The Yale Law Journal



Prison Law Writing Contest Results

Elizabeth A. Reid, Ernie Drain & Aaron Lowers

122 Yale L.J. 2082 (2013).


(Mis)Understanding Good-Behavior Tenure

Saikrishna Prakash & Steven D. Smith

116 Yale L.J. 159 (2006)


Mismeasuring the Mismatch: A Response to Ho

Richard H. Sander

114 Yale L.J. 2005 (2005)

Daniel Ho claims that if one tugs at a single strand of my analysis of affirmative action, A Systemic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools, the entire structure collapses. As I explain briefly in this Response, Ho is wrong. Ho seems to miss the central an…


This Is Not a War

Bruce Ackerman

113 Yale L.J. 1871 (2004)

I know that some people question if America is really in a war at all. They view terrorism more as a crime, a problem to be solved mainly with law enforcement and indictments. After the World Trade Center was first attacked in 1993, some of the guilty were indicted and tri…


Valuing Modern Contract Scholarship

Ian Ayres

112 Yale L.J. 881 (2003)

In sum, Posner has leveled three different criticisms at the modern economic analysis of contracts: a descriptive critique that the scholarship fails to describe or predict the content of current law, a normative critique that the scholarship fails to "provide a solid basis f…


In That Case, What Is the Question? Economics and the Demands of Contract Theory

Richard Craswell

112 Yale L.J. 903 (2003)

In his thoughtful essay, Eric Posner asks whether economic analysis has failed contract law and suggests that it has. Not surprisingly, I hold a different opinion. That is, while I agree with much of what Posner says about particular economic findings, I disagree about what …


Reply: Notions of Fairness Versus the Pareto Principle: On the Role of Logical Consistency

Louis Kaplow & Steven Shavell

110 Yale L.J. 237 (2000)

In other writing, we advance the thesis that legal policies should be evaluated solely on the basis of their effects on individuals' well-being, meaning that no independent evaluative weight should be accorded to notions of fairness. In that work, we consider a variety of pr…


Rejoinder: The Possibility of a Fair Paretian

Howard F. Chang

110 Yale L.J. 251 (2000)

In their reply to my article, Kaplow and Shavell deny that either F* or F** is "a Pareto-conflict-free notion that is not solely based on individuals' well-being." The basis for their claim is obscure, but Kaplow and Shavell apparently seek to expand their definition of welf…