English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Owen Fiss is viewed by most constitutional theorists as a stern critic of Cricial Legal Studies, whom he has accused of contributing to "the death of law" as an inspiring ideal. A rereading of "Groups and the Equal Protection Clause" reveals, however, that there was nothing inevitable in this development, for a number of Fiss's arguments seem quite similar to arguments often identified with "crits," including, most importantly, the relatively limited relevance of purely "legal" notions and the consequent tight connection between "legal" analysis and political philosophy, including ideal conceptions of the political order. I conclude by offering some extremely brief speculations as to what might account for Fiss's later opposition to CLS instead of his becoming, say, one of its "moderate" adherents.

"Law", "Philosophy," or "Politics"? Identifying the Status of the Arguments in Owen Fiss's "Groups and the Equal Protection Clause"