前沿 | 美国法社科杂志今年讨论了什么

《法律和社会科学年度评论》第20卷

Talia Shiff

摘要：本文回顾了有关道德如何影响国家一线官僚组织实践的学术研究：官僚们在代表国家将权利、资源和惩罚下放给分散主体的同时，如何借鉴、质疑和应用道德模式，管理一线现实。该研究的一个核心重点是机构法规与道德价值观之间存在紧张关系的情况。在这种情况下，曾经被置于意识背景之下的道德分类变得清晰可见、且有争议，反过来，这也为道德如何影响组织实践提供了重要启示。然而，如果学者们能更多地关注官僚们对道德不协调（不一致）的看法，以及他们寻求实现其道德愿望的解决方式的微观动态过程，那么目前关于客户服务型官僚机构中道德与组织实践之间相互关系的理论研究就会得到改进。

Abstract

This article reviews scholarship concerned with the ways in which morality shapes organizational practice on the frontlines of the state: how bureaucrats, who draw on, contest, and apply moral schemas while delegating rights, resources, and punishments on behalf of the state to discrete subjects, manage the reality of being on the frontlines. A central focus of this scholarship is on situations characterized by tensions between agency-codified regulations and moral values; in such situations, moral categorizations once relegated to the background of consciousness become visible and subject to debate and, in turn, shed important light on how morality informs organizational practice. Current theorizing on the interrelations between morality and organizational practice in client-serving bureaucracies could nonetheless be improved by greater scholarly attention to bureaucrats’ perceptions of moral incongruence, and to the micro-dynamic processes through which they seek to actualize their aspirations for moral resolution.

Kim Lane Scheppele

Abstract

The rule of law has become all things to all people, which is precisely why it has been hard to define. Rather than attempt that feat, this article traces how the rule of law has developed as a set of specific governing practices both in the history of comparative law and in recent policy debates. Whereas national legal traditions blended ideas about the constraining effects of law with normative ideas about the organization of politics, the policy conversation has tended to depoliticize law altogether. As a result, it became possible for aspirational autocrats determined to undermine normative legal constraints to game the system and use law for autocratic ends. The rule of law is now beginning a new life, however, through a movement to deparochialize law and re-embed it in transnational norms. This rule of law writ large has become a new touchstone for holding political power accountable through law.

Marc Hertogh

摘要：过去，法治在很大程度上被社会学家和其他社会科学家所忽视。然而，近年来有关法治的实证研究越来越多。我对这些不同的文献进行了调查，发现了三代实证研究，每一代都基于不同的方法：(a) 行动中的法治（the rule of law in action），(b) 法治指数（the rule of law index），以及 (c) 活生生的法治（the living rule of law）。这些研究为我们提供了现实世界中法治的详细情况，但往往令人警醒。我将对这一新兴领域进行批判性回顾，并讨论未来研究面临的挑战。发展更加连贯的法治社会科学非常重要，因为这有助于我们理解，法治不仅由正式机构和法律文件来定义，也由法律在人们日常生活中的地位来定义。

Abstract

In the past, the rule of law was largely overlooked by sociologists and other social scientists. However, recent years have seen an increasing number of empirical studies of the rule of law. I survey that diverse literature and identify three generations of empirical research, each based on a different approach: (a) the rule of law in action, (b) the rule of law index, and (c) the living rule of law. These studies give us a detailed, but often sobering, view of the rule of law in the real world. I critically review the emerging field and discuss challenges for future research. Developing a more coherent social science of the rule of law is important because it helps us to understand that the rule of law is defined not only by formal institutions and legal documents but also by the place of law in people's everyday lives.

Melissa Crouch

Abstract

Studies of constitutions in authoritarian regimes reveal a new finding hiding in plain sight: that the military is often a key constitutional actor. The question of how the military uses law and constitutions to enable and facilitate its influence in constitution making and constitutional practice is under-researched. The military demands scholarly attention because of the unprecedented opportunities for the military in governance due to the rise of populism and the decline of democracy, internal conflict, efforts at counter-terrorism and anti-trafficking, and the COVID-19 global pandemic. I review the literature across law and the social sciences on the constitution and the military in authoritarian regimes. In doing so, I demonstrate that the military is an important, yet overlooked, constitutional actor; that civilian control of the military by law is never absolute but a matter of degree and changes over time; and that histories of military rule and military use of law and constitutions matter.

Ivan Ermakoff

摘要：在探讨革命与法律关系的文献中，可以区分出两大主题视角。一种观点认为，行动者与法律条文和宪法规定的关系以及对它们的使用如何影响革命的动态（革命中的法律）。另一种方法则研究革命进程的动态和方式如何影响法律的内容和法律秩序的构成（法律中的革命）。革命中的法律视角包含五个主要议题：利用宪法条款作为颠覆革命的工具、以法律为框架的防御策略、宪法演变、合法性问题以及法院的立场。法律革命视角包括对革命范式中法律地位的思考、革命事件作为基础行为的影响、制宪权力概念的转变以及连续性与断裂共存的问题。贯穿这两个视角的是革命与法律研究难以忽视的挑战和陷阱：分析和描述性范畴的重新整合、规范和积极立场的混淆以及对无条件主张的依赖。如果研究能够记录和分析行为者在做出决定和采取行动时与法律打交道的过程，就能克服这些挑战。

Abstract

Two broad thematic perspectives can be distinguished in the literature that broaches the revolutions–law nexus. One considers how actors’ relations to, and usages of, legal statutes and constitutional provisions affect the dynamics of revolutionary conjunctures (law in revolutions). The other examines how the dynamics and modalities of revolutionary processes affect the content of law and the configuration of the legal order (revolutions in law). Subsumed to the law in revolutions perspective are five main topics: the use of constitutional provisions as instruments of revolutionary subversion, legally framed defensive strategies, constitutional devolutions, legitimation problems, and the courts’ stances. The revolutions in law perspective encompasses reflections on the status of law in revolutionary paradigms, the impacts of revolutionary events as acts of foundation, shifting conceptions of constituent power, and the issue of continuities coexisting with ruptures. Cutting across these two perspectives are challenges and pitfalls that studies of revolutions and law can hardly ignore: the reification of analytical and descriptive categories, the confusion of normative and positive standpoints, and the reliance on unconditional claims. Studies overcome these challenges when they document and analyze the processes whereby actors engage law as they make decisions and pursue courses of action.

Grégoire Mallard, and Jin Sun

摘要：本文回顾了国际法、政治学、社会学、人类学和历史学中有关制裁的最新文献。文章展示了全面制裁十年（20 世纪 90 年代）期间的文献如何被制裁微型化十年（20 世纪 2000 年代）的制裁目标化所取代。而全面制裁十年（20 世纪 90 年代）期间的文献，对全球化时代的制裁大多持批判态度。然后，文章回顾了制裁执行十年（2010 年代）中社会学和人类学领域的制裁文献，探讨了制裁的跨国特征、制裁在数字经济中的基础物质性，以及由私人行为者来监督制裁的执行。文章还回顾了殖民地政府性方面的文献，鼓励制裁专家从更长远的角度看待制裁的跨国秩序。最后呼吁对制裁进行非殖民化研究，或者说，质疑制裁作为世界制造工具的殖民起源，以便对制裁进行适当的非殖民化研究。

Abstract

This article reviews recent literature on sanctions from international law, political science, sociology, anthropology, and history. It shows how the literature during the comprehensive sanctions decade (the 1990s), with a largely critical view on sanctions in the age of globalization, was co-opted by the targetization of sanctions in the sanctions miniaturization decade (the 2000s). It then reviews the sanctions literature in sociology and anthropology during the sanctions enforcement decade (the 2010s), addressing the transnational characteristics of sanctions, their infrastructural materiality in the digital economy, and the deputization of private actors to police their implementation. Last, the article reviews the literature in colonial governmentality to encourage sanctions specialists to take a longer-term view of transnational orders of sanctions. This section ends with a call to decolonize sanctions research—or rather, to question the colonial origins of sanctions as an instrument of world making so that a properly decolonial perspective on sanctions can be elaborated.

Dimitry V. Kochenov

摘要：关于无国籍状态的文献中出现了一种新的方法。这种方法以公民论为出发点，由斯韦德和布鲁姆首创，为研究和理解无国籍现象提供了一种全新范式。在公民权极度不平等和种族化的当代全球背景下，对权利的关注促使我们摒弃毫无根据的假定，即消除无国籍状态总是符合相关人群的利益，更不用说这与保护人权和公民权利直接相关。问题在于世界上不公平的新封建主义公民制度安排，而不是有些人不符合公民制度的等级制度，发现自己处于无国籍状态。新的学术研究揭示了公民身份和无国籍状态在当今世界的作用，它们是维护种族化等级制度的工具，也是将世界上大多数人不公平地排斥在国内外权利之外的工具。

Abstract

A new approach to statelessness has emerged in the literature on the topic. Taking citizenism as a starting point and pioneered by Swider and Bloom, this approach offers a completely fresh paradigm for studying and understanding the statelesseness phenomenon. In the contemporary global context where citizenships are deeply unequal and racialized, the focus on rights invites us to dismiss the baseless presumption that fighting statelessness is always in the interests of the populations concerned, let alone that it is directly connected to the protection of human and citizenship rights. It is the world's inequitable neo-feudal citizenism arrangement that is a problem, not the fact that some people do not fit neatly into the citizenism hierarchy and find themselves in a position of statelessness. Shedding light on the role of citizenship and statelessness in the world today as tools of preservation of racialized hierarchies and inequitable exclusion of most of the world's population from rights at home and abroad, the new scholarship questions the UN High Commissioner for Refugees's mission and actions in this domain and takes issue with the self-serving parochialism of dominant Western citizenship and statelessness literatures.

Valerie P. Hans, Shari Seidman Diamond, Sanja Kutnjak Ivković, and Nancy S. Marder

摘要：全世界几乎有三分之二的国家依靠非专业人士作为刑事案件的法律决策者，还有相当多的国家使用非专业人士解决民事纠纷。非专业人士以陪审员、非专业法官、非专业治安法官和非专业法庭成员的身份参与其中。他们的参与将社区观点和价值观纳入法律决策，从而加强了事实调查。非专业人士的参与还能提高法律和法院的透明度和合法性，促进民主。因此，近几十年来，一些国家采用了非专业人员参与的做法。然而，对能力和偏见的担忧导致其他国家限制或废除了非专业人员参与制度。本综述介绍了非专业人士作为法律决策者所扮演的不同角色以及他们所做的工作。它还描述了扩大或限制非法律专业人士参与法律决策的竞争趋势。在总结了研究证据之后，本文得出结论：同行评判具有很大的价值。

Abstract

Almost two-thirds of countries worldwide rely on laypersons as legal decision makers in criminal cases, and a substantial number use laypersons to resolve civil disputes. Laypersons participate as jurors, lay judges, lay magistrates, and members of lay courts. Their participation enhances fact-finding by incorporating community views and values into legal decision making. Lay participation can also increase the transparency and legitimacy of law and the courts and promote democracy. As a result, some countries have adopted lay participation in recent decades. Yet, concerns about competence and bias have led other countries to circumscribe or abolish their systems of lay participation. This review describes the different roles that laypersons play as legal decision makers and the work that they do. It also describes the competing trends to expand or limit lay participation in legal decision making. After summarizing the research evidence, this article concludes that there is much value in judgment by peers.

Lynn Mather, and Leslie C. Levin

摘要：尽管整个法律行业都有统一的道德准则，但律师对 “道德 ”含义的理解却存在很大差异。本文讨论了影响律师执业道德行为的因素。我们回顾了法律教育、律师协会、工作场所以及软硬监管机构在构建律师道德价值观中的作用。然后，我们探讨了执业环境在塑造律师对适当道德行为的理解方面所起的重要作用。解释律师之间差异的一些关键因素包括客户类型、事务所规模、专业和专长、监管机构以及律师参与诉讼的程度。然后，我们预测了市场压力和其他因素给律师带来的新的道德挑战，并确定了未来研究的问题。

Abstract

Although the entire legal profession shares a single ethical code, lawyers’ understanding of what it means to be “ethical” shows considerable variation. This article discusses the factors that shape lawyers’ ethical conduct in practice. We review the role of legal education, bar associations, the workplace, and hard and soft regulators in the construction of lawyers’ ethical values. We then explore the important role that practice contexts play in shaping lawyers’ understanding of appropriate ethical conduct. Some of the key explanatory factors for differences among lawyers include type of client, office size, specialty and specialization, regulators, and the extent to which lawyers engage in litigation. We then anticipate new ethical challenges for lawyers created by market pressures and other factors and identify questions for future research.

Rebecca K. Helm

摘要：在许多司法管辖区，大多数定罪都是认罪的结果。这一现实意味着，在这些司法管辖区，大多数定罪不是法官或陪审团决策的结果，而是检察官（他们通常有自由裁量权，可以提供鼓励被告认罪的激励措施）和被告（他们必须决定是否认罪）决策的结果。这些决定在心理上可能是复杂的，并受到一系列战术和规范考虑的驱动。本文概述了我们对检察官和被告如何做出认罪决定的了解，探讨了现代心理学理论如何帮助我们更好地理解这些决定，并讨论了该领域未来的研究方向。未来的研究对于更有效地评估通过认罪获得的定罪在多大程度上符合规范法律目标非常重要。

Abstract

In many jurisdictions, most convictions result from guilty pleas. This reality means that most convictions in these jurisdictions are reached not as the result of the decision-making of judges or juries but as the result of the decision-making of prosecutors (who often have discretion to offer incentives that can encourage defendants to plead guilty) and defendants (who must decide whether to plead guilty). These decisions can be psychologically complex and driven by a range of tactical and normative considerations. This article provides an overview of what we know about how prosecutors and defendants make decisions relating to guilty pleas, examines how modern psychological theory can help us understand these decisions better, and discusses directions for future research in this area. This future research will be important in more effectively evaluating the extent to which convictions obtained via guilty plea are consistent with normative legal goals.

Robert E. Scott, Stephen J. Choi, and Mitu Gulati

摘要：长期以来，格式条款一直吸引着法律学者。但人们的关注点主要集中在消费者合同上，争论的焦点是大公司强加给消费者的 “要么接受，要么放弃 ”的批量生产形式应被视为合同还是监管问题。相比之下，商业模板—公司或主权债券交易或兼并协议中使用的标准格式—历来很少受到关注。人们一直认为，成熟当事人之间的格式合同与商业实体之间的定制合同在形式上可能有所不同，但实质上并无区别。然而，越来越多的学者对这一假设提出了质疑。本文回顾了这些大型市场中合同制作的复杂性，为合同研究的令人兴奋的新领域打开了一扇窗。

Abstract

Boilerplate contracts have long fascinated legal scholars. But the focus has been largely on consumer contracts, with the debate centered on the question of whether take-it-or-leave-it mass-produced forms imposed on consumers by large corporations should be treated as contracts or as a problem in regulation. By contrast, commercial boilerplate—the standard forms used in transactions for corporate or sovereign bonds or merger agreements—has traditionally received little attention. The assumption has been that form contracts among sophisticated parties may differ in form but not in substance from bespoke contracts between business entities. Yet a growing body of scholarship is questioning that assumption. This article reviews the complexities of contract production in these large markets and provides a window into an exciting new area of contracts research.

Pamela Foohey, Robert M. Lawless, and Deborah Thorne

摘要：有大量文献利用法律和社会科学方法来更好理解破产内外的家庭财务困境和过度负债问题。这些学术研究对一些正在进行的学术讨论做出了贡献，例如关于不同种族和阶层的收入和财富差距、人们如何生活在财务不稳定的环境中、人们为什么会求助于法律系统来解决他们的问题，以及如何改善诉诸司法的途径以便人们能够获得他们需要的帮助。我们首先回顾了目前关于谁申请破产、导致人们申请破产的原因、他们在破产法庭上的遭遇以及破产案件结束后的情况的文献。然后，我们概述了容易实现的研究议程，这将有助于更广泛的社会学和社会法律研究议程，包括经济流动性、老龄化、性别研究、健康研究、家庭研究、社会心理学和政策工作。

Abstract

A rich literature uses law and social science methods to better understand household financial distress and overindebtedness both inside and outside of bankruptcy. This scholarship contributes to several ongoing scholarly conversations, such as those on income and wealth disparities across race and class, how people live in circumstances of financial precarity, why people turn to the legal system to solve their problems, and how to improve access to justice so people can get the help they need. We first review the current literature about who files bankruptcy, the contributors to people's need to file bankruptcy, what happens to them in bankruptcy court, and what happens after their bankruptcy cases conclude. We then outline a research agenda of low-hanging fruit that will contribute to broader sociological and sociolegal research agendas, including economic mobility, aging, gender studies, health studies, family studies, social psychology, and policy work.

Shobita Parthasarathy

摘要：数十年来，基因组学和生物技术一直引发着争议，涉及对生命进行修补和商品化的道德限度、自然与技术之间的界限、对研究参与者的尊重以及对新兴技术的正确评估。社会法律和科技研究学者已经证明了这些问题的解决如何对科学和法律产生严重影响，包括科学研究的适当进行和方向以及法律类别和权利的构建。本文论证了这些冲突对科技政治，尤其是对相关知识和专业知识的处理方法也有深远影响。人文、社会科学、法律和非专业知识通过人类遗传学研究的建立以及生物材料和数据所有权的争夺而得到伸张。然而，美国的政治文化—倾向于技术和市场知识—限制了他们的权威。跨国比较凸显了这一结论，因为其他司法管辖区在科技治理方面更具包容性。

Abstract

Genomics and biotechnology have generated controversy for decades, about the moral limits of tinkering with and commodifying life, the boundary between nature and technology, the respectful treatment of research participants, and the proper evaluation of emerging technologies. Socio-legal and science and technology studies scholars have demonstrated how the resolution of these questions has serious implications for both science and the law, including the appropriate conduct and direction of scientific research and the construction of legal categories and rights. This article demonstrates that these conflicts also have profound impacts on the politics of science and technology, and particularly approaches to relevant knowledge and expertise. Humanities, social scientific, legal, and lay knowledge asserted themselves through the establishment of human genetics research and battles over the ownership of biological materials and data. However, US political culture—which favors technical and market knowledge—constrained their authority. Cross-national comparison highlights this finding, as other jurisdictions have been more inclusive in their approaches to science and technology governance.

Doron Dorfman

摘要：残疾研究是一个跨学科领域，研究残疾作为一种社会和文化现象的本质。自 2000 年代中期以来，法律学者们一直在运用残疾研究的视角来探索法律理论和法律对残疾人的待遇。本文指出了一种新兴的学术运动，我称之为实证残疾法律研究：利用残疾研究视角和与社会科学相关的实证方法来研究残疾法律。法律学者们使用实证方法，包括对定量或定性数据的分析，来探讨三大主题：残疾人在正式法律体系中的经历、正式法律机构之外的日常生活中对残疾人权利的协商，以及法律文本中对残疾的建构。本文呼吁更多学者在实证残疾法律研究传统中开展工作，并提出了新的尚未探索的路径，以扩展此类对残疾法律待遇的探究。

Abstract

Disability studies is an interdisciplinary field investigating the nature of disability as a social and cultural phenomenon. Since the mid-2000s, legal scholars have been employing a disability studies lens to explore legal doctrine and the treatment of people with disabilities under the law. This article identifies a nascent scholarly movement I call empirical disability legal studies: utilizing both a disability studies lens and empirical methods associated with the social sciences to study disability law. Legal scholars have used empirical methods, involving an analysis of quantitative or qualitative data, to explore three main themes: the experiences of disabled individuals within the formal legal system, the negotiations of disability rights in everyday life outside of formal legal institutions, and the construction of disability in legal texts. This article calls for more scholars to do work in the empirical disability legal studies tradition and puts forward new unexplored paths to expand such inquiry into the legal treatment of disability.

Joanna N. Erdman, and Paola Bergallo

Abstract

Since the 1970s, a liberal politics has dominated comparative abortion law, one almost too ubiquitous to name. This article tracks departures from liberal abortion law in Europe and the Americas that have reshaped the field of comparative abortion law. Section 2 examines the repurposing of liberal abortion law for illiberal ends in a conservative moment of authoritarian governments and their anti-gender campaigns. Drawing on larger ideas of autocratic legalism, the article analyzes how governments and courts have used the features of liberal abortion law to revoke or defeat abortion rights. Section 3 examines the counter-emergence of a feminist protest politics that has abandoned liberal abortion law in a democratic remaking of society and state. Today, in abortion lawmaking through democratized institutions and in the unmaking of abortion law through direct action, feminist movements are reclaiming comparative abortion law and its politics.

Bertrall L. Ross

摘要：美国民主正处于危机之中。情感极化和民粹主义的出现造成了美国的分裂，双方都认为每次选举都是对其生活方式、价值观和民主本身的威胁。自由民主的核心特征，包括投票权、制衡制度和总统权力交接，似乎都受到了自南北战争以来从未有过的集体威胁。学者们对危机的根源和应对措施存在分歧。有些人认为，问题在于民主太多，解决办法则是减少民主。另一些学者则认为，问题在于民主太少，解决之道在于民主更多。这篇评论综合了关于美国民主危机的截然不同的观点，并提出了第三种选择，即以更好的民主作为摆脱危机的关键。

Abstract

American democracy is in crisis. The emergence of affective polarization and populism has contributed to a divided America in which both sides perceive every election as an existential threat to their ways of life, values, and democracy itself. Central features of liberal democracy, including the right to vote, the system of checks and balances, and presidential transitions of power, appear to be collectively under threat in ways they have not been since the Civil War. Scholars diverge on both the sources of and responses to the crisis. For some, the problem is too much democracy, and the solution is less. For others, the problem is too little democracy, and the solution is more. This review offers a synthesis of the contrasting accounts of American democracy in crisis and advances a third alternative of better democracy as a key to escaping the crisis.

Tasseli McKay and William A. “Sandy” Darity

摘要：大量实证文献记录了大规模监禁对美国黑人的财富、健康和安全造成的后果。然而，这些文献往往将这些后果归结为刑事法律系统与种族不相称的接触所产生的令人遗憾的产物，而不是将刑事法律系统的推动力和运作置于白人政治和经济统治的大背景下。通过分层经济学的视角重新审视四分之一世纪以来的大规模监禁研究，我们强调了大规模监禁如何影响黑人与白人在教育、就业和财政资源方面的竞争，以及如何导致黑人与白人在福利方面的差异。我们强调了持续存在的研究空白，并提出了一项研究议程，以更好地理解大规模监禁是如何促成系统性白人优势的。为了解决大规模监禁的后果并改变产生大规模监禁的白人政治和经济统治条件，我们呼吁进行立法和司法干预，以纠正白人的超选举权，并进行赔偿以消除黑人与白人之间的贫富差距。

Abstract

A rich empirical literature documents the consequences of mass incarceration for the wealth, health, and safety of Black Americans. Yet it often frames such consequences as a regrettable artifact of racially disproportionate criminal legal system contact, rather than situating the impetus and functioning of the criminal legal system in the wider context of White political and economic domination. Revisiting a quarter century of mass incarceration research through a stratification economics lens, we highlight how mass incarceration shapes Black–White competition for education, employment, and financial resources and contributes to Black–White disparities in well-being. Highlighting persistent research gaps, we propose a research agenda to better understand how mass incarceration contributes to systematic White advantage. To address mass incarceration's consequences and transform the conditions of White political and economic domination under which it arose, we call for legislative and judicial intervention to remedy White hyper-enfranchisement and reparations to eliminate the Black–White wealth gap.

Ashley T. Rubin, Paige E. Vaughn, and Danielle S. Rudes

摘要：自 20 世纪 70 年代末和 80 年代初兴起以来，新制度理论一直是理解法律、法律机构和政策的流行框架。新制度理论尤其有助于解释各种刑事司法现象，从刑法和政策声明的变化，到警察部门、法院、囚禁设施和社区矫正的实地实践。本综述介绍了研究刑事法律体系的学者如何运用新制度理论，以及在哪些方面还有进一步运用的空间。此外，它还讨论了新制度理论如何以及为何对社会法律学者特别有用，而不仅仅是那些研究刑事法律组织和政策的学者。

Abstract

Since emerging in the late 1970s and early 1980s, neo-institutional theory has been a popular framework for understanding law, legal institutions, and policies on the books and in action. Neo-institutional theory has been particularly useful for explaining diverse criminal justice phenomena, from changes in penal law and policy statements to on-the-ground practices across police departments, courts, carceral facilities, and community corrections. This review describes how scholars of the criminal legal system have used neo-institutional theory and where there is room for further utilization. Additionally, it discusses how and why neo-institutional theory is particularly useful for sociolegal scholars, and not only those studying criminal legal organizations and policies.

Paul Kaplan

摘要：本综述侧重于有关美国当代死刑面临的挑战的实证研究。挑战是指阻碍死刑的因素，包括法律或政治限制；联邦或州一级的取消；或在指控、判决、上诉、宽大处理或执行等运作阶段对死刑程序的阻碍。根据最著名的衡量标准，自本世纪初以来，美国的死刑一直在减少。致命注射错误—“失败”—可以说是当前死刑制度面临的最重要挑战。错误的死刑判决使得普通公众对死刑的容忍度降低。减刑仍然是死刑面临的一个重要挑战。本评论强调误判、无罪和减刑，但也涉及不同影响、未能带来社会效益和成本等问题。同时，本综述提出了一个框架，用于考虑在两个连续影响轴（微观/宏观/宏观轴和狭义/广义轴）上出现的挑战。

Abstract

This review focuses on empirical research about contemporary challenges to the death penalty in the United States. Challenges are factors that obstruct capital punishment, including legal or political restrictions; elimination at the federal or state level; or the hindrance of the process at its operational stages of charging, adjudicating, appeals, clemency, or executions. By the best-known measures, the death penalty has been in decline in the United States since the turn of the century. Lethal injection errors—“botches”—are arguably the most important current challenge to the institution. Wrongful capital conviction has made capital punishment less tolerable to the general public. Mitigation remains an important challenge to the death penalty. This review emphasizes botches, innocence, and mitigation but also touches on disparate impact, failure-to-deliver a social benefit, and cost. Along the way, this review proposes a framework for considering challenges as they occur on two continua of impact, a micro/meso/macro axis and a narrow/wide axis.

Jonathan Lusthaus

摘要：网络犯罪不是单纯的技术课题，而是涉及人类罪犯的课题，而人类罪犯是社会科学研究的对象。然而，尽管人们呼吁将网络犯罪研究纳入主流，但在法律研究和社会科学领域，这一课题仍然是小众领域。本综述借鉴了近年来最重要的研究成果，旨在通过淡化网络犯罪与传统犯罪概念之间的一些界限，使广大学者更容易理解这一主题。它研究了文献中的这些关键主题：网络犯罪的定义和类别、网络犯罪市场、网络犯罪治理、网络犯罪世界中 “场所 ”的重要性、网络犯罪网络、关于网络犯罪新旧问题的讨论以及我们今后应如何定义这一概念。有关这些主题的实证文献表明，一个简单的定义是最合适的：网络犯罪是大量使用数字技术的犯罪。

Abstract

Cybercrime is not a solely technical subject but one that involves human offenders who are susceptible to social scientific study. Yet, despite calls for cybercrime research to be mainstreamed, the topic remains a niche area within legal studies and the social sciences. Drawing on the most significant findings over recent years, this review aims to make the subject more accessible to a wide range of scholars by softening some of the perceived boundaries between conceptions of cybercrime and conventional crime. It examines these key themes in the literature: definitions and categories of cybercrime, cybercrime marketplaces, the governance of cybercrime, the importance of “place” within the world of cybercrime, cybercriminal networks, a discussion of what is new or old about cybercrime, and how we should define the concept going forward. The empirical literature on these themes suggests a simple definition is most appropriate: Cybercrime is crime that uses digital technology in a significant way.

Eve M. Brank, 

Jennifer L. Groscup, and Kayla R. Sircy

摘要：

第四修正案和解释该修正案的法庭案例为执法部门在刑事调查中如何合法地搜查和取证提供了指导。虽然第四修正案最初适用于执法人员的实际侵入，但现在以及未来可能发生的侵入更多是虚拟性质的。执法人员不再需要走进某人的财产来搜查犯罪活动，因为现在各种技术都能提供类似或更深入的信息。技术创新拓展了第四修正案的界限。尽管公众舆论无法回答政策影响，但它可以说明公众对警方的合理期望。一般来说，有限的研究表明，公众对执法人员在调查中使用技术的方式有所担忧，但这些担忧并不足以减少个人对技术的使用。

Abstract

The Fourth Amendment and court cases interpreting it provide guidelines for how law enforcement should legally approach searching for and taking evidence in criminal investigations. Though it originally applied to physical intrusion by law enforcement, current—and likely future—intrusions are more virtual in nature. Law enforcement officers no longer need to walk onto someone's property to search for criminal activity because various technologies now provide similar or more in-depth information. Technological innovations have stretched the bounds of the Fourth Amendment. Although public opinion cannot answer the policy implications, it can speak to what the public reasonably expects of the police. In general, limited research demonstrates that the public has concerns about the way law enforcement officers can use technology in their investigations, but those concerns are not strong enough to decrease individuals’ technology use.