Piotr Bystranowski (Jagiellonian University), Ivar Hannikainen (University of Granada), and Raff Donelson (Chicago-Kent College of Law) have posted Quiet in the Face of Wrong? An Empirical Look at Legal Positivism and the Quietist Hypothesis on SSRN. Here is the abstract: Most debates surrounding legal positivism and its associated separability thesis concern the truth of these claims. As such, the central question has been whether there are good epistemic grounds for believing legal positivism.

When algorithms make legal decisions, people perceive the process as less fair than when humans do — a phenomenon known as the judicial human-AI fairness gap. W

Should linguistics inform textualism? When legal theories make claims about another discipline’s subject, that discipline is often illuminating: History impacts

Experimental jurisprudence (or “X-Jur”) addresses questions of jurisprudence or legal philosophy by complementing traditional philosophical analysis with empirical methods. Often those methods…

<p><span>Recent breakthroughs in statistical language modeling have impacted countless domains, including the law. Chatbot applications such as ChatGPT, Claude,