Hemeroteca

1. THREE KINDS OFD LEGITIMACY? 2. THE COMPLEX RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEGAL AND MORAL LEGITIMACY. 3. THE NATURE OF ILLEGITIMACY. 4. THE LEGITIMACY OF THE COSTITUTION. 5. CONCLUSION.

1. THREE CONCEPTS OF LEGITIMACY AND THEIR OBJECTS. A) LEGITIMACY AS A LEGAL CONCEPT. B) LEGITIMACY AS A SOCIOLOGICAL CONCEPT. C) LEGITIMACY AS A MORAL CONCEPT. D) AN ASIDE ON LEGAL POSITIVISM AND NATURAL LAW. E) THE OBJECTS OF LEGITIMACY JUDMENTS. 2. THE LEGITIMACY OF THE COSTITUTION. A) THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE COSTITUTION'S MORAL LEGITIMACY AND ITS LEGAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL LEGITIMACY. B) ASSESING IDEAL AND MINIMAL MORAL LEGITIMACY C) WHAT IS THE COSTITUTION? D) THE LIMITS OF COSTITUTIONAL LEGITIMACY. 3. JUDICAL LEGITIMACY UNDER THE COSTITUTION. A) JUDICIAL LEGITIMACY AS A LEGAL CONCEPT. B) THE SOCIOLOGICAL LEGITIMACY OF JUDICIAL POWER AND ITS EXERCISE. C) THE MORAL LEGITIMACY OF JUDICIAL POWER AND ITS EXERCISE. D) THREE COCEPTS OF LEGITIMACY: A TEST CASE. 4. LEGISLATIVE, PRESIDENTIAL, AND ADMINISTRATIVE LRGITIMACY. A) LEGAL LEGITIMACY. B) SOCIOLOGICAL LEGITIMACY. C)MORAL LEGITIMACY. 5. CONNECTION AND DISJUNCTIONS. A) LEGAL LEGITIMACY. B) SOCIOLOGICAL LEGITIMACY. C) MORAL LEGITIMACY. D) CONFLICTS AND PRIORITIES. 6. CONCLUSION: THE PERSISTING IDEAL OF COSTITUTIONAL LEGITIMACY.

1. Liberalism à la Mexicana. a) The ancien régime of colonial mexico. b) The liberal challenge in mexico (1810-1910). c) Mexico's modern liberal state. 2. The 1994 mexican judicial reform. a) Composition of the supreme court. b) judicial tenure. c) Administration of federal courts. d) Supreme court jurisdiction. e) Senate approval of judicial appointments. f) Qualifications for assuming ...

1. Introduction. 2. French judicial discourse: An overview. 3. American judicial discourse. a) Introduction: the "judicial test". b) The judicial test's initial displacement of primary text. c) The continued operation of the test method. d) Conclusion. 4. "Lit. Theory" in legal action. a) The judicial decision as paradigmatic or syntagmatic discourse. b) The judicial decision as myth. 5. Conclusion: The judicial decision as trope.

1. Introduction. 2. The current interpretation ofthe scope of the government attorney-client privilige. a) Overview. b) Recent developments. 3. A proposed analysisof the government attorney-client privilege drawing anofficial-personal distinction. a) The extent of theprivilege. b) Application of the official-personaldistinction to the facts of the leading cases. 4. Conclusion.

1. Making elite lawyers: Granfield's story. a) The politics of the classroom. b) Learning collective eminence. 2. The pacification of law students. a) Welcome to Harvard, the "total" law school. b) Grades: The great unmentionable. c) Making law review. d) The stigma of the discreditable and the discredited. e) Enter the corporate recruiters. f) Second year and beyond. 3. Putting a wrench in the system. a) Coda: explaining the anger.

1. Market and political forces creating incomesegregation. 2. Creating incentives for incomedesegregation. 3. Potential criticisms of the proposal. 4.Conclusion.

1. The supreme court and federal mens rea requirements. 2. Federalism and federal mens rea requirements.