New York University Law Review最新文献_第2页

Provisional Precedent: Protecting Flexibility in Administrative Policymaking 临时先例:保护行政决策的灵活性

IF 2.4 2区社会学

New York University Law Review Pub Date : 2002-12-20 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.363120

K. Bamberger

{"title":"Provisional Precedent: Protecting Flexibility in Administrative Policymaking","authors":"K. Bamberger","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.363120","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.363120","url":null,"abstract":"Under the rule of strict stare decisis, when a court construes a statute before an agency does, the judicial interpretation becomes binding precedent, even when Congress has delegated primary interpretive authority to the agency. This Article argues that the Supreme Court's adherence to this strict rule of precedent for the interpretations of administrative statutes undermines the separation-of-powers justifications for agency administration and jeopardizes effective policymaking. It illustrates how the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Mead, which limits the types of agency constructions that deserve judicial deference, dramatically increases the opportunities for courts to interpret statutes on their own. In response to the constitutional and normative disconnects caused by judges' enhanced ability to commandeer agency discretion, the Article proposes a model of provisional precedent as an alternative to strict stare decisis. This approach, based on the federalism model that governs federal court adjudication of state law issues, gives stare decisis effect to reasonable judicial constructions of regulatory statutes only until governing agencies make binding interpretations of their own.","PeriodicalId":47736,"journal":{"name":"New York University Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2002-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82380484","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 9

Voting Technology and Democracy 投票技术与民主

IF 2.4 2区社会学

New York University Law Review Pub Date : 2002-09-26 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.325382

P. Schwartz

引用次数: 14

International conflicts over patenting human DNA sequences in the United States and the European Union: an argument for compulsory licensing and a fair-use exemption. 美国和欧盟关于人类DNA序列专利的国际冲突:关于强制许可和合理使用豁免的争论。

IF 2.4 2区社会学

New York University Law Review Pub Date : 2001-12-01

D M Gitter

{"title":"International conflicts over patenting human DNA sequences in the United States and the European Union: an argument for compulsory licensing and a fair-use exemption.","authors":"D M Gitter","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The thought of a large biotech company holding an exclusive right to research and manipulate human genetic material provokes many reactions--from moral revulsion to enthusiasm about the possibilities for therapeutic advancement. While most agree that such a right must exist, debate continues over the appropriate extent of its entitlements and preclusive effects. In this Article, Professor Donna Gitter addresses this multidimensional problem of patents on human deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sequences in the United States and the European Union. Professor Gitter chronicles not only the development of the law in this area, but also the array of policy and moral arguments that proponents and detractors of such patents raise. She emphasizes the specific issue of patents on DNA sequences whose function has not fully been identified, and the chilling effect these patents may have on beneficial research. From this discussion emerges a troubling realization: While the legal framework governing \"life patents\" may be similar in the United States and the European Union, the public perceptions and attitudes toward them are not. Professor Gitter thus proposes a dual reform: a compulsory licensing regime requiring holders of DNA sequence patents to license them to commercial researchers, in return for a royalty keyed to the financial success of the product that the licensee develops; and an experimental-use exemption from this regime for government and nonprofit researchers.</p>","PeriodicalId":47736,"journal":{"name":"New York University Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2001-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"22380819","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Givings, Takings, and the Fallacy of Forward-Looking Costs 给予、征收与前瞻性成本谬误

IF 2.4 2区社会学

New York University Law Review Pub Date : 2001-01-22 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.257322

J. Sidak, Daniel F. Spulber

{"title":"Givings, Takings, and the Fallacy of Forward-Looking Costs","authors":"J. Sidak, Daniel F. Spulber","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.257322","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.257322","url":null,"abstract":"Mr. Sidak and Professor Spulber extend here the analysis in Deregulatory Takings and Breach of the Regulatory Contract, published last year in this Review. They respond to comments and criticisms raised not only by Professors Baumol and Merrill, but also by Judge Williams and Professor Williamson in their Comments published last year. Sidak and Spulber begin by exploring the constitutional limitations on the government's ability to redefine the public purpose to which a regulated utility has dedicated its private property. Then, the authors examine whether the government has made givings that implicitly compensate the regulated firm for its diminution in value owing to the imposition of policies mandating network unbundling at regulated prices. Sidak and Spulber refine the limiting principles for the recovery of stranded costs that they articulated in their earlier article and show how those principles reconcile with the actual treatment of losses from deregulation in disparate industries. Next, they expose the economic fallacies in the notion of forward-looking costs as that term has been used by the Federal Communications Commission and state public utility commissions to set prices for mandatory network access under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The authors analyze the Supreme Courts 1996 decision in United States v. Winstar Corp. and argue that the reasoning employed by seven Justices in that case comports not only with earlier decisions of the Court construing the regulatory contract with public utilities, but also with the contemporary economic analysis of why the regulatory contract is essential and efficient. Sidak and Spulber explain how transition bonds may solve the stranded cost conundrum in the telecommunications and electric power industries by permitting the securitization of stranded costs in a manner that restores investors' faith in the state's ability to make credible commitments. Finally, the authors examine the significance of the Eighth Circuit's 1997 decision in Iowa Utilities Board v. FCC for the debate over deregulatory takings and breach of the regulatory contract.","PeriodicalId":47736,"journal":{"name":"New York University Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2001-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88111010","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 13

Switching the Default Rule 切换默认规则

IF 2.4 2区社会学

New York University Law Review Pub Date : 2001-01-01 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.255993

C. Sunstein

引用次数: 182

A Positive Theory of Chapter 11 第11章实证理论

IF 2.4 2区社会学

New York University Law Review Pub Date : 1998-10-01 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.137897

Kevin A. Kordana, E. Posner

引用次数: 99

Against Constitutional Theory 反对宪法理论

IF 2.4 2区社会学

New York University Law Review Pub Date : 1998-01-01 DOI: 10.4135/9781071800942.n30

R. Posner

引用次数: 16

Deregulatory takings and breach of the regulatory contract 违规征收和违反监管合同

IF 2.4 2区社会学

New York University Law Review Pub Date : 1996-10-01 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.257311

J. Sidak, Daniel F. Spulber

{"title":"Deregulatory takings and breach of the regulatory contract","authors":"J. Sidak, Daniel F. Spulber","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.257311","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.257311","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past century, as the regulatory state steadily expanded its reach, courts frequently addressed claims that regulatory actions amounted to an unconstitutional taking. Recently, however, legislation in the telecommunications and electric power industries have brought deregulatory concerns to the fore. In this landmark Article, Mr. Sidak and Professor Spulber present the first detailed analysis of the interaction between the Takings Clause, deregulation, network pricing, and contract law. In the typical case of regulated industries, firms and their investors agree to bear considerable incumbent burdens in exchange for a regulated rate of return. Sidak and Spulber first demonstrate that this arrangement represents a regulatory contract and find that recent deregulatory measures constitute breach. The authors then argue that, whether or not a regulatory contract in fact exists, recent mandatory unbundling in the electric power industry and open-access regulation in the telecommunications field effectuate a taking without just compensation. Finally, relying on concepts such as investment-backed expectations and the efficient component-pricing rule, the authors not only demonstrate that damages would be equivalent under either contract or takings theory, but also warn that governments could face enormous liability for their deregulatory measures.","PeriodicalId":47736,"journal":{"name":"New York University Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"1996-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91277348","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 59

What does it mean to be a "parent"? The claims of biology as the basis for parental rights. “为人父母”意味着什么?生物学作为父母权利基础的主张。

IF 2.4 2区社会学

New York University Law Review Pub Date : 1991-05-01 DOI: 10.4324/9781315090085-3

J. Hill

引用次数: 93

The Dialectic of Rights and Politics: Perspectives from the Women’s Movement [1986] 权利与政治的辩证法:来自妇女运动的视角[1986]

IF 2.4 2区社会学

New York University Law Review Pub Date : 1986-01-01 DOI: 10.4324/9780429500480-18

E. Schneider

引用次数: 128