Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Review: The Domain of Reflexive Law

Reviewed Work: Regulating Intimacy: A New Legal Paradigm by Jean L. Cohen
Review by: Michael C. Dorf
Columbia Law Review
Vol. 103, No. 2 (Mar., 2003), pp. 384-402
DOI: 10.2307/1123697
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1123697
Page Count: 19
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
The Domain of Reflexive Law
Preview not available

Abstract

In "Regulating Intimacy: A New Legal Paradigm," Jean Cohen synthesizes liberal and egalitarian justifications for a right to sexual privacy. Cohen proposes that regulation of sexual privacy, where permissible, be accomplished through "reflexive law." This Review Essay expresses broad sympathy for Cohen's project, while suggesting an expansion. In Cohen's reflexive paradigm, the sovereign in its lawmaking capacity sets general standards that steer primary actors but simultaneously leave them with a substantial zone of freedom in which to engage in self-regulation. Although it permits substantial autonomy, Cohen's conception of reflexive law is essentially top-down. This Review Essay offers an amended account of reflexive law in which data drawn from experience at the relatively local level are continually refined and transmitted to the relatively central standard-setter, which uses the data continually to update the standards all must meet. This amended account is accordingly both top-down and bottom-up, and for that reason it may be particularly well-suited to contexts--such as regulation of issues touching on sexual privacy--where the simple announcement of a controversial legal norm would meet with substantial opposition.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
384
    384
  • Thumbnail: Page 
385
    385
  • Thumbnail: Page 
386
    386
  • Thumbnail: Page 
387
    387
  • Thumbnail: Page 
388
    388
  • Thumbnail: Page 
389
    389
  • Thumbnail: Page 
390
    390
  • Thumbnail: Page 
391
    391
  • Thumbnail: Page 
392
    392
  • Thumbnail: Page 
393
    393
  • Thumbnail: Page 
394
    394
  • Thumbnail: Page 
395
    395
  • Thumbnail: Page 
396
    396
  • Thumbnail: Page 
397
    397
  • Thumbnail: Page 
398
    398
  • Thumbnail: Page 
399
    399
  • Thumbnail: Page 
400
    400
  • Thumbnail: Page 
401
    401
  • Thumbnail: Page 
402
    402