Copyright (c) 2009 All rights reserved. http://works.bepress.com/eric_fink Recent documents in Eric M Fink en-us Fri, 14 Aug 2009 21:50:32 PDT 3600 http://works.bepress.com/eric_fink/2 http://works.bepress.com/eric_fink/2 Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:37:39 PST One problem that is ripe for socio-legal inquiry is the emergence and diffusion of the Law and Economics movement. A socio-legal approach would consider Law and Economics not simply as a style of legal analysis or a school of thought within law, but as a discursive project, constituted by and constitutive of an emergent socio-legal matrix. That approach would be attentive not only to the instrumental significance of Law and Economics, but also what difference, if any, Law and Economics makes in deciding legal cases; who employs and benefits from Law and Economics; and similar concerns. This approach would additionally be particularly attentive to its constitutive significance for socio-legal praxis - how Law and Economics frames meaning and action across the multiplicity of socio-legal fields. In order to more closely examine this breadth, this Article represents an attempt to sketch the outlines of a socio-legal analysis of Law and Economics, and to suggest some starting points for socio-legal research into the Law and Economics movement. Eric M. Fink Politics Judges Law and Society http://works.bepress.com/eric_fink/1 http://works.bepress.com/eric_fink/1 Wed, 09 Jan 2008 11:56:54 PST As part of the REAL ID Act, Congress amended the Immigration and Nationality Act to restrict judicial review of adverse credibility determinations by immigration judges. The change came in the wake of controversy of judicial reversals of adverse credibility determinations that the reviewing courts saw as inappropriately speculative and lacking in evidentiary support. Critics, including some appellate judges, have in turn alleged that the appellate courts have been insufficiently deferential to the factual determinations of Immigration Judges (IJs) and the BIA.This paper examines the argument offered in support of limiting judicial review in this area, and provides an empirical assessment of the appellate courts' disposition of IJ/BIA credibility determinations in asylum cases in recent years. The paper concludes that the stated justifications for restricting judicial review of credibility determinations in asylum cases thus appear to be unfounded. Rather, it argues that the controversy and legislative response can best be understood as an instance of symbolic politics and moral panic. Eric M. Fink Legislation Politics Judges Courts Immigration Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Law and Society Civil Rights