, further evident in film adaptations and reissues of her popular literary novels. Political pundits abound have, in turn, deemed the return of Ayn Rand as a victory for libertarian thought and the Republican Party, more broadly. However, in this paper I contest such a theoretical synergy and complicate the Rand/Republican Party interplay by suggesting that it rests on false grounds. Drawing from Rand’s Objectivism, I argue that modern-day Republican Party politics, specifically conservative and libertarian strains of thought, fail on epistemological grounds. The philosophical writings of the Russian-born, turned-American philosopher therefore are not only incompatible, but function as a forceful critique against the governing platform of the Republican Party in preparation for the 2022 midterm elections.

E pluribus unum Shrugged: Ayn Rand Against American Conservatism and Libertarianism

The past decade has witnessed a renewed interest in the works of twentieth-century Objectivist philosopher Ayn Rand. Political events ranging from the rise of the Tea Party to the 2016 election of Donald J. Trump have only helped to spur this resurgence, further evident in film adaptations and reissues of her popular literary novels. Political pundits abound have, in turn, deemed the return of Ayn Rand as a victory for libertarian thought and the Republican Party, more broadly. However, in this paper I contest such a theoretical synergy and complicate the Rand/Republican Party interplay by suggesting that it rests on false grounds. Drawing from Rand’s Objectivism, I argue that modern-day Republican Party politics, specifically conservative and libertarian strains of thought, fail on epistemological grounds. The philosophical writings of the Russian-born, turned-American philosopher therefore are not only incompatible, but function as a forceful critique against the governing platform of the Republican Party in preparation for the 2022 midterm elections.