Robert L. Tsai

Bio: Robert L. Tsai is an academic researcher from Boston University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Constitution & Constitutional law. The author has an hindex of 5, co-authored 24 publications receiving 102 citations. Previous affiliations of Robert L. Tsai include American University & Washington College of Law.

Book Review of Zephyr Teachout, Corruption in America: From Benjamin Franklin's Snuff Box to Citizens United (Harvard 2014)

Abstract: This is a review of Zephyr Teachout's book on the anticorruption principle, "Corruption in America" (Harvard 2014).

Fire, Metaphor, and Constitutional Myth-Making

Abstract: From the standpoint of traditional legal thought, metaphor is at best a dash of poetry adorning lawyerly analysis, and at worst an unjustifiable distraction from what is actually at stake in a legal contest By contrast, in the eyes of those who view law as a close relative of ordinary language, metaphor is a basic building block of human understanding This article accepts that metaphor helps us to comprehend a court's decision At the same time, it argues that metaphor plays a special role in the realm of constitutional discourse Metaphor in constitutional law not only reinforces doctrinal categories, but also promotes acceptance of interpretive prerogative and creates sustainable constitutional subcultures, with their attendant myths, counter-narratives, hero figures and villains, and sacred mantras It links citizens to governing institutions, and bridges diverse communities of interest Metaphor is bound up with the motivations of the Justices and the development of legal doctrine, and marks the steady ascendancy of the American Supreme Court to the center of cultural and legal life To illustrate these themes, the article examines the appearance of the fire metaphor and fire-inspired legal sayings in the Court's free expression rulings over time, drawing on the work of cultural anthropologists, legal theorists, and cognitive linguists Launched in early speech decisions involving socialist ideology, and reinvented in more recent cases involving cross-burning and the Internet, the fire motif has had a long pedigree Tracing the Court's invocation of fire across the decades, we can uncover a wealth of information about the interaction between rule and myth, legal doctrine and symbol Born in the early part of the Twentieth Century during turbulent times, the fire metaphor has enjoyed an integral role in the construction of our free speech folklore Across historical epochs and amid social upheavals, it has alternately collaborated with and jousted with other free speech metaphors and icons The curious life of this remarkable, though often overlooked, language composition tells us much about the institution of the Court, our modes of constitutional discourse and myth-making, and the interactive nature of legal change

Obama’s Conversion on Same-Sex Marriage: The Social Foundations of Individual Rights

Abstract: This essay explores how presidents who wish to seize a leadership role over the development of rights must tend to the social foundations of those rights. Broad cultural changes alone do not guarantee success, nor do they dictate the substance of constitutional ideas. Rather, presidential aides must actively re-characterize the social conditions in which rights are made, disseminated, and enforced. An administration must articulate a strategically plausible theory of a particular right, ensure there is cultural and institutional support for that right, and work to minimize blowback. Executive branch officials must seek to transform and popularize legal concepts while working within a broader professional and political culture that respects the role of other branches of government, including the prerogative of the courts to interpret the laws. To illustrate these insights, this essay examines the Obama administration’s shift in position on the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and its subsequent articulation of a theory of equality that encompasses same-sex marriage. This episode should be understood, in part, as an act of presidential leadership over individual rights, though presidentially-instigated rights differ from judicially-derived ones. Recognizing this model of leadership doesn’t require embracing executive supremacy, but it does suggest we ought to emphasize institutional dynamics over party politics or social movements in explanations of constitutional change.

Fire, metaphor, and constitutional myth-making

Abstract: From the standpoint of traditional legal thought, metaphor is at best a dash of poetry adorning lawyerly analysis, and at worst an unjustifiable distraction from what is actually at stake in a legal contest. By contrast, in the eyes of those who view law as a close relative of ordinary language, metaphor is a basic building block of human understanding. This article accepts that metaphor helps us to comprehend a court's decision. At the same time, it argues that metaphor plays a special role in the realm of constitutional discourse. Metaphor in constitutional law not only reinforces doctrinal categories, but also promotes acceptance of interpretive prerogative and creates sustainable constitutional subcultures, with their attendant myths, counter-narratives, hero figures and villains, and sacred mantras. It links citizens to governing institutions, and bridges diverse communities of interest. Metaphor is bound up with the motivations of the Justices and the development of legal doctrine, and marks the steady ascendancy of the American Supreme Court to the center of cultural and legal life. To illustrate these themes, the article examines the appearance of the fire metaphor and fire-inspired legal sayings in the Court's free expression rulings over time, drawing on the work of cultural anthropologists, legal theorists, and cognitive linguists. Launched in early speech decisions involving socialist ideology, and reinvented in more recent cases involving cross-burning and the Internet, the fire motif has had a long pedigree. Tracing the Court's invocation of fire across the decades, we can uncover a wealth of information about the interaction between rule and myth, legal doctrine and symbol. Born in the early part of the Twentieth Century during turbulent times, the fire metaphor has enjoyed an integral role in the construction of our free speech folklore. Across historical epochs and amid social upheavals, it has alternately collaborated with and jousted with other free speech metaphors and icons. The curious life of this remarkable, though often overlooked, language composition tells us much about the institution of the Court, our modes of constitutional discourse and myth-making, and the interactive nature of legal change.

The civic constitution: Civic visions and struggles in the path toward constitutional democracy

Abstract: If you ally infatuation such a referred the civic constitution civic visions and struggles in the path toward constitutional democracy book that will manage to pay for you worth, acquire the completely best seller from us currently from several preferred authors. If you want to humorous books, lots of novels, tale, jokes, and more fictions collections are afterward launched, from best seller to one of the most current released.

Social Media, Echo Chambers, and Political Polarization

Abstract: A popular argument that is commonly put forth as an explanation linking digital technologies to political polarization is related to their ability to foster the emergence of echo chambers where extremist ideas are amplified. Sunstein (2018), a leading proponent of this view, argues that the main characteristic of social networking sites is that they allow politically like-minded individuals to find one another. In this environment, citizens are only exposed to information that reinforces their political views and remain isolated from other individuals with opposing views, in part due to the filtering effects of ranking algorithms that generate filter bubbles (Pariser, 2011) and create incentives for publishers to share clickbait and hyperpartisan content (Benkler et al, 2018). The outcome of this process is a society that is increasingly segregated along partisan lines, and where compromise becomes unlikely due to rising mistrust on public officials, media outlets, and ordinary citizens on the other side of the ideological spectrum.

Demopolis: Democracy before Liberalism in Theory and Practice

Abstract: What did democracy mean before liberalism? What are the consequences for our lives today? Combining history with political theory, this book restores the core meaning of democracy as collective and limited self-government by citizens. That, rather than majority tyranny, is what democracy meant in ancient Athens, before liberalism. Participatory self-government is the basis of political practice in 'Demopolis', a hypothetical modern state powerfully imagined by award-winning historian and political scientist Josiah Ober. Demopolis' residents aim to establish a secure, prosperous, and non-tyrannical community, where citizens govern as a collective, both directly and through representatives, and willingly assume the costs of self-government because doing so benefits them, both as a group and individually. Basic democracy, as exemplified in real Athens and imagined Demopolis, can provide a stable foundation for a liberal state. It also offers a possible way forward for religious societies seeking a realistic alternative to autocracy.

Online Hate Speech

Abstract: Once relegated to the dark corners of the Internet, online hate speech has become increasingly visible on mainstream social media platforms. From targeted antiSemitic attacks on Jewish journalists to reports of social media’s role in mobilizing ethnic violence in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, the offline consequences of online hate speech appear increasingly dire. Fearing that this harmful rhetoric is inciting violence and driving extremism, governments worldwide are passing regulation and pressuring social media companies to implement policies to stop the spread of online hate speech (Gagliardone et al. 2016). However, these calls for action have rarely beenmotivated by comprehensive empirical evidence. Moreover, despite increased attention to online hate speech in the scientific literature, surprisingly little is known about the prevalence, causes, or consequences of different forms of harmful language across diverse platforms. Furthermore, researchers have only recently begun to examine the efficacy of approaches to countering online hate, and our understanding of the collateral costs of these interventions is especially limited. This chapter examines the state of the literature – including scientific research, legal scholarship, and policy reports – on online hate speech. In particular, it explores ongoing debates and limitations in current approaches to defining and detecting online hate speech; provides an overview of what social media data and surveys can tell us about the producers, targets, and overall prevalence of harmful language; reviews empirical evidence of the offline consequences of online hate speech; and offers quantitative insights into what interventions might be most effective in combating harmful rhetoric online.

Thou Shalt Not Misinterpret: Landscape as Legal Performance

Abstract: Since the early 1990s cities and towns across the United States have been embroiled in a series of increasingly contentious lawsuits over displays of the Ten Commandments on government land. Part of a broader wave of litigation over religious iconography in public places, these cases are seen to embody a national confrontation between conservative Christians and their liberal enemies over the separation of church and state. In many cases, one side argues that the displays merely acknowledge the nation's Judeo-Christian heritage, the other that they alienate non-Christians and thus exclude them from public life. On both sides, efforts to explain how landscapes “speak”—and more important, to describe the psychological effects of such speech—have focused on the affective modalities of observation. How, courts ask, should a reasonable observer respond emotionally to religious symbols in the public square? What, if anything, is the political significance of his or her feelings? This debate is best understood a...