Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:52:06.213Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Three Ways of Thinking “Critically” about the Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

John P. McCormick
John P. McCormick*
Affiliation:
Yale University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Radical criticisms of liberalism's method of legal adjudication focus on its excessive formalism, its tendency to foster indeterminacy, and its naive maintenance of the separation of political from legal concerns. I examine these arguments as they appear in the work of Carl Schmitt, on the Right, and the Critical Legal Studies (CLS) movement, on the Left. Jürgen Habermas has recently attempted to refute the positions of these most scalding twentieth-century critics of liberal adjudication. I argue that by so extensively engaging these theorists, and in fact liberalism itself, on their own grounds, Habermas has abandoned some of the distinctive strengths of what he previously practiced as a critical social theory in his new reflexive or discourse theory of law.

Type
Forum
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 93 , Issue 2 , June 1999 , pp. 413 - 428
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ackerman, Bruce. 1983. Reconstructing American Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ackerman, Bruce. 1991. We the People: Foundations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Adorno, T. W., and Horkheimer, Max. [1944] 1998. Dialectic of Enlightenment. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Alter, Karen J. 1996. “The European Court's Political Power.” West European Politics 19 (July: 458–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altman, Andrew. 1990. Critical Legal Studies: A Liberal Critique. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amin, Ash, ed. 1994. Post-Fordism: A Reader. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amin, Ash, and Thrift, Nigel, eds. 1996. Globalization, Institutions, and Regional Development in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Perry. 1989. “Roberto Unger and the Politics of Empowerment.” New Left Review 173 (January/February): 93–108.Google Scholar
Archibugi, Daniele, Held, David, and Koehler, Mark, eds. 1998. Transnational Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
Balkin, J. M. 1987. “Deconstructive Practice and Legal Theory.” Yale Law Journal 96 (March: 743–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bamyeh, Mohammed A. 1993. Transnationalism. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Baynes, Kenneth. 1991. Normative Grounds of Social Critique: Kant, Rawls and Habermas. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Baynes, Kenneth. 1995. “Democracy and the Rechtsstaat: Habermas's Faktizität und Geltung.” In The Cambridge Companion to Habermas, ed. White, Stephen K.. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Pp. 201–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Ulrich. 1996. The Reinvention of Politics: Rethinking Modernity in the Global Social Order, trans. Ritter, Mark. Cambridge, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla. 1986. Critique, Norm and Utopia: A Study of the Foundations of Critical Theory. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla. 1997. “Review of Between Facts and Norms.” American Political Science Review 91 (September: 712–14.Google Scholar
Bohman, James. 1993. New Philosophy of Social Science: Problems of Indeterminacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bohman, James. 1994. “Complexity, Pluralism and the Constitutional State.” Law and Society Review 28 (November: 897–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohman, James. 1996. Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Boyle, James. 1985. “The Politics of Reason: Critical Legal Theory and Local Social Thought.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 133 (April: 685–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenner, Neil. 1993. “The Limits of Civil Society in the Age of Global Capital: A Critique of Jürgen Habermas's Mature Social Theory.” M.A. thesis. Department of Political Science, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Budak, Ali C. 1998. Emerging Legal Certainty: Empirical Studies on the Globalization of Law. Aldershot, UK: Dartmouth.Google Scholar
Burley, Anne-Marie, and Mattli, Walter. 1993. “Europe before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Integration.” International Organization 47 (Winter): 41–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A., and Gibson, James L.. 1995. “The Legitimacy of the Court of Justice in the European Union: Models of Institutional Support.” American Political Science Review 89 (June): 356–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldwell, Peter C. 1997. Popular Sovereignty and the Crisis of German Constitutional Law: The Theory and Practice of Weimar Constitutionalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Cardozo Law Review 1996. Special Double Issue: “Habermas on Law and Democracy: Critical Exchanges.” 17 (March): 767–1684.Google Scholar
Carothers, Thomas. 1998. “The Rule of Law Revival.” Foreign Affairs 77 (March/April): 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, Lief. 1985. Contemporary Constitutional Lawmaking. New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Chambers, Simone. 1996. “Discourse and Democratic Practices.” In The Cambridge Companion to Habermas, ed. White, Stephen K.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 233–63.Google Scholar
Conant, Lisa J. 1998. “Containing Justice: Institutional Constraints on European Law.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston.Google Scholar
Cornell, Drucilla, Rosenfeld, Michel, and Carlson, David, eds. 1992. Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dalton, Claire. 1985. “An Essay in the Deconstruction of Contract Doctrine.” Yale Law Journal 94 (April: 999–1114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dews, Peter. 1993. “Agreeing What's Right.” London Review of Books, May 13, pp. 29–32.Google Scholar
Dunn, John, ed. 1994. Contemporary Crisis of the Nation State? Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald. 1977. Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald. 1986. Law's Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dyzenhaus, David. 1996. “The Legitimacy of Legality.” University of Toronto Law Journal 46: 129–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyzenhaus, David. 1997a. “Legal Theory in the Collapse of Weimar: Contemporary Lessons?” American Political Science Review 91 (March: 121–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyzenhaus, David. 1997b. Truth's Revenge: Carl Schmitt, Hans Kelsen, and Hermann Heller in Weimar. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Ewald, William. 1988. “Unger's Philosophy: A Critical Legal Study.” Yale Law Journal 97 (April: 665–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Featherstone, Mike, ed. 1990. Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Feinman, Jay. 1983. “Critical Approaches to Contract Law.” University of California Law Review 30 (April: 829–60.Google Scholar
Fish, Stanley. 1990. “Almost Pragmatism.” University of Chicago Law Review 57 (Fall: 1447–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiss, Owen. 1982. “Objectivity and Interpretation.” Stanford Law Review 34 (April: 739–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiss, Owen. 1985. “Conventionalism.” Southern California Law Review 58 (January: 177–97.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, Peter, and Hunt, Alan. 1987. Critical Legal Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Frug, Gerald. 1984. “The Ideology of Bureaucracy in American Law.” Harvard Law Review 97 (April: 1276–1388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Geoffrey. 1992. “International Cooperation and Institutional Choice: The European Community's Internal Market.” International Organizations 46 (Spring): 533–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Geoffrey. 1998. “Global Markets and National Politics.” International Organization 52 (Fall): 787–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Geoffrey, and Weingast, Barry. 1993. “Ideas, Interests and Institutions: Constructing the European Community's Internal Market.” In Ideas and Foreign Policy, ed. Goldstein, Judith and Keohane, Robert. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Pp. 173–206.Google Scholar
Garrett, Geoffrey, Keleman, R. Daniel, and Schulz, Heiner. 1998. “The European Court of Justice, National Governments, and Legal Integration in the European Union.” International Organizations 52 (Winter): 149–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gessner, Volkmar. 1995. “Global Approaches in the Sociology of Law.” Journal of Law and Society 22 (March): 85–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, Anthony. 1985. “Reason without Revolution?” In Habermas and Modernity, ed. Bernstein, Richard J.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pp. 95–124.Google Scholar
Gregg, Benjamin. 1991. “Possibility of Social Critique in an Indeterminate World.” Theory and Society 23: 327–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guéhenno, Jean-Marie. 1995. The End of the Nation-State, trans. Elliott, Victoria Pesce. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Gutmann, Amy, and Thompson, Dennis. 1996. Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Belknap.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. [1962] 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trans. Burger, Thomas with Lawrence, Frederick. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. [1968] 1971. Knowledge and Human Interests, trans. Shapiro, Jeremy. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. [1971] 1973. Theory and Practice, trans. Viertel, John. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. [1973] 1975. Legitimation Crisis, trans. McCarthy, Thomas. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1984/1987. Theory of Communicative Action, trans. McCarthy, T.. Vols. 1 and 2. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. The New Conservatism: Cultural Criticism and the Historians' Debate, ed. Nicholsen, Shierry Weber. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. Rehg, William. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1997a. “Carl Schmitt in the Political Intellectual History of the Federal Republic.” In A Berlin Republic: Writings on Germany, trans. Rendall, Steven. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Pp. 107–18.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1997b. “Kant's Idea of Perpetual Peace, with the Benefit of Two Hundred Years' Hindsight.” In Perpetual Peace: Essays on Kant's Cosmopolitan Ideal, ed. Bohman, James and Lutz-Bachmann, Matthias. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pp. 59–78.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1998. The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory, ed. Cronin, Ciaran and de Grieff, Pablo. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harris, J. W. 1989. “Unger's Critique of Formalism in Legal Reasoning: Hero, Hercules and Humdrum.” Modern Law Review 52 (January: 42–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. 1983. Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 1993. Law and Philosophy Issue: “Symposium on Legal Formalism.” 16 (Autumn): 579–860.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. [1821] 1991. Elements of the Philosophy of Right, trans. Nisbet, H. B., ed. Wood, Allen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Held, David. 1982. “Crisis Tendencies, Legitimation and the State.” In Habermas: Critical Debates, ed. Thompson, John and Held, David. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pp. 181–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Held, David. 1991. “Democracy, the Nation-State and the Global System.” In Political Theory Today, ed. Held, David. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Pp. 197–235.Google Scholar
Held, David. 1995. Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Herget, James. 1996. Contemporary German Legal Philosophy. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirst, Paul, and Thompson, Grahame. 1996. Globalization in Question: The International Economy and the Possibilities of Governance. Cambridge, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
Holmes, Stephen. 1993. The Anatomy of Antiliberalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, Stephen. 1995. Passions and Constraint: On the Theory of Liberal Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Horkheimer, Max. 1972. Critical Theory, trans. O'Connell, M. J.. New York: Herder and Herder.Google Scholar
Joerges, Christian. 1989. “Politische Rechtstheorie and CLS: Points of Contact and Divergence.” In Critical Legal Thought: An American-German Debate, ed. Joerges, M. and Trubek, David M.. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Pp. 597–643.Google Scholar
Kelman, Mark. 1984. “Trashing.” Stanford Law Review 36 (January: 293–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelman, Mark. 1987. A Guide to Critical Legal Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans. 1911. Grenzen zwischen juristischer und soziologischer Methode. Tübingen, Germany: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans. [1920] 1981. Das Problem der Souveränität und die Theorie des Völkerrechts: Beiträge zu einer Reinen Rechtslehre. Aalen, Germany: Scientia.Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans. [1922] 1981. Der soziologische und der juristische Staatsbegriff: Kritische Untersuchung des Verhältnisses von Staat und Recht. Aalen, Germany: Scientia.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 1973. “Legal Formality.” Journal of Legal Studies 2 (June: 351–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 1976. “Form and Substance in Private Law Adjudication.” Harvard Law Review 89 (June: 1685–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 1979. “The Structure of Blackstone's Commentaries.” Buffalo Law Review 28 (Spring): 205–382.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 1980. “Toward an Historical Understanding of Legal Consciousness: The Case of Classical Legal Thought in America, 1850–1940.” Research in Law and Society 3 (Annual): 3–24.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 1981–1982. “Distributive and Paternalistic Motives in Contract and Tort Law. Maryland Law Review 41 (Fall): 563–658.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 1985. “Psycho-Social CLS.” Cardozo Law Review 6 (Summer): 1013–31.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 1986. “Freedom and Constraint in Adjudication: A Critical Phenomenology.” Journal of Legal Education 36 (December: 518–62.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 1997. A Critique of Adjudication: fin de siècle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan, and Gabel, Peter. 1984. “Roll over Beethoven.” Stanford Law Review 36 (January: 293–348.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Ellen. 1987. “Carl Schmitt and the Frankfurt School.” Telos 71 (Spring): 37–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchheimer, Otto, and Neumann, Franz L.. 1996. The Rule of Law Under Siege: Selected Essays of Franz L. Neumann and Otto Kirchheimer, ed. Scheuerman, William E.. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Leibfried, Stephan. 1992. “Europe's Could-Be Social State: Social Policy in European Integration after 1992.” In Singular Europe: The Economy and Polity of the European Community after 1992, ed. Adams, William James. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Pp. 97–118.Google Scholar
Leibfried, Stephan. 1994. “The Social Dimension of the European Union: En Route to Positively Joint Sovereignty?” Journal of European Social Policy 4 (4): 239–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibfried, Stephan, and Pierson, Paul. 1992. “Prospects for Social Europe.” Politics and Society 20 (September: 333–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibfried, Stephan, and Pierson, Paul. 1993. “SemiSovereign Welfare States: Social Policy in a Multitiered Europe.” In European Social Policy: Between Fragmentation and Integration, ed. Leibfried, Stephan and Pierson, Paul. Washington, DC: Brookings. Pp. 43–77.Google Scholar
Love, Nancy. 1996. “What's Left of Marx?” In The Cambridge Companion to Habermas, ed. White, Stephen K.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 46–66.Google Scholar
Marx, Karl. [1846] 1964. The German Ideology, trans. Ryazanskaya, S. R.. Moscow: Foreign Language Publishing.Google Scholar
MacCormick, Neil. 1990. “Reconstruction after Deconstruction: A Response to CLS.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 10 (Winter): 539–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCormick, John P. 1997a. Carl Schmitt's Critique of Liberalism: Against Politics as Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCormick, John P. 1997b. “Habermas's Discourse Theory of Law: Bridging Anglo-American and Continental Legal Traditions.” Modern Law Review 60 (September: 734–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCormick, John P. N.d. “Supranational Challenges to the Rule of Law: The Case of the European Union.” In Recrafting the Rule of Law, ed. Dyzenhaus, David. Oxford: Hart. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Michelman, Frank I. 1998. “W(h)ither the Constitution?” Paper presented at the conference, “Constitutionalism, Privatization and Globalization,” Cardozo Law School, New York, November 19–21.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 1998. The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Peller, Gary. 1984. “Debates about Theory within CLS.” Lizard 1: 21–39.Google Scholar
Pierson, Paul. 1996. “The New Politics of the Welfare State.” World Politics 48 (January: 143–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, Richard. 1990. The Problem of Jurisprudence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Postone, Moishe. 1990. “History and Critical Social Theory.” Contemporary Sociology 19 (March: 170–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postone, Moishe. 1992. “Political Theory and Historical Analysis.” In Habermas and the Public Sphere, ed. Calhoun, Craig. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pp. 164–80.Google Scholar
Rasmussen, David. 1994. “How Is Valid Law Possible?” Philosophy and Social Criticism 20 (4): 21–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehg, William, and Bohman, James. 1996. “Discourse and Democracy: The Formal and Informal Bases of Legitimacy in Habermas's Faktizität und Geltung.” Journal of Political Philosophy 4 (March: 79–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rieger, Elmar, and Leibfried, Stephan. 1998. “Welfare State Limits to Globalization.” Politics and Society 26 (September: 361–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, Roland. 1992. Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1991. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring about Social Change? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, Michel. 1992. “Deconstruction and Legal Interpretation: Conflict, Indeterminacy and the Temptations of The New Legal Formalism.” In Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice, ed. Cornell, Drucillaet al., New York: Routledge. Pp. 152–210.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, Michel. 1995. “Law as Discourse: Between Democracy and Rights.” Harvard Law Review 108 (March: 1163–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruggie, John Gerard, ed. 1993. Multilateralism Matters: The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Sassen, Saskia. 1996. Globalization and Its Discontents. New York: New Press.Google Scholar
Sassen, Saskia. 1998. Losing Control?: Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Schauer, Frederick. 1988. “Formalism.” Yale Law Journal 97 (March: 509–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheuerman, William E. 1994. Between the Norm and the Exception: The Frankfurt School and the Rule of Law. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Scheuerman, William E. 1996. “Legal Indeterminacy and the Origins of Nazi Legal Thought: The Case of Carl Schmitt.” History of Political Thought 17 (Winter): 571–88.Google Scholar
Scheuerman, William E. N.d. “Economic Globalization and the Rule of Law.” Constellions. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Carl. [1912] 1969. Gesetz und Urteil: Eine Untersuchung zum Problem der Rechtspraxis. Munich: C. H. Beck.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Carl. [1922] 1985. Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty, trans. Schwab, George. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Carl. [1923] 1985. The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy, trans. Kennedy, Ellen. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Carl. 1931. Der Hüter der Verfassung. Munich: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Carl. 1932. Legalität und Legitimität. Munich: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Spaeth, Harold J.. 1993. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, David. 1988. “Courts, Legislatures, and Paternalism.” Virginia Law Review 74 (April: 519–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Ian. 1990. Political Criticism. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Ian. 1996. “Three Fallacies Concerning Minorities, Majorities, and Democratic Politics.” In Democracy's Place. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Pp. 16–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slaughter Burley, Anne-Marie. 1993. “New Directions in Legal Research on the European Community.” Journal of Common Market Studies 31 (September: 391–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Rogers M. 1988. “Political Jurisprudence, The ‘New Institutionalism,’ and the Future of Public Law.” American Political Science Review 82 (March: 89–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Rogers M. 1989. “After Criticism: An Analysis of the Critical Legal Studies Movement.” In Judging the Constitution, ed. McCann, Michael and Houseman, Gerald. New York: Little, Brown. Pp. 92–124.Google Scholar
Smith, Rogers M. 1998. “The Inherent Deceptiveness of Constitutional Discourse: A Diagnosis and Prescription.” In Nomos XL: Integrity and Conscience, ed. Shapiro, Ian and Adams, Robert. New York: New York University Press. Pp. 218–54.Google Scholar
Solum, Lawrence. 1987. “On the Indeterminacy Crisis: Critiquing Critical Dogma.” University of Chicago Law Review 54 (March: 462–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, Alec. 1994. “What Is a Supranational Constitution?: An Essay in International Relations Theory.” Review of Politics 56 (Summer: 441–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, Alec. 1995. “Governing with Judges: The New Constitutionalism.” In Governing the New Europe, ed. Hayward, Jack and Page, Edward C.. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Pp. 286–314.Google Scholar
Stone Sweet, Alec, and Brunell, Thomas L.. 1998. “Constructing a Supranational Constitution: Dispute Resolution and Governance in the European Community.” American Political Science Review 92 (March: 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strange, Susan. 1996. The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Streeck, Wolfgang, and Schmitter, Phillipe C.. 1991. “From National Corporatism to Transnational Pluralism: Organized Interests in the Single European Market. Politics and Society 19 (June: 133–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 1996a. “Democracy Isn't What You Think.” New York Times Book Review, August 18, p. 29.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 1996b. Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teubner, Günther, ed. 1988. Dilemmas of Law and the Welfare State. New York: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 1981. “The Dilemmas of Liberal Constitutionalism.” Ohio State Law Journal 42 (Winter: 413–26.Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 1984. “Critical Legal Studies and Constitutional Law: An Essay in Deconstruction.” Stanford Law Review 36 (January: 623–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 1985. “Conservative Constitutional Theory.” Tulane Law Review 59 (March: 910–27.Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 1986. “Critical Legal Studies: An Introduction to Its Origins and Underpinnings.” Journal of Legal Education 36 (December: 505–17.Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 1988. Red, White and Blue: A Critical Analysis of Constitutional Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 1991. “Critical Legal Studies: A Political History.” Yale Law Journal 100 (January: 1515–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 1993. “The Critique of Rights.” Southern Methodist University Law Review 47 (September/October): 23–34.Google Scholar
Unger, Roberto M. 1975. Knowledge and Politics. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Unger, Roberto M. 1976. Law in Modern Society. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Unger, Roberto M. 1986. The Critical Legal Studies Movement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Unger, Roberto M. 1987. Politics, A Work in Constructive Social Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Unger, Roberto M. 1996. What Should Legal Analysis Be Like? London: Verso.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark. 1989. “Liberal Constitutionalism as Ideology: Marx and Habermas.” Political Theory 17 (November: 511–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, Mark. 1993. “Can Participatory Democracy Produce Better Selves?: Psychological Dimensions of Habermas's Discursive Model of Democracy.” Political Psychology 14 (2): 209–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiler, Joseph H. H. 1991. “The Transformation of Europe.” Yale Law Review 100 (April: 2403–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiler, Joseph H. H. 1994. “A Quiet Revolution: The European Court of Justice and Its Interlocutors.” Comparative Political Studies 26 (January: 510–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiler, Joseph H. H. 1997. “The Reformation of European Constitutionalism.” Journal of Common Market Studies 35 (March: 97–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinberger, Ota. 1994. “Habermas on Democracy and Justice: Limits of a Sound Conception.” Ratio Juris 7 (July: 239–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinrib, Ernest J. 1988. “Legal Formalism: On the Immanent Rationality of the Law.” Yale Law Journal 97 (May: 949–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, Stephen K. 1990. The Recent Work of Jürgen Habermas: Reason, Justice and Modernity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
White, Stephen K. 1996. “Review of Faktizitàt und Geltung.” Political Theory 24 (February: 128–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yablon, Charles M. 1985. “The Indeterminacy of the Law: Critical Legal Studies and the Problem of Legal Explanation.” Cardozo Law Review 6(Summer: 917–45.Google Scholar
Zolo, Danilo. 1997. Cosmopolis: Prospects for World Government, trans. McKie, David. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.