Contemporary proponents of law and economics claim to have abandoned the idea that law is an instrument for maximizing economic efficiency and wealth. Corporate law scholars haven’t yet heard the good news.
The rise of AI demands legislative action to mitigate its many risks. But rather than follow the same old regulatory playbook, Congress should instead embrace creative tax policy.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
The old school year is dying, and the new one struggles to be born: now is the time of movies.
Industrial policy will often require picking winners: if there were already many domestic firms capable of producing the desired output, there would be no compelling reason for subsidy or special treatment. Yet in doing so, the government risks locking in dominant firms and foreclosing the competition it ultimately needs. How might policymakers avoid this trap?
As policymakers pursue supply-side reforms to address rising housing costs, they must also confront a legal regime that affords tenants second-class status. Without confronting this anti-tenancy bias, abundance reforms risk producing more housing within the same inequitable framework.
The most pressing AI-driven crisis is the overestimation of AI’s capabilities and impacts, which has produced a historically large speculative AI bubble. To safeguard against this economic catastrophe, policymakers must confront and resist AI industry hype.
Amna Akbar interviews Joe Soss and Joshua Page about how the criminal legal system extracts resources from the nation’s most oppressed communities and converts them into public and private revenues.
Corporate diversity practices, long celebrated for driving revenue growth and stabilizing stock prices, are now being targeted as liabilities by conservative shareholder activists, consumer boycotts, and litigation. This shift from rainbow capitalism to today’s anti-woke agenda reveals how diversity’s value in the marketplace has always been politically and legally constructed.
A selection of worthy additions to your “important PDFs” folder.
Coined by a German economist in 1926, Fordism came to describe the dominant political-economic order of the mid-twentieth century. Could “Muskism” play a similar role in the twenty-first? How should we understand its distinctive regime of accumulation, and what kind of social contract does it propose?
By targeting the addictive design features of social media platforms, K.G.M. v. Meta marks a breakthrough in product liability law. Yet the case also reveals a neglected class dimension: the harms of addictive platform design fall most heavily on those with the fewest alternatives. In addition to regulating these harmful products, we must build a world in which children do not so desperately need them.
At the core of the U.S. banking system is the public’s choice to delegate money-creation privileges to private actors. But what is the public getting in exchange? An ever-swelling suite of predatory credit products and few basic services. It’s time to reset the terms of the bargain.
While student loan repayment has resumed, stability is an illusion. Beneath the surface, mounting delinquency, administrative chaos, and the potential dismantling of federal loan management point to a deeper crisis in the governance of higher education finance.
At the core of Jason Jackson’s Traders, Speculators, and Captains of Industry is a longstanding conversation among Indian modernizers about how to identify and nurture the ‘right’ kind of capitalists. Yet this is not just an Indian story. Struggles over “good” and “bad” businessmen have structured political life in all capitalist societies, and the book’s deeper implication is that morality tales about virtuous entrepreneurs and predatory speculators are less descriptions of economic reality than prescriptive efforts to shape it.
