New Books in Law

Latest Episodes:

Leila Schneps and Coralie Colmez, “Math on Trial” (Basic Books, 2013) Mar 13, 2013

Show notes

You may well have seen “Numb3rs,” a TV show in which mathematicians help solve crimes. It’s fiction. But, as Leila Schneps and Coralie Colmez show in their eye-opening new book Math on Trial: How Numbers Get Used and Abused in the Court Room (Basic Books, 2013) math does play a role in criminal prosecution. Alas, it’s often bad math and, as such, often leads to bad outcomes: people get off who shouldn’t and others get convicted who shouldn’t. Schneps and Colmez show how math has been misused in ten interesting (and disturbing) cases. In some instances the errors are trivial; in others rather complex. But they all add up (excuse the pun) to injustice. Listen in and find out how and why.

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Daniel McCool, “The Most Fundamental Right: Contrasting Perspectives on the Voting Rights Act” (Indiana UP, 2012) Feb 27, 2013

Show notes

Daniel McCool, professor of political science at the University of Utah, is the editor of The Most Fundamental Right: Contrasting Perspectives on the Voting Rights Act (Indiana University Press, 2012). The VRA was one of the center pieces of the civil rights legislation passed in the 1960s. The Act aimed to address great inequities in access to and participation in voting, particularly among African Americans. Perhaps most controversially, the law labeled a handful of states that were deemed the most egregious violators of voting rights, and required them to gain pre-clearance from the Department of Justice on any changes in state voting procedures. Nearly fifty years later, is the case for the VRA still so pressing or are modifications or a complete overhaul called for? This timely collection provides deep theoretical and empirical justifications for the VRA, and equally well-developed arguments in opposition. One finished the collection more informed and a little unsure of what is called, both signs of a well-edited volume.

The timeliness of this book cannot be overstated. On Wednesday February 26, 2013, the Supreme Court hears arguments in the Voting Rights case of Shelby County v Holder.

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor, Jr., “Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It’s Intended to Help” (Basic Books, 2012) Feb 22, 2013

Show notes

In their book Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It’s Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won’t Admit It (Basic Books, 2012), Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor, Jr. present the following big idea: race preferences in higher education harm those preferred. Their argument is interesting in that it is not premised on the idea that racial preferences are unfair. Rather, they crunch the numbers and show that when good minority students are placed among elite students at elite schools, they often fail; when they are placed among other good students at good schools, they do much better. Students, they say, need to be “matched” with students at their level, not “mismatched” (or, rather, overmatched) with students far above their level. Both Sanders and Taylor are very much in favor of Affirmative Action, though they would like to see it reformed. Listen in and see how.

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Par Cassel, “Grounds of Judgment: Extraterritoriality and Imperial Power in Nineteenth-Century China and Japan” (Oxford UP, 2012) Sep 13, 2012

Show notes

Extraterritoriality was not grafted whole onto East Asian societies: it developed over time and in a relationship with local precedents, institutions, and understandings of power. Grounds of Judgment: Extraterritoriality and Imperial Power in Nineteenth-Century China and Japan (Oxford University Press, 2012) uses a trans-regional and transnational focus to explore the history of extraterritoriality and the treaty port system in nineteenth century societies. Eschewing the kinds of teleological narratives that privilege current nation states, Par Cassel locates late Qing, Tokugawa, and Meiji debates in a deep history of legal pluralism, notions of “foreign” identity, and inter-ethnic relations. Cassel uses an impressive range of press accounts, legal texts, and other sources to unfold the ways that the very different trajectories of extraterritoriality in China and Japan had very different consequences for the two countries. Cassel’s book ranges across some fascinating case studies from the histories of opium, counterfeiting, and the police. In addition to being required reading for anyone working in the history of modern China or Japan, Grounds of Judgment is also of special note to readers interested in the ways that language, dialect, and translation have shaped modern history, legal reform, and international relations. Enjoy!

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Barry Kernfeld, “Pop Song Piracy: Disobedient Music Distribution Since 1929” (University of Chicago Press, 2011) May 17, 2012

Show notes

Have you ever illegally downloaded a song from the internet? How about illicitly burned copies of a CD? Made a “party tape?” Bought a bootleg album? You may have done these things, but have you purchased a bootlegged song-sheet? In Pop Song Piracy: Disobedient Music Distribution Since 1929 (University of Chicago, 2011) Barry Kernfeld fills us in on the history of disobedient music reproduction and distribution since, well, before the advent of recording technology. Along the way he discusses the above mentioned disobedient distribution techniques along with a few others: fake books, music photocopying, and pirate radio round out the book. Kernfeld suggests that the history of pop music piracy is never ending, with battles of different types of disobedience taking similar forms: the music “monopolists” (song owners) attempting to enact prohibitions on illegal production and distribution, the failed containment of said production and distribution systems and, finally, the assimilation of disobedient forms into the mainstream production and distribution industries.

Barry Kernfeld is on the staff of the Special Collections Library of the Pennsylvania State University. He is the author of The Story of Fake Books: Bootlegging Songs to Musicians and What to Listen for in Jazz, and he is the editor of The New Grove Dictionary of Jazz. He is also a professional jazz saxophonist playing in Jazza-ma-phone and a clarinetist in local musical theater productions.

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

David Ball and Don Keenan, “Reptile: The Manual of the Plaintiff’s Revolution” (Balloon Press, 2009) May 01, 2012

Show notes

“I am not smart. I invented smart to compel you to do what I want.” — The Reptile

Any civil trial represents the culmination of many, many years of disciplined mental effort. Legal education generates learning, and the discovery process generates information.–Yet neither learning nor information can result in a verdict of liability. For that, you need a jury: and a jury operates, by design, on very different principles of decision-making. As Rebecca West wrote, “The whole point of a jury is that it is not learned … but chunks of laity, brought in for the special purpose of being unlearned.” Judges resolve the cases that can be decided by learning and logic. Attorneys settle out of court the ones that can be decided through gathering information.But in the end, when learned, reasonable people disagree, the case “goes to the jury” — and law professors lose interest.

It is here that David Ball and Don Keenan‘s research begins. What happens in the mind of a juror? What factors actually decide close cases? Beginning in 2006, they undertook extensive empirical study to find out. Evolution, neuroscience, and even psychoanalysis play into the answer. Darwin, Skinner, and Freud all had it right: conscious thought processes are not as important as we think they are (and of course, as the annals show, this is true of judges as well as jurors). n all humans, deliberative processes are subject to primal, unconscious factors that place survival and safety ahead of everything else.

This insight led Ball and Keenan to a metaphor and a method for litigators that have created a sensation in the plaintiffs’ bar: the Reptile. A creature of evolution, coiled deep in the human neurosystem, the Reptile compels jurors to heed certain kinds of arguments more than others. But the Reptile is not a base reflex: its values are also enthroned at the center of the American jury system. Ball and Keenan believe they have redeemed it from cooptation by the adherents of “tort reform.” In turn, they seek to harness it for plaintiffs: not only to win cases, but also to redress injustices of certain kinds.

The Reptile is roused when there is a menace to its own genetic prospects, and such a menace can be discerned in many different kinds of cases. To hear Ball tell it, all defendants that can be seen to threaten the well-being of the community are looking more and more, in recent years, like food for the Reptile.

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Lynn Stout, “Cultivating Conscience: How Good Laws Make Good People” (Princeton UP, 2010) Feb 22, 2012

Show notes

Lynn Stout‘s pathbreaking book Cultivating Conscience:How Good Laws Make Good People (Princeton University Press, 2010) represents a much-needed update to the discipline of law and economics. Using current social science and discarding threadbare premises, it develops new methods for theorizing and deploying law in its real-life context — starting from the simple observation that, as a matter of scientific fact, people are often remarkably and demonstrably unselfish.

In updating her own field of study, Prof. Stout found herself, unexpectedly, calling into question one of its most cherished axioms. Scholars of law and economics had always begun with the assumption that people were “rationally selfish.” Cass Sunstein’s 2008 book Nudge called into question the first term of that formula; Prof. Stout, holder of an endowed chair in Corporate and Securities Law at UCLA, now challenges the second.On the evidence of this book, it seems more than possible that her insights will prove more significant in the long run.

Lucidly summarizing the vast quantities of recent social-science research on so-called prosocial behavior, Cultivating Conscience shows how selfishness is overhyped as a driver of human conduct.Prof. Stout finds repeatedly that when there is a gap between actual legal structures and current legal theory, the problems are not with the law, but with the theory — problems rooted in certain academic cultures, unscientific thinking, and inattention to the empirically proven power of human conscience. The prospect of correcting these errors suggests a new direction for the field of law and economics.

Conscience may turn out to be a policy tool as useful as incentivization. In fact, the power of Prof. Stout’s analytic framework, both as description and prescription, may make one-dimensional evaluation of legal incentives obsolete. Using the method proposed here, policymakers attentive to the key parameters of authority, conformity, and empathy may develop ways to “cue” conscientious behavior in a wide variety of social contexts.

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

James Unnever and Shaun L. Gabbidon, “A Theory of African American Offending: Race, Racism, and Crime” (Routledge, 2011) Sep 15, 2011

Show notes

Is comedian and cultural critic Bill Cosby right–that black youth suffer from a cultural pathology that leads them to commit more crimes than their white counterparts? Is the remedy to the high rate of offending by African American men the “shape up or get shipped out” perspective? Is there more to African American offending than poor parenting or lousy schools? James D. Unnever is the co-author (with Shaun L. Gabbidon) of the new book A Theory of African American Offending: Race, Racism, and Crime (Routledge, 2011). This book builds on the assertion of sociologist and cultural critic W. E. B. Du Bois that theories of African American life, culture, and especially crime must deal with the unique circumstances and worldview of black people living in America. Unnever and Gabbidon take this assertion seriously as they develop a theory that the reading public in general and criminologists and lawyers specifically, indeed all associated with the criminal justice system, should read.

I’ve recommended this book to colleagues at the collegiate level in African American Studies, as well as to junior high and high school teachers working in predominantly African American schools. This book is a must read!

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Martha Minow, “In Brown’s Wake: Legacies of America’s Educational Landmark” (Oxford UP, 2011) Sep 07, 2011

Show notes

What can judges do to change society? Fifty-seven years ago, the Supreme Court resolved to find out: the unanimous ruling they issued in Brown v. Board of Education threw the weight of the Constitution fully behind the aspiration of social equality among the races. The possibilities of law as an engine of social justice seem to be encapsulated in the story of the decision — and in the many decades of resistance to its enforcement.

Today, there are those who argue that the Court failed in its goal, since actual racial mixing in U.S. schools has declined steadily over the last 35 years. But in her new book, In Brown’s Wake: Legacies of America’s Educational Landmark (Oxford UP, 2011), Harvard Law School Dean Martha Minow argues that the legacy of Brown should be viewed in a larger context. Neither a self-executing mandate for racial equality nor a futile rhetorical exercise, the decision was destined to become a lodestar for a wide variety of reformers in all areas of American society — and beyond.

In a series of case studies, Dean Minow’s book reveals how Brown, the milestone in American jurisprudence, took on meanings the judges never envisioned, in the hands of advocates who, in 1954, nobody could have expected. Whatever else it was, the decision was that vital ingredient to be coupled with any kind of action: an idea whose time had come.

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Rajshree Chandra, “Knowledge as Property, Issues in the Moral Grounding of Intellectual Property Rights” (Oxford UP, 2010) Aug 04, 2011

Show notes

Copyright is one of those topics over which even two saints disagreed. The legend has it that Saint Columba and Saint Finnian engaged in an argument as Columba had secretly, and without the latter’s permission, copied a Latin Psalter owned by Finnian. When Finnian found out about it, he requested the copy, but Columbia refused to give it back. Dermott, the King of Ireland, decreed “to every cow belong its calf, so to every book belong its copy.”

In 1925 the former Assistant Register of Copyrights in the United States, Richard De Wolf, pointed out that “the progress of copyright law does not take place by revolutions, but by successive stages. It resembles the growth of a city, in which, as time goes on, some parts are torn down and others are devoted to new uses..” However, this process has been historically riddled with controversy and disagreement, and not only among saints.

Authorship rights and other questions related to the intellectual property became issues of major importance with the advent of the industrial revolution, in particular, with the advancement of printing technologies. Even figures like Charles Dickens were concerned with the free circulation of British books abroad. English statutes to protect intellectual property were adopted as early as in 1624. As the international legal mechanisms protecting intellectual property have solidified, the critique, mainly emanating from the global south, about its monopolizing and exclusionary nature has intensified as well.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights contains provisions regarding the protection of private property as well as intellectual property. In particular, Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides that “everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.”

But is it proper to think of the world of ideas and knowledge, the world, which as Rajshree Chandra argues, is inexhaustible and socially distributed, in the same way as we think of the world of tangibles such as clothes, cars, or houses? And what are the main problems associated with relying on normative justifications for private property while we consider moral underpinnings of property rights over knowledge? And if indeed the moral groundings of the right to intellectual property are the same as those of the right to the ownership of property, what conclusions should be made from the distributional consequences of the transnational enforcement of these rights?

Chandra takes up all these questions and more in her fine new book Knowledge as Property, Issues in the Moral Grounding of Intellectual Property Rights (Oxford University Press, 2010).

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected