Article by Friedrich K. Juenger
American conflict of laws scholarship has a venerable comparative law tradition dating from the nineteenth-century works of Samuel Livermore and Justice Story. A twentieth-century “conflicts revolution,” however, has turned away from that tradition and, in the process, ignored the lessons comparison can teach. Reinventing a forum-centered unilateralist approach, the “revolutionaries” seemed unaware of the fact that their methodology, as well as the problems it poses, have long been known. This Article urges a return to the comparative approach that used to characterize American conflicts scholarship. That approach seems especially appropriate at a time when globalization increasingly brings foreign law problems to our shores and gives rise to novel phenomena such as the new law merchant. The perspective comparison affords can reveal the shortcomings of traditional methodologies, increase the prospects of law reform, and enhance the level of multistate justice.
About the Author
Friedrich K. Juenger. Edward L. Barrett, Jr., Professor of Law, University of California at Davis.
Citation
73 Tul. L. Rev. 1309 (1999)