Book contents
- Legal Design
- Legal Design
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures and Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- IWhy Legal Design
- 1Dignifying Law in Design
- 2Dignifying Design in Law
- 3Dignifying Imagination in Legal Education
- IIWhat Legal Design Can Do
- IIIHow Legal Design Works
- IVWhere Legal Design Goes
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
2 - Dignifying Design in Law
from I - Why Legal Design
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 December 2024
Book contents
- Legal Design
- Legal Design
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures and Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- IWhy Legal Design
- 1Dignifying Law in Design
- 2Dignifying Design in Law
- 3Dignifying Imagination in Legal Education
- IIWhat Legal Design Can Do
- IIIHow Legal Design Works
- IVWhere Legal Design Goes
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter posits that the emerging methods, perspectives, and goals of legal design fit squarely within the history of law. It offers a quick sketch of the history of the development of the rule of law over the last 4,000 years, which sets the stage for an examination of that history as a design history – humanity’s collective work over four millennia of ideating, prototyping, testing, and refining the systems of rules we use to live collectively. It then makes a few points about the benefits of design as design – its relative speed, flexibility, and responsiveness to making things that are useful to people. It will then introduce the concept of “longtermerism,” which refers to a concept or ideology that emphasizes the importance of long-term thinking and decision-making in various aspects of life. The chapter wraps things up with a note of urgency and optimism based on the argument that no human should be denied the benefit of the rule of law.
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Legal DesignDignifying People in Legal Systems, pp. 32 - 43Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2024
References
Baker, J. H. 2002. An Introduction to English Legal History. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bassiouni, M. Cherif. 1992. Crimes against Humanity in International Criminal Law. The Hague: Springer Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhatnagar, Sankalp. 2022. “What Legal Design Is as Opposed to Could/Should Be.” Proceedings of DRS Biennial Conference Series, Design Research Society, Bilbao, Spain, June 25 – July 3, 2022. London: Design Research Society.Google Scholar
Buchanan, Richard. 1992. “Wicked Problems in Design Thinking.” Design Issues 8, no. 2 (Spring): 5–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burleigh, Michael, and Wippermann, Wolfgang. 1991. The Racial State: Germany 1933-1945. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Capolongo, S., Gola, M., Brambilla, A., Morganti, A., Mosca, E., & Barach, P. 2020. COVID-19 and Healthcare Facilities: A Decalogue of Design Strategies for Resilient Hospitals. Acta Biomed., 91(9-S), 50–60.Google ScholarPubMed
Center for AI Safety. n.d. “Statement on AI Risk.” Accessed June 11, 2023. www.safe.ai/statement-on-ai-risk.Google Scholar
Dicey, A. V. 1885. Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dingledy, F. 2016. The Corpus Juris Civilis: A Guide to Its History and Use. Legal Reference Services Quarterly, 35, no. 4: 231–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Driver, Julia. 2022. The History of Utilitarianism. In Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman (eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/utilitarianism-history/.sophy.Google Scholar
European Union. “The European Union Consists of 27 Member Countries.” Accessed June 11, 2023. https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/countries_en.Google Scholar
Finnegan, Ruth. 1970. A Note on Oral Tradition and Historical Evidence. History and Theory 9, no. 2: 195–201. doi.org/10.2307/2504126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gertner, Jon. 2013. The Idea Factory: Bell Labs and the Great Age of American Innovation. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Gowder, Paul. 2016. The Rule of Law in the Real World. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagan, Margaret. n.d. “Law by Design.” Accessed August 5, 2023. https://lawbydesign.co.Google Scholar
Hamilton, Alexander, Madison, James, and Jay, John. 1787–88. The Federalist Papers. New York: McLean.Google Scholar
Harari, Yuval N. 2015. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. First U.S. edition. New York: Harper, an imprint of HarperCollinsPublishers.Google Scholar
Hassenzahl, Marc, and Tractinsky, Noam. 2006. “User Experience – A Research Agenda.” Behaviour & Information Technology 25, no. 2 (March): 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290500330331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaneda, Toshiko, and Haub, Carl. 2011. “How Many People Have Ever Lived on Earth?” Population Reference Bureau, November 15, 2022. www.prb.org/howmanypeoplehaveeverlivedonearth/.Google Scholar
Kramer, Samuel Noah. 1953. “The Oldest Laws.” Scientific American 188, no. 1 (January): 26–29. JSTOR.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, S. N. 1954. Ur-Nammu Law Code. Orientalia 23, no. 1: 40–51. www.jstor.org/stable/43073169.Google Scholar
Lawson, Bryan. 2006. How Designers Think: The Design Process Demystified. Oxford: Architectural Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legal Services Corporation. 2017. “The Justice Gap: Measuring the Unmet Civil Legal Needs of Low-income Americans.” Legal Services Corporation. Accessed June 1, 2023. www.lsc.gov/sites/default/files/images/TheJusticeGap-FullReport.pdf.Google Scholar
Lincoln, Abraham. 1863. “Emancipation Proclamation.” Washington, DC, January 1. In The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. Accessed August 5, 2023. www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured-documents/emancipation-proclamation.Google Scholar
Lippe, P., Martin Katz, D., and Jackson, D.. 2015. “Legal by Design: A New Paradigm for Handling Complexity in Banking Regulation and Elsewhere in Law.” Oregon Law Review 93, no. 4 (December): 833–43.Google Scholar
MacAskill, William. 2022. “The Case for Longtermism.” The New York Times, August 5, 2022. www.nytimes.com/2022/08/05/opinion/the-case-for-longtermism.html.Google Scholar
MacCormack, Geoffrey. 2001. Traditional Chinese Penal Law. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
MacCormick, N. 2008. Law, Justice, and Power: Between Reason and Will. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Martínez, E., and Winter, C.. 2023. Experimental Longtermist Jurisprudence. In Prochownik, K. and Magen, S. (Eds.), Advances in Experimental Philosophy of Law. Part III(10). Bloomsbury Academic. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3933618.Google Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle. 1988. “Legal Pluralism.” Law & Society Review 22, no. 5: 869–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053638.Google Scholar
Norman, D., and Stappers, P.. 2015. DesignX: Complex Sociotechnical Systems. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 1, no. 2: 83–106.Google Scholar
Ober, Josiah. 1989. Mass and Elite in Democratic Athens: Rhetoric, Ideology, and the Power of the People. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasquale, Frank. 2020. New Laws of Robotics: Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pranis, Kay, Wedge, Mark, and Stuart, Barry. 2003. Peacemaking Circles: From Conflict to Community. St. Paul, MN: Living Justice Press.Google Scholar
Unger, Roberto Mangabeira. 1976. Law in Modern Society: Toward a Criticism of Social Theory. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
United States of America Internal Revenue Service. 1986. “Internal Revenue Code of 1986.” January 18, 2023. www.irs.gov/privacy-disclosure/tax-code-regulations-and-official-guidance.Google Scholar
van Blerk, N. 2018. The Emergence of Law in Ancient Egypt: The Role of Maat. Fundamina, 24, no. 1: 69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van De Mieroop, M. 2007. A History of the Ancient Near East ca. 3000 – 323 BC (2nd ed.). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
World Justice Project. 2019. “Measuring the Justice Gap: A People-Centered Assessment of Unmet Justice Needs Around the World.” https://worldjusticeproject.org/our-work/research-and-data/access-justice/measuring-justice-gap.Google Scholar
Zalasiewicz, Jan, Waters, Colin N., Williams, Mark, and Summerhayes, Colin P., eds. 2019. The Anthropocene as a Geological Time Unit: A Guide to the Scientific Evidence and Current Debate. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.