The limits of normative legal pluralism: Review of Paul Schiff Berman, Global Legal Pluralism: A Jurisprudence of Law beyond Borders

Galán, Alexis; Patterson, Dennis

doi:10.1093/icon/mot029

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Alexis Galan and Dennis Patterson have suggested that Berman inadequately conceptualises the communities at the heart of his framework. This loose conceptualisation is the basis for his omission of what is distinctive about political community. In Berman's description of the transformation from states to nation‐states, he comes closest to acknowledging this difference in kind.…”

Section: The Political Community Of Jurisdictionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Politics of Jurisdiction

Kaushal

2015

Modern Law Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Jurisdiction is a central concept in the framing of the legal world but it has received short shrift in mainstream legal theory. This article examines the prevailing conceptual forms of jurisdiction in order to retrieve space for the political. The study of jurisdiction is also the study of the political community that it invokes and authorises. The first part of the article examines the three forms that jurisdiction takes in contemporary scholarship (territory, community, governance) to show that each form overlooks some implication of the political community that is tethered to jurisdiction. The second part of the article flips the inquiry to demonstrate the oversight of jurisdiction in theories of sovereign exception. The emergent understanding of jurisdiction as political provides an anchor for the study of jurisdiction going forward and highlights the potential role for jurisdictional arrangements in contemporary public law and constitutional law settings.

show abstract

Section: The Political Community Of Jurisdictionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Politics of Jurisdiction

Kaushal

2015

Modern Law Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Benefits of Process Simulation Software – The Case of a Brazilian Mixed Public-Private Company

Nascimento

Oliveira

Entriel

2018

Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology &Amp; Systems (ICITS 2018)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Descriptive vs. prescriptive global legal pluralism: a gentle reminder of David Hume’s is–ought divide

Kirchmair

2019

The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In [almost all of the analyses of global legal pluralism], which I have hitherto met with, I have always remark'd, that the author proceeds for some time in the ordinary ways of reasoning, and establishes [the existence of "global legal pluralism"], or makes observations concerning [the "global Bukowina" regarding international] human affairs; when of a sudden I am surpriz'd to find, that instead of the usual copulations of propositions, is, and is not, I meet with no proposition that is not connected with an ought, or an ought not. This change is imperceptible; but is however, of the last consequence. (Hume 1738, book III, part I, ch. I) Pointing at David Hume's powerful insight, this article aims to remind us of the necessity of sharply distinguishing between global legal pluralism as the description of recent factual developments, drawing attention for example, towards the massive increase in international actors, norms and tribunals as well as adjudicators on the one hand. And, on the other hand, as a different issue, the question of how we ought to deal with or even solve those legal conflicts (based on a (common) framework) resulting from these plural, overlapping legal claims. The "normative move" in the global legal pluralism debate asks for sufficient justification for its normative claims. This article concludes that the isought divide is respected at best if prescriptive proposals to solve legal conflicts are not termed "pluralistic." Instead, I shall suggest, it is more precise to refer to a necessarily common framework which addresses the question as to how those conflicts should be resolved together or at least in a way acceptable to all parties. Finally, this article holds that this common framework depends hugely on the context. Thus, solutions are more likely to be found if we focus on specific contexts instead of drawing on universal solutions for different situations.

show abstract

The limits of normative legal pluralism: Review of Paul Schiff Berman, Global Legal Pluralism: A Jurisprudence of Law beyond Borders

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

The Politics of Jurisdiction

The Politics of Jurisdiction

Benefits of Process Simulation Software – The Case of a Brazilian Mixed Public-Private Company

Descriptive vs. prescriptive global legal pluralism: a gentle reminder of David Hume’s is–ought divide

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About