Failures of American Methods of Lawmaking in Historical and Comparative Perspectives

367 Pages·2018·29.117 MB·English

by  James R. Maxeiner

failures of american methods of lawmaking in
historical and comparative perspectives
America’s 18th century founders expected that the people of the United States
wouldestablishawiseandhappygovernmentofwrittenlawsadoptedwithasingle
eyetoreasonandthegoodofthosegoverned.FewAmericanstodaywouldsaythat
America’slawmakingfulfillsthefounders’expectations.Dysfunctionalistheword
thatmanyAmericansusetodescribetheirmethodsoflawmaking.
ThelegalprofessionstelltheAmericanpeoplethattheyaredoingthebestthey
can.Theytellamythofcommonlaw.Theysaythepeopleshouldrejoice,andnot
complain,whenAmerica’sjudgesmakelaw,forsuchlawmakingmakesAmerica’s
laws exceptional. It is how America has always made law, they say. Judges make
betterlawsthanlegislatures,theyclaim.
Thehistoricalpartofthisbookexplodesthecommonlawmythofdominance
of judge-made law in American history. Using sources hardly accessible until
21st century digitization, it shows that statutes have had a much greater role in
Americanlawthanthelegalprofessionsacknowledge.
Thecomparativepartofthisbookdismantlestheclaimthatjudgesmakebetter
law then legislatures. It shows how the methods of American legislative lawmak-
ing,owingtoneglect,havefailedtokeepupwiththeircounterpartsabroad,and
have thus denied the people the government of laws that the founders expected.
ThisbookshowshowsuchasystemworksinGermanyandwouldbeasolutionfor
theAmericanlegalsystemaswell.
james r. maxeiner is the associate director of the Center for International
and Comparative Law at the University of Baltimore. Among many other books,
he is coauthor of Failures of American Civil Justice in International Perspective
(CambridgeUniversityPress,2011)andaserieseditorforIusGentium:Comparative
PerspectivesonLawandJustice.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Universiteit Leiden / LUMC, on 11 Jan 2019 at 09:26:10, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182195
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Universiteit Leiden / LUMC, on 11 Jan 2019 at 09:26:10, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182195
Failures of American Methods of
Lawmaking in Historical and
Comparative Perspectives
JAMES R. MAXEINER
With a Foreword by
PHILIP K. HOWARD
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Universiteit Leiden / LUMC, on 11 Jan 2019 at 09:26:10, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182195
UniversityPrintingHouse,Cambridgecb28bs,UnitedKingdom
OneLibertyPlaza,20thFloor,NewYork,ny10006,USA
477WilliamstownRoad,PortMelbourne,vic3207,Australia
314–321,3rdFloor,Plot3,SplendorForum,JasolaDistrictCentre,NewDelhi–110025,India
79AnsonRoad,#06–04/06,Singapore079906
CambridgeUniversityPressispartoftheUniversityofCambridge.
ItfurtherstheUniversity’smissionbydisseminatingknowledgeinthepursuitof
education,learning,andresearchatthehighestinternationallevelsofexcellence.
www.cambridge.org
Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9781107198159
doi:10.1017/9781108182195
©JamesR.Maxeiner2018
Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexception
andtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements,
noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewritten
permissionofCambridgeUniversityPress.
Firstpublished2018
PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabySheridanBooks,Inc.
AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary.
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
names:Maxeiner,JamesR.,author.
title:FailuresofAmericanmethodsoflawmakinginhistoricaland
comparativeperspectives/JamesR.Maxeiner.
description:Cambridge[UK];NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,2017.|
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
identifiers:lccn2017029293|isbn9781107198159(Hardback)
subjects:lcsh:Legislation–UnitedStates–Historyandcriticism.|
Parliamentarypractice–UnitedStates–Historyandcriticism.|
Law–UnitedStates–History.|UnitedStates–Politicsandgovernment.|
Parliamentarypractice–Germany.|Legislation–Comparativestudies.
classification:lcckf4945.m392017|ddc328.73/077–dc23
LCrecordavailableathttps://lccn.loc.gov/2017029293
isbn978-1-107-19815-9Hardback
CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceoraccuracy
ofURLsforexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredtointhispublication
anddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuchwebsitesis,orwillremain,
accurateorappropriate.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Universiteit Leiden / LUMC, on 11 Jan 2019 at 09:26:10, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182195
To Philip K. Howard
America’s finest jurists have combined practical and theoretical knowledge,
dedication to law improvement, and appreciation for how legal science and
foreign law facilitate better law. You stand in this tradition of Joseph Story,
DavidDudleyField,andKarlN.Llewellyn.Yourgeneroussupporthasmade
this workpossible.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Universiteit Leiden / LUMC, on 11 Jan 2019 at 09:28:41, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182195
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Universiteit Leiden / LUMC, on 11 Jan 2019 at 09:28:41, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182195
Laws for the People
The laws are not made for the lawyers but for the people.
AmericanLawJournal(1813)
Thelawsarenot–wemeantheyoughtnottobe–writtenforthelawyers,but
for the people.
AmericanThemis(1844)
Thoughour[government]claimstobeademocraticgovernment,ourstatutes
are addressed tolawyers and notto the people; alaymancan hardlybe
expected tounderstand their phraseology. The principalGerman statutes,
particularlythe civil code, are published incheap, popular and handy
editions,andarefoundinhundredsofthousandsofhomes.Theextraordinary
sense of legality ofthe Germanpeople is notentirely unconnectedwiththe
intelligibilityoftheir laws.
SpecialCommitteeonDraftingofLegislation,AmericanBarAssociation(1914)
Our legal system has become extremely difficult to understand for ordinary
citizens, even for smart lawyers.
GeoffreyC.Hazard,Jr.(2014)
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Universiteit Leiden / LUMC, on 11 Jan 2019 at 09:30:54, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182195
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Universiteit Leiden / LUMC, on 11 Jan 2019 at 09:30:54, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182195
Contents
Foreword by Philip K. Howard page xiii
Preface xix
Acknowledgements xxv
Summary xxvii
part i introduction 1
1 Introduction:Of Governmentsand Laws 3
A. Americans’Longing for a Government ofLaws 3
B. MakingGood Laws IsHard 6
C. America’s Broken Government ofLaws 7
D. Germany’sWorking Government ofLaws 8
E. The Theses of This Book 9
F. How toRead This Book 9
2 America’sExceptionalism in 1876: Systematizing Laws 10
Philadelphia Centennial Exhibition 11
3 CommonLawIs Not an Option 15
A. Three Common-Law Truths 16
B. FiveCommon-Law Myths 21
part ii historical part: americans’ longing
for laws for the people 31
4 Founding a Government of Laws 33
A. TheFounders’Vision:AGovernmentofLawsforaNewNation 34
B. The Enigmas ofBritish Law inAmerica 44
C. Eulogies of Adams andJefferson 54
ix
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Universiteit Leiden / LUMC, on 11 Jan 2019 at 09:33:20, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182195