Displaying 251 - 260 of 1294

This Article elaborates on and defends experimental jurisprudence. Experimental jurisprudence, appropriately understood, is not only consistent with traditional jurisprudence; it is an essential branch of it.

This Comment argues that this broad domestic application of the wire fraud statute shields courts from asking whether the statute applies extraterritorially. Further, this Comment argues that courts’ domestic application of the wire fraud statute is sufficiently broad as to begin to resemble extraterritoriality because courts can almost always find sufficient domestic activity to apply the wire fraud statute.

Ieshia Townsend was scared to return home after her job at a South Side McDonald’s, she said at a rally for frontline workers in downtown Chicago: she could infect her children with coronavirus.

When British authorities dragged Julian Assange out of the Ecuadorian embassy in London in April 2019, the Australian-born founder of the whistleblowing platform, WikiLeaks, was no stranger to displacement.

Personalized law is a new model of rulemaking where each person is subject to different legal rules and bound by their own personally tailored law.

Personalized law is on-trend.

The potential of adjusting legal rules to personal characteristics is obvious: while the reason of law coincides with the purposes of its norms, the fulfillment of these very purposes depends, in many ways, on personal characteristics of the individuals to which legal provisions relate.

Personalized Law: Different Rules for Different People describes a type of law that does not today exist.

In Personalized Law: Different Rules for Different People, Professors Omri Ben-Shahar and Ariel Porat imagine a brave new tort world wherein the ubiquitous reasonable person standard is replaced by myriad personalized “reasonable you” commands.

Negligence law seldom accounts for a person’s idiosyncrasies.