Analogy, Expertise, and Experience
https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/analogy-expertise-and-experience
I. Analogical Reasoning in Law—The Traditional View
Displaying 1081 - 1090 of 1336
Qualitative Methods for Law Review Writing
https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/qualitative-methods-law-review-writing
I. Imagining Alternatives and Identifying a Puzzle
Congress, Statutory Interpretation, and the Failure of Formalism: The CBO Canon and Other Ways That Courts Can Improve on What They Are Already Trying to Do
https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/congress-statutory-interpretation-and-failure-formalism-cbo-canon-and-other-ways
I. Why Interpretive Formalism Has Failed
The Concepts of Law
https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/concepts-law
I. A Primer on Conceptualization and Measurement
A. Concepts and Conceptualization
Arguing in Good Faith about the Constitution: Ideology, Methodology, and Reflective Equilibrium
https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/arguing-good-faith-about-constitution-ideology-methodology-and-reflective-equilibrium
I. A Practice-Based Description of the Justices’ Role
Concepts before Percepts: The Central Place of Doctrine in Legal Scholarship
https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/concepts-percepts-central-place-doctrine-legal-scholarship
I. Contract Damages
The Absence of Method in Statutory Interpretation
https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/absence-method-statutory-interpretation
A conference about “best practices” for legal inquiry supposes that there are practices. In the field of legal interpretation, that assumption is doubtful.
Doing Gloss
https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/doing-gloss
I. Potential Justifications for Crediting Gloss
Making Doctrinal Work More Rigorous: Lessons from Systematic Reviews
https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/making-doctrinal-work-more-rigorous-lessons-systematic-reviews
I. The Case for Increased Rigor
We begin by surveying unsystematic claims about the state of legal doctrine, then go on to explain why, even if the claims are true, there are still benefits to more systematic review.
A. Examples