Pages 430–472, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avaf021
Since the 1970s, comparative law scholars have studied “legal transplants”: legal institutions that emerged in one location and then were moved to (or forced upon) another. This research agenda offers little traction on one of today’s most pressing questions of global legal change.
Pages 384–429, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avaf001
This Article investigates the interaction between transplanted law and society after legal transplants, focusing on a case study of the changing meaning of geographical indications (GIs) after this legal concept was transplanted from Europe to China.
Pages 337–383, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avaf006
How do courts function in an environment of political polarization? This Article aims to gain insight into this question through a comparative case study of three countries—India, Brazil, and Israel—examining the challenges that political polarization posed to their supreme courts and the way each of them chose to respond to them.
Pages 279–335, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avaf009
Conventional wisdom pinpoints the origins of East Asia’s World War II redress movement in 1990, with the emergence of the “comfort women” issue and subsequent transnational litigation. This Article challenges that narrative by excavating a series of lawsuits, filed by Taiwanese citizens in Japanese courts from the 1970s.
Pages 236–278, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avaf011
In this Article, we look at how these texts have been employed by courts, regardless of—and often contrary to—their formal legal status and the political expectations of constitution-makers.
Pages 215–235, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avaf028
Constitutionalism “with adjectives” is now a common part of the comparative constitutional law vocabulary. But scholars often use the same adjectives in different ways, and suggest that different “constitutionalisms” are alternatives, when in fact they overlap in complex ways.