Algorithmic wage discrimination – paying workers personalized wages using opaque and fluctuating formulas – is common in the gig economy. But with the recent development of intrusive new forms of employee surveillance, such wage-setting practices will be coming soon to a workplace near you. This post offers a brief taxonomy of five different forms. . .
Ryan Martínez Mitchell on China’s developing sanctions regime, Yochai Benkler on the role of law in capitalism, and Elettra Bietti on how not to regulate big tech. Plus, upcoming events with Saule Omarova, Marshall Steinbaum, Veena Dubal, Luke Herrine, Hendrik Theine, Tamara Nopper, Eve Zelickson, and Raúl Carrillo; an interview with Amy Kapcynski and. . .
In Paul Gowder’s recent blog post, as well as in his new book, he argues that we should democratize, rather than dismantle or restructure, Big Tech platforms. However, this familiar framing obscures more than it reveals, relying upon an impoverished account of the political economy of technology, of the co-evolution of politics and production, and of. . .
Within the LPE movement, there is a broad consensus that “law is central to the creation and maintenance of structural inequalities in the state and the market” and that “class power is inextricably connected to the development of racial and gender hierarchies.” These claims, while often articulated in response to neoliberalism, go to the very. . .
Once the near-exclusive prerogative of the United States, unilateral economic sanctions are increasingly a multipolar phenomenon. As Aslı Bâli has recently argued, this current conjuncture may offer a new window to resist forms of economic coercion that legitimate and enforce an unjust neocolonial global order. At the same time, however, there are new. . .
Matthew Dimick defends the concept of capitalism, and the LPE Blog highlights the hottest forthcoming LPE and LPE-adjacent articles. Plus, the at-large student group rises from the ashes, a book talk on American debt relief at HLS, Sandeep Vaheesan and Brian Callaci on the labor movement as a resource for antitrust, Lenore Palladino shares her economic and. . .
Some people head to the pumpkin patch. Others drink from the unholy fountain of the pumpkin spice latte. But here at the Blog, our favorite autumnal activity is decidedly less gourd-based: we scour the internet for the most exciting forthcoming LPE and LPE-adjacent articles. Covering tech, labor, housing, the administrative state, criminal justice, family. . .
According to Sam Moyn, capitalism and the ills it is said to generate are nothing more than a contingent jumble of various legal rules and regulations. Indeed, “capitalism” is merely a term of abuse, to which nineteenth-century thinkers made a misguided attempt to attribute “general laws.” This critique, however, overlooks the extent to which Marx’s. . .
Talha Syed on the poverty of theory in CLS, Douglas Kysar on climate change and the neoliberal imagination, and Bernard Harcourt on the relationship between legal theory and radical political practice. Plus, an open letter from legal scholars urging an immediate cease-fire in Gaza, an event next week with Stephen Vladeck about the shadow docket, and last. . .
In his recent post about the LPE Movement’s reticence toward legal theory, Sam Moyn speculates that this aversion may be born of a noble yet misguided deference towards grassroots social movements. Deference, however, does not capture the dynamic relationship between critical legal theory and radical political practice. One does not precede the other or. . .
Neoliberal welfare economics has constrained our moral and political imagination and, in so doing, limited our ability to realistically advance climate justice. This can be seen by considering two policy proposals that appear to fit comfortably within the standard climate economic paradigm, but that offer a wider scope of possibility than conventionally allowed.. . .
Sam Moyn’s recent call for a renewed interest in a radical theory of law is timely and welcome. However, if LPE wants a social and legal theory adequate to its ambitions, we cannot turn to the insights of the earlier CLS movement to develop it. This is because CLS, in the relevant respects, did not have (much of) any theory at all.
Week in review: Amanda Parsons and Salomé Viljoen analyze the disconnect between social data and the law, while Luke Herrine offers law students a guided tour through the many meanings of efficiency. Plus, the first New Haven LPE Happy Hour, Rob Hunter responds to Sam Moyn, Sanjay Jolly discusses C. Edwin Baker, and Claire Kelloway and Maureen Tkacik debunk. . .
Efficiency is a slippery term, and legal scholars frequently shift between distinct and even incompatible meanings as is convenient. This lack of clarity can inhibit students from challenging certain claims. To ask “but what do you mean by ‘efficiency’?” can make one appear unsophisticated or pedantic. But that’s precisely the question we should. . .
There is, at present, a conceptual mismatch between the strategies of accumulation that are dominant in the digital economy and the basic assumptions that underlie the legal regimes tasked with regulating accumulation. To begin to address this discrepancy, legal actors in these regimes need a better understanding of how companies translate social data into. . .