Showing papers by "Ralf Michaels published in 2011"

From Multiculturalism to Technique: Feminism, Culture and the Conflict of Laws Style

Abstract: The German chancellor, the French president and the British prime minister have each grabbed world headlines with pronouncements that their state’s policy of multiculturalism has failed. As so often, domestic debates about multiculturalism, as well as foreign policy debates about human rights in non-Western countries, revolve around the treatment of women. Yet there is also a widely noted brain drain from feminism. Feminists are no longer even certain how to frame, let alone resolve, the issues raised by veiling, polygamy and other cultural practices oppressive to women by Western standards. Feminism has become perplexed by the very concept of “culture.” This impasse is detrimental both to women’s equality and to concerns for cultural autonomy. We propose shifting gears. Our approach draws on what, at first glance, would seem to be an unpromising legal paradigm for feminism - the highly technical field of conflict of laws. Using the non-intuitive hypothetical of a dispute in California between a Japanese father and daughter over a transfer of shares, we demonstrate the contribution that conflicts can make. Whereas Western feminists are often criticized for dwelling on “exotic” cultural practices to the neglect of other important issues affecting the lives of women in those communities or states, our choice of hypothetical not only joins the correctives, but also shows how economic issues, in fact, take us back to the same impasse. Even mundane issues of corporate law prove to be dazzlingly indeterminate and complex in their feminist and cultural dimensions. What makes conflict of laws a better way to recognize and do justice to the different dimensions of our hypothetical, surprisingly, is viewing conflicts as technique. More generally, conflicts can offer a new approach to the feminism/culture debate - if we treat its technicalities not as mere means to an end but as an intellectual style. Trading the big picture typical of public law for the specificity and constraints of technical form provides a promising style of capturing, revealing and ultimately taking a stand on the complexities confronting feminists as multiculturalism is challenged here and abroad.

The Functionalism of Legal Origins

Abstract: This article, written on request for the centennial issue of Ius Commune Europaeum, connects the economic literature on legal origins (La Porta et al) and the World Bank's Doing Business reports with discussions in comparative law about the functional method. It finds that a number of parallels and similarities exist, and that much of the criticism that has been voiced against functionalism should apply, mutates mutants, also to these more recent projects. The attraction that these projects have derive not, it is argued, from their methodological sophistication, but instead from "the strange lure of economics" and from the ostentatious objectivity of numbers and statistics.

Of Islands and the Ocean: The Two Rationalities of European Private Law

Abstract: Debates over Europen private law frequently concern matters of ideology – how social or how liberal should it be – or of form – code versus common law – or of level of regulation – European level versus member state level. Underlying all these debates is a deeper one that is insufficiently recognized, that about the rationality of European private law. Historically, private law has always been characterized by two rationalities that can be called compensatory and competitive. I show how these two rationalities still characterize European private law in both form and substance, and how it is unlikely that one will ever win over the other, because both are complementary to each other. More importantly, I demonstrate how both rationalities have traditionally been represented in different forms and at different levels. The current bifurcation in European private law between the compensatory Draft Common Frame of Reference and the competitive regulatory directives is a fruit of this history, and not necessarily an undesirable state of affairs.

Empagran’s Empire: International Law and Statutory Interpretation in the US Supreme Court of the 21st Century

Abstract: In its Empagran decision in 2004, the US Supreme Court decided that purchasers on foreign markets could not invoke US antitrust law even against a global cartel that affects also the United States. This article, forthcoming in a volume dedicated to the history on international law in the US Supreme Court, presents three radically different readings of the opinion. The result is that Empagran is a decision that is transnationalist in rhetoric, isolationist in application, and hegemonial in its effect. A decision with a seemingly straightforward argument is found riddled in the conflict between these different logics. A decision with few references to international law displays deep links to some of the most pressing international law issues. A decision with a forward‑looking globalization rhetoric finds itself mired in history. A decision praising harmony displays somber parallels to decisions refusing interference with the evil of slave trade. This has implications for our understanding of international law today, and for its place in its own history.