法学文论 · LEGAL STUDIES – Page 3

New Book: The Classical Liberal Constitution: The Uncertain Quest for Limited Government. By Richard A. Epstein

By 爱德布克 @ 2013-5-25

The Classical Liberal Constitution: The Uncertain Quest for Limited Government.
By Richard A. Epstein.
Harvard University Press 2013.
ISBN: 9780674724891, 0674724895.

American liberals and conservatives alike take for granted a progressive view of the Constitution that took root in the early twentieth century. Richard Epstein laments this complacency which, he believes, explains America’s current economic malaise and political gridlock. Steering clear of well-worn debates between defenders of originalism and proponents of a living Constitution, Epstein employs close textual reading, historical analysis, and political and economic theory to urge a return to the classical liberal theory of governance that animated the framers’ original text, and to the limited government this theory supports.

Grounded in the thought of Locke, Hume, Madison, and other Enlightenment figures, the classical liberal tradition emphasized federalism, restricted government, separation of powers, property rights, and economic liberties. The most serious challenge to this tradition, Epstein contends, has come from New Deal progressives and their intellectual defenders. Unlike Thomas Paine, who saw government as a necessary evil at best, the progressives embraced government as a force for administering social good. The Supreme Court has unwisely ratified the progressive program by sustaining an ever-lengthening list of legislative programs at odds with the classical liberal Constitution.

Epstein’s carefully considered analysis addresses both halves of the constitutional enterprise: its structural safeguards against excessive government power and its protection of individual rights. He illuminates contemporary disputes ranging from presidential prerogatives to health care legislation, while reexamining such enduring topics as the institution of judicial review, the federal government’s role in regulating economic activity, freedom of speech and religion, and equal protection.

New Book: Legal Orientalism: China, the United States, and Modern Law. By Teemu Ruskola

By 爱德布克 @ 2013-5-16

Legal Orientalism: China, the United States, and Modern Law（《法律东方主义：中国·美国·现代法律》）. By Teemu Ruskola. Harvard University Press 2013. ISBN: 0674073061, 9780674073067.

Since the Cold War ended, China has become a global symbol of disregard for human rights, while the United States has positioned itself as the world’s chief exporter of the rule of law. How did lawlessness become an axiom about Chineseness rather than a fact needing to be verified empirically, and how did the United States assume the mantle of law’s universal appeal? In a series of wide-ranging inquiries, Teemu Ruskola investigates the history of “legal Orientalism”: a set of globally circulating narratives about what law is and who has it. For example, why is China said not to have a history of corporate law, as a way of explaining its “failure” to develop capitalism on its own? Ruskola shows how a European tradition of philosophical prejudices about Chinese law developed into a distinctively American ideology of empire, influential to this day.

The first Sino-U.S. treaty in 1844 authorized the extraterritorial application of American law in a putatively lawless China. A kind of legal imperialism, this practice long predated U.S. territorial colonialism after the Spanish-American War in 1898, and found its fullest expression in an American district court’s jurisdiction over the “District of China.” With urgent contemporary implications, legal Orientalism lives on in the enduring damage wrought on the U.S. Constitution by late nineteenth-century anti-Chinese immigration laws, and in the self-Orientalizing reforms of Chinese law today. In the global politics of trade and human rights, legal Orientalism continues to shape modern subjectivities, institutions, and geopolitics in powerful and unacknowledged ways.

New Book: The Roberts Court: The Struggle for the Constitution. By Marcia Coyle

By 爱德布克 @ 2013-5-14

The Roberts Court: The Struggle for the Constitution. By Marcia Coyle. Simon & Schuster 2013. ISBN: 1451627513; 9781451627510.

购买本书@亚马逊

The Roberts Court, seven years old, sits at the center of a constitutional maelstrom. Through four landmark decisions, Marcia Coyle, one of the most prestigious experts on the Supreme Court, reveals the fault lines in the conservative-dominated Court led by Chief Justice John Roberts Jr.

Seven minutes after President Obama put his signature to a landmark national health care insurance program, a lawyer in the office of Florida GOP attorney general Bill McCollum hit a computer key, sparking a legal challenge to the new law that would eventually reach the nation’s highest court. Health care is only the most visible and recent front in a battle over the meaning and scope of the U.S. Constitution. The battleground is the United States Supreme Court, and one of the most skilled, insightful, and trenchant of its observers takes us close up to watch it in action.

Marcia Coyle’s brilliant inside account of the High Court captures four landmark decisions—concerning health care, money in elections, guns at home, and race in schools. Coyle examines how those cases began—the personalities and conflicts that catapulted them onto the national scene—and how they ultimately exposed the great divides among the justices, such as the originalists versus the pragmatists on guns and the Second Amendment, and corporate speech versus human speech in the controversial Citizens United campaign case. Most dramatically, her analysis shows how dedicated conservative lawyers and groups are strategizing to find cases and crafting them to bring up the judicial road to the Supreme Court with an eye on a receptive conservative majority.

The Roberts Court offers a ringside seat at the struggle to lay down the law of the land.

New Book: Reflections on Judging. By Richard A. Posner

By 爱德布克 @ 2013-4-24

Reflections on Judging. By Richard A. Posner. Harvard University Press 2013. ISBN: 0674725085, 9780674725089

购买本书@亚马逊

In Reflections on Judging, Richard Posner distills the experience of his thirty-one years as a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Surveying how the judiciary has changed since his 1981 appointment, he engages the issues at stake today, suggesting how lawyers should argue cases and judges decide them, how trials can be improved, and, most urgently, how to cope with the dizzying pace of technological advance that makes litigation ever more challenging to judges and lawyers.

For Posner, legal formalism presents one of the main obstacles to tackling these problems. Formalist judges—most notably Justice Antonin Scalia—needlessly complicate the legal process by advocating “canons of constructions” (principles for interpreting statutes and the Constitution) that are confusing and self-contradictory. Posner calls instead for a renewed commitment to legal realism, whereby a good judge gathers facts, carefully considers context, and comes to a sensible conclusion that avoids inflicting collateral damage on other areas of the law. This, Posner believes, was the approach of the jurists he most admires and seeks to emulate: Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Benjamin Cardozo, Learned Hand, Robert Jackson, and Henry Friendly, and it is an approach that can best resolve our twenty-first-century legal disputes.

Review

“A deep and thought-provoking collection of insightful analyses of various aspects of being a judge, told from an insider’s perspective, but with appropriate and equally thoughtful caveats about the advantages and disadvantages of an insider’s account.”—Frederick Schauer, University of Virginia School of Law

Table of Contents

Introduction: A Judge on the Challenges to Judges
Two Kinds of Complexity
Extrajudicial Writing by Judges
Plan of the Book
Appendix: External versus Internal Complexity in Federal Adjudication

1. The Road to 219 South Dearborn Street
Education and Early Career
The Federal Judicial Appointment Process in 1981
Transition, and the Question of Initial Judicial Training

2. The Federal Judiciary Evolves
A Half-Century of Change
Input-Output, with Special Reference to the Supreme Court
Staff and Specialization in Relation to Rank

3. The Challenge of Complexity
Complexity Further Explained
Examples, Primarily from Criminal Law and Sentencing
The Impact of Technology
Judicial Insouciance about the Real
Specialization the Solution?
Internal Complexity: The Case of the Bluebook

4. Formalism and Realism in Appellate Decision Making
The Formalist Judge
The Realist Judge
Advice to New Appellate Judges

5. The Inadequate Appellate Record
Internet Research by Judges
Is a Word Really Worth a Thousand Pictures?

6. Coping Strategies for Appellate Judges I: Judicial Self-Restraint
Thayer and His Epigones
The Decline of Self-Restraint
The Rise of Constitutional Theory
Thayerism’s Death and Legacy

7. Coping Strategies for Appellate Judges II: Interpretation
The Spirit Killeth, but the Letter Giveth Life
Dreaming a Constitution
Opposites Attract and Repel
Realist Interpretation

8. Make It Simple, Make It New: Opinion Writing and Appellate Advocacy
The Signs of Bad Judicial Writing
The Writer Model versus the Manager Model
Management versus Managerialism
The Formalist Opinion
Rules of Good Opinion Writing
The Morris Opinion
Some Tips on Appellate Advocacy
Appendix: United States v. Morris (Original and Rewritten)

9. Forays into the District Court
Expert Witnesses and Trial by Jury: An Anecdotal Introduction
Party-Appointed and Court-Appointed Expert Witnesses
The Jury
Jury Trials in Patent Cases
Internet Research by Jurors
Other Issues
Appendix: Jury Instructions in Chamberlain v. Lear

10. What Can Be Done, Modestly?
Staffing
Initial Judicial Training
Continuing Judicial Education
The Widening Gap between Academia and the Judiciary
The Role of the Law Schools in Continuing Judicial Education
MOOCs to the Rescue?

Conclusion: Realism, the Path Forward
Acknowledgments
Index

Richard A. Posner is Circuit Judge, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.

Richard Posner: How Many Constitutions Can Liberals Have?

By 爱德布克 @ 2012-10-27

Richard Posner: How Many Constitutions Can Liberals Have? (Or, A Lawyer’s Dozen)

(A book review of Akhil Amar, America’s Unwritten Constitution: The Precedents and Principles We Live By)

An excerpt from the beginning part:

Actually, despite the book’s title, it is not two in one—it is twelve in one. There is not just one unwritten constitution, in Amar’s reckoning; there are eleven of them. There is an “implicit” constitution, a “lived” constitution, a “Warrented” constitution (the reference is to Earl Warren), a “doctrinal” constitution, a “symbolic” constitution, a “feminist” constitution, a “Georgian” constitution (the reference is to George Washington), an “institutional” constitution, a “partisan” constitution (the reference is to political parties, which are not mentioned in the written Constitution), a “conscientious” constitution (which, for example, permits judges and jurors to ignore valid law), and an “unfinished” constitution that Amar is busy finishing. All these unwritten constitutions, in Amar’s view, are authoritative. And miraculously, when correctly interpreted, they all cohere, both with each other and with the written Constitution. The sum of the twelve constitutions is the Constitution.

One is tempted to say that this is preposterous, and leave it at that. But it is an attempt to respond to the felt need of professors of constitutional law, and of judges who rule on constitutional cases (particularly Supreme Court justices), to find, or at least to assert, an objective basis for constitutional decisions. On the eve of the Supreme Court’s decision on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act—a time of liberal panic—Amar was quoted as saying that if the Court invalidated the act “then yes, it’s disheartening to me, because my life was a fraud. Here I was, in my silly little office, thinking law mattered, and it really didn’t. What mattered was politics, money, party, and party loyalty.” But the constitutional “law” that matters to Amar is not what other lawyers understand law to be. It is a palimpsest of twelve constitutions, only one of which is real.

刘忠：规模与内部治理：中国法院编制变迁三十年

By 爱德布克 @ 2012-10-9

晚近以来，程序正义理论的一个基本命题认为只有经由“中立第三方”主持、双方当事人平等对抗下的三角结构，所得出的结论才是唯一可接受的结果[1]。其方法论立场系出于自然科学：古典物理学为便利研究，将运动中的物体如赛马、帆船等视为一个可以不考虑大小，无体积、形状的“质点”（mass point），从而引入几何学坐标系进行计算。近代以来，人文、社科研究受自然科学研究方式影响甚重[2]。然而，人文、社会研究中，这种方式的物理简约却可能自我斩断能对事态作出真正有力的解释的因果关系项。

将法院看作一个“质点”在程序法内跃动，忽略了法院是一个有着复杂的内部结构关系的组织，忽视了法院的构成尤其是编制规模导致的内部治理所产生的组织内行为会对组织外程序的产生决定性的影响。

本文对三十年（1978-2008）中国法院编制规模作出尽可能细致的数据变化描述，以此为逻辑起点，在“内部组织结构——外部程序行为”这一视域下，展开对以下问题的初步分析：

政治治理观念转型，将更多公共治理职能转移给法院担当，由此导致的三十年法院编制规模巨观化，使得法院内部组织出现了非预期的后果，即表象上的日趋坚硬的科层化，及由此所导致的结构上的困境，即司法行为的作出，被内部组织样态所决定，产生巨大的负外部性，原本期望的国家政治治理方式转变目标恰恰因追求目标的手段自身而被削弱。在学理上，以法院为中心的法治化新叙事，获得了正当程序理论“中立第三方”命题的理论支持。在不反思这一命题的前提下的诸种对策，被1998年以来的司法改革经验证实效果不彰。法院编制激增，不仅带来司法效率问题，也导致了新的“宪政时刻”问题。

冯象：法学的历史批判——答《北大法律评论》

By 冯象 @ 2012-10-4

二〇〇八年您写了《法学三十年：重新出发》，文中提到中国法学“最大的挑战，不在体制内的腐败和控制（如买卖学位、竞贿评估、大小山头争夺资源），而是全球化即全球美国化的形势下，中国法学整体上的边缘化、殖民地化……主流法学在话语层面已广泛接受美国的影响，跨入了‘美国时代’”。时隔四年，回顾一下，中国法学的建树还是不少。比如，北大法学院强世功老师试图通过“不成文宪法”的概念来重构实践中的中国宪制；章永乐老师的专著《旧邦新造》，则是取政治学和法学双重视角，探讨晚清至民国的宪政史；山东大学田雷老师最近提交“八二宪法”纪念研讨会的论文，《 “差序格局”、反定型化与未完全理论化合意——中国宪政模式的一种叙述》，也是一种重构的努力。您如何看待学术界这些新的努力？

开了新风气呢。我们在课上讲过田老师分析的教科书迷思，叫作“中国有宪法而无宪政”。那迷思的根据是，中国的体制缺了违宪审查程序，宪法争议不能诉讼，宪法文本悬在虚空里了——类似《政法笔记》引的那句老百姓大白话：“它没宪法”。但是，“没宪法”不等于“无宪政”。田老师借用费孝通先生的“差序格局”等学说来讨论中国的宪政格局，是大胆的创见。我想强老师也是这个意思，除了几部宪法，我们还应当研究“中国特色”的宪制的方方面面，包括“不成文”的或法律本本之后、之上的宪政惯例。

当代中国语境下宪法文本的一个特点，也是传统宪法学上的难处，是脱离现实政治。“八二宪法”虽有几次修订，如添加了社会主义法治、私有产权保护和尊重人权的语言，但都是宣示性质，小心翼翼地跟改革开放以来的制度实践保持着安全距离。道理很简单，那些制度实践多数经不起违宪审查，哪怕是程序性的审查。而且，“违宪”一旦引入现实政治，即有违反《宪法》的哪一部分、哪一句话的争论：到底是背离了序言所规定的马列主义、毛泽东思想指引下的人民民主专政和社会主义道路，还是具体的、争议各方可作彼此牴牾的解释的条款文字？前些年，学界跟媒体关于《物权法》草案的激烈辩论，就是一次预演。差点把“不争论”的告诫撇一边去了。

历史地看，“八二宪法”可说是清末以降所有宪法文本中，最具宪政张力即潜能的一部宪法。由于建设中的法治（我称之为“形式法治”）必须以宪法为基础而获得并展示其合法性，“八二宪法”便成了中国体制“落后”（拿形式法治的原则来衡量）的一个表征。正是这巨大的张力，使得不时修宪有了政治动力，从而避免了现行《宪法》像之前的文本那样，完全为政治抛离。

冯象：知识产权或孔雀尾巴

By 冯象 @ 2012-7-23

与S君谈

冯老师，读了您的文章《知识产权的终结》，我有几点困惑，能否聊聊？您扯开去谈也行。现在好像不仅仅中国，世界各地甚至欧美发达国家，盗版和“山寨”产品都大行其道。这方面的报道和评论很多，一般认为是知识产权及相关法律不健全造成的，您同意吗？

恐怕不能这么说。如果知识产权法还叫“不健全”，世上恐怕没有健全的法律了。因为各国的知识产权立法都是美国推动，拿国际条约和双边/多边协定做框架，背后则是主导全球贸易的美国法标准；至少在“主要贸易伙伴”之间，法律规范、学理解释甚而条款用语的同质化程度，已经相当高了。

所以出了问题，业内人士都怪执法，还怪一个叫“体制”的东西。

中国就是这毛病，老批自己，跟着美国的调门批，坐实了人家的指控。说实话，知识产权乃至业已宣布建成的整个法律制度，是不是建国以来最健全的时候？谁不承认，即有肯定上世纪五六十年代的“无法无天”之嫌，那可是严重的偏离“政治正确”，呵呵。法律如此紧密地接轨国际（读作照搬美国），却仍然担了“不健全”的恶名，而且是官方宣传口径，这里头一定有什么不便明言的难处。

这话怎么讲？

“不健全”是委婉语。说白了，就是知识产权为市场经济“保驾护航”不力，照顾不了它的首要服务对象即资本的利益，走到头了。乍一听，此话有点反常识。可是谁有那个能力，且受益于，抛弃知识产权——以及支撑它的形式化的“普世价值”法权意识形态，我称之为“形式法治”——除了资本，新世纪全球化的资本市场和资本竞争？

刘忠：条条与块块关系下的法院院长产生

By 爱德布克 @ 2012-7-16

摘要：条块关系是不同于西方学术典范的解释中国现象的中国叙事框架。在中国政治予境中，较之中央地方关系更重要的是条条与块块关系。在地方法院院长产生的问题上，作为块块的上级党委和本级党委与拟任职法院的上级法院之间，对人选各有不同支配关系。在武装夺权年代确立的“块块为主，条块结合”的地方治理机制，在市场经济条件下获得新的政治考量意义。

关键词：条块关系法院院长产生地方治理机制

Abstract: The relationship between tiao system (vertical) and kuai system (horizontal) is an unique interpretive framework of Chinese issues that is quite different from existing paradigm of western scholarship. In China’s political context, such relationship is more important than that of central-local governments. As for the generation of local people’s court’s head, different dominating powers exist over the head candidate among higher Party’s Committee , local Party’s Committee and higher people’s court. The local governing mechanism of “kuai system is prior to and correlated to tiao system” shaped during the revolutionary period has acquired a new political significance under the current market economy.

Key words: relationship between tiao and kuai, candidate of local people’s court’s head, local governing mechanism governing mechanism

传统政治学、宪法学，受西方学术范式影响，高度关注中央地方关系。[1]但西方学术植根于西方经验，不可完全通约于中国问题。中央地方关系在毛泽东时代，是中共中央和各中央局、中央分局、省委（区党委）、地委、县委、区委的权力分配关系。在当代，主要是中共中央和省、市、县/区委的关系[2]。虽然全国人大、国务院和各省、市、县的人大、政府之间也有上下协调、权力划分关系，但是，由于中国共产党实行党委一元化领导，地方人大、政府、政协和工会、共青团、妇联等人民团体，都要首先服从同级党委的领导，因此，中央与地方关系最终是党内关系，是中国共产党中央委员会和省、市、县/区委员会的权力层级关系。

在中国的地方治理中，本文认为最重要的是条块关系。条块关系，是在中国共产党地方政治治理中出现的特殊政治形态，其中的条条指的是从中央到地方纵向的、工作性质一致的部门体系，如最高法院、高级法院、中级法院、基层法院。块块指的是中共中央、省、市、县/区地方党委。之所以称谓条条、块块，盖来自于一个知识隐喻（metaphor）：在对机构设置进行图状表示时，相同工作性质的机构以条型的树状图表示，而所有的这些机构又均置于一个地方行政区划内，地方行政区划在平面地图中一块一块的标绘，拼成一个更大的区划，而每一级区划都由该级地方党委统一领导。

条块关系比中央地方关系形态更复杂，对现实的中国政治实践影响更大。条条与块块关系之间的权力配置中最重要的是人员任用权力的分配，条与块各自权力量的大小最主要表现为人员任用上的决定权份量，财税汲取的支配权划分只居于其次。由于非家产制[3]下的官员，都只向产生自己的官员负责，所以不管是条条还是块块，都清晰地意识到只有管住人，才能管住事；管住人，人事两全；只管事，管不住人，人事两空。

1990年代以来，鉴于地方保护主义、部门保护主义的抬头，最高法院和上级法院开始强化最高法院对全国各级法院、上级法院对下级法院在组织人事任命、审判、行政装备等事务上的纵向一体化[4]领导。这最突出的表现在地方法院院长的任命上。在地方法院院长这一重要组织任免上，块块中的上级党委行使决定权，条条中的上级法院和本级党委，分别行使协管、建议任免权，由此条条与块块的关系形态日显复杂。

法院院长在法律、干部组织人事规定内的任职资格以及地方人大在法院院长产生上的分量和其他技术性的约束，我另文细述。本文仅力图在制度细节上通过地方法院院长的任命，来展示政治治理如何在条块之间推动；以条与块之间在法院院长任命上的权力分配比为表述对象，考量政治决策对国家内部政治控制的不同思路。司法的政治意义，至少是学术分析理路上以政治入司法，是理解当代中国司法的一个走不出的背景。[5]

刘忠：被识别的几率：非法取证程序性制裁的构成性前提

By 爱德布克 @ 2012-4-27

两高三部《关于办理死刑案件审查判断证据若干问题的规定》和《关于办理刑事案件排除非法证据若干问题的规定》两个证据规定[1]，在极高的被期待中颁布。细析条文，这两个规定是给办案人员提供了一个比较细致的办案指导守则、工作操作的引导指南，在对非法取证进行程序性制裁具有实质作用力的条款上，该规定并没有超出的制度增量，区别对待以非法方法获取的言辞证据和书证、物证的证据能力这种做法，也仍是沿袭了两高对1997年修正后的刑事诉讼法各自所作司法解释中的规定。

消除以刑讯逼供为主要表现的非法取证，从1980年刑事诉讼法实施的30年中，最高司法机关的关注从未松懈过，学界也持续投入研究，但根本的改观并未显现。除刑事政策选择、基础性的社会控制力等社会存在制约等原因外，在纯粹的侦查技术维度，外部观察者对于非法取证，甚至是刑讯逼供这样严重并且易于留下证据的行为，均难以识别、确证，是非法取证无法消解的一个最大的支撑因素。

本文以既有的制度投入在排除非法取证这一问题上何以无效，作为制裁程序性违法的构成性前提的被识别机制在中国刑事诉讼实践中的建立障碍为分析线索，表达程序性制裁规则在排除非法取证这一局部问题上的逻辑弱点，以及构建排除非法取证的强识别机制在中国刑事诉讼法制度、实践中的复杂，以期望能对程序性制裁规则的制度实效获得延展性的认识。

The End of Intellectual Property: Challenges beyond the “China Model”. By Feng Xiang

By 冯象 @ 2012-3-29

知识产权的终结
The End of Intellectual Property
Challenges beyond the “China Model”*
冯象

Abstract: A new reef the luxury cruise ship “Rule of Law” has hit, called the unenforceability of intellectual property rights. This article argues that instead of the often misnamed and misunderstood scapegoat, the “China model”, it is two global trends, the internet and outsourcing, that have led to the historical clashing and overcoming of the law. As a result, important revisions to our conception and use of the law and a new faith in universalism must be contemplated.

Key words: intellectual property; rule of law; internet; outsourcing; revisionism; universalism.

I

Intellectual property is demising. Or at least, that form of intellectual property rights (IPR) as taught at our law schools and propagated by powerful state machines – a complex web of statutorily defined property and moral rights, entitled to official respect and protection in all “civilized nations”, according to a long list of treaties and international conventions signed into effect by members of global trade communities such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) – has come to its end.

The fact is undeniable. Today, few people in good conscience can conduct normal business or enjoy a day of leisure without breaching a commandment of intellectual property by, for example, running a computer program, choosing a branded handbag or sharing a song with friends on the internet. This is so not only in China and other emergent economies, but increasingly in the United States and developed markets in general, as amply documented by academic researchers and industry analysts. The situation of IPR in China, therefore, is essentially no different from elsewhere on this over-wired blue planet, though for various reasons, there is often more media attention paid to it, in China as well as in the west, than deeper economic and social problems, such as what triggered the “Occupy Wall Street” demonstrations.

A couple of months ago, I remember, the BBC reported a case in the city of Kunming, Yunnan Province, southwestern China, in which 22 fake Apple stores were shut down in a crackdown by the local industry and commerce administration. The tips came from a foreign tourist who discovered some alterations in the layout and “signature” features in one of those “Apple stores” (BBC news, 12 Aug 2011). Given the freewheeling business environment, however, we may reasonably expect that similar bootleg operations will soon mushroom to fill in the void, right there or in nearby towns. The consumer market demands that.

苏力主编：《法律和社会科学》第八卷

By 爱德布克 @ 2012-3-17

《法律和社会科学》[Law and Social Sciences] 第八卷，苏力主编，法律出版社 2012年。

购买：亚马逊；当当网。

主题讨论：基层社会与司法

农田水利纠纷与乡村秩序：鄂中w村调查／焦长权
“彻底解释”农民的地权观／朱晓阳
人民法庭对绅权的转化和替代／孟庆友
基层法院办案方式的转变(1982-2008年)／朱涛
基层法院“送法下乡”的行为逻辑——以对西北某基层法院的观察为例／葛峰

“地方政府都市化”策略下的户籍制度改革——以重庆户籍改革为切入点／卢超
信息成本下的公共执法与私人参与——从“钓鱼执法”事件切入／昊义龙
网络舆情中的风险、认知与规制／胡凌

批评：两湖平原“混混”研究

法律能否治理“混混”／王启梁／
“乡村江湖”的兴起如何可能／林辉煌
巨变年代的底层、基层与经验研究／易江波
对“混混”研究的质疑／侯猛

罗纳德·德沃金：《民主是可能的吗？：新型政治辩论的诸原则》

By 爱德布克 @ 2012-1-19

★ 社会思想译丛 ★ 新书讯

罗纳德·德沃金（Ronald Dworkin）：《民主是可能的吗？：新型政治辩论的诸原则》（Is Democracy Possible Here?: Principles for a New Political Debate），鲁楠、王淇译，北京大学出版社2012年。ISBN: 9787301198407. @豆瓣 @小组

购买：亚马逊中国；当当网。

内容简介

美国政治可能正出现前所未有的两极化，并遭到普遍的轻视。最近几年来，来自左右两翼、红蓝两大阵营的政治家们彼此争斗，仿佛政治是博取啦啦队欢呼的贴身竞技一样。德沃金写道，这种结果已经变成令人深感失望的政治文化，无法面对实现社会正义的长远挑战，而这些挑战是由诸如恐怖主义的新威胁等问题所带来的。改变的希望能够实现吗?

德沃金——一位著名的世界级法律和政治哲学家，论证并捍卫了个人和政治道德性的核心原则，而这些原则为所有公民所共享。他指出，这些共享的原则能够使实质性的政治论辩成为可能，能够将互相蔑视变成互相尊重，能够引领美国和其他国家实现对民主更加完整的承诺。

约翰·卓贝克（编）：《规范与法律》

By 爱德布克 @ 2012-1-11

★ 社会思想译丛 ★ 新书讯

约翰·卓贝克（John N. Drobak）（编）：《规范与法律》（Norms and the Law），杨晓楠、涂永前译，北京大学出版社2012年。ISBN: 9787301199541. @豆瓣 @小组

购买：亚马逊中国；当当网。

内容简介

本书包含了来自法律、经济学和政治学等不同领域的世界知名学者对法律和规范之间的关系提出的观点。作者们从法律、法律史、新古典经济学、博弈论、政治学、认知科学和哲学等广泛的视角，运用不同的方法对此进行了分析。这些文章探讨了规范和法律在四种语境下的关系。第一部分的文章从认知科学和行为经济学的角度分析了对法律有影响的规范。在第二部分，作者们运用三种不同类型的共有财产来分析合作的规范。第三部分的文章分析了规范对司法机构施加的限制。最后也就是第四部分探讨了正式的法律对规范的影响。

冯象：《政法笔记》（增订版）

By 爱德布克 @ 2012-1-10

冯象：《政法笔记》（增订版），北京大学出版社2012年。ISBN: 9787301166734.