Failures of American methods of lawmaking in historical and comparative perspectives

5Citations
Citations of this article
2Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

In this book, James R. Maxeiner takes on the challenge of demonstrating that historically American law makers did consider a statutory methodology as part of formulating laws. In the nineteenth century, when the people wanted laws they could understand, lawyers inflicted judge-made, statute-destroying, common law on them. Maxeiner offers the cure for common law, in the form of sensible statute law. Building on this historical evidence, Maxeiner shows how rule-making in civil law jurisdictions in other countries makes for a far more equitable legal system. Sensible statute laws fit together: one statute governs, as opposed to several laws that even lawyers have trouble disentangling. In a statute law system, lawmakers make laws for the common good in sensible procedures, and judges apply sensible laws and do not make them. This book shows how such a system works in Germany and would be a solution for the American legal system as well.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Maxeiner, J. R. (2018). Failures of American methods of lawmaking in historical and comparative perspectives. Failures of American Methods of Lawmaking in Historical and Comparative Perspectives (pp. 1–336). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182195

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free