Blog

When confronted with the vexing issues surrounding online speech regulation, “plus ça change” might be a tempting response for comparativists who have studied free speech before the advent of social media, including in the context of comparative hate speech regulation. Deep skepticism toward speech regulation remains the prevailing American position, based on the contemporary domestic understanding of free speech.

The present book constitutes, to our knowledge, the first attempt of a detailed comparative analysis of various themes regarding tort liability (common law) and extra-contractual liability for personal acts (civil law-Québec) in Canada. The book is mainly written in French – only some of the cases in the book are reproduced in English.

Histories of jurisprudence and legal thought in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries are focused on developments that occurred in Europe and North America. At that time, European powers ruled much of the non-western world, but the assumption of most intellectual historians of modern law is that nothing interesting happened outside the West.

The 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees creates certain obligations for states in relation to protecting refugees. These protections were agreed to by the international community in the aftermath of World War II in response to the failure of governments around the world to provide refuge to those fleeing Nazi Germany. However, many states are turning their backs on these obligations by implementing progressively more restrictive asylum and border-control measures.

Theoretically oriented scholarship on comparative study of law makes it clear that language is important. More generally, law and language are deeply intertwined and for a comparative law scholar this causes a specific problem concerning information about foreign law.

The ASCL is delighted to announce the launch of its blog. The blog aims to host contributions on any topic related to comparative law: its purpose, methodology, case studies, and also theoretical reflections on topics of global interest. It features new books, important articles in comparative law scholarship and opinion pieces.

A résumé screening algorithm declines to shortlist any women for a job; a sentencing program concludes that a defendant has a high risk of reoffending but won’t say why. Who is responsible when technology makes decisions on behalf of humans — in some cases following processes that are impossible to understand?