Timing Rules and Legal Institutions

Article by Jacob E. Gersen and Eric A. Posner

Constitutional and legislative restrictions on the timing of legislation and regulation are ubiquitous, but these “timing rules” have received little attention in the legal literature. Yet the timing of a law can be just as important as its content. The timing of a law determines whether its benefits are created sooner or later. This determines how the costs and benefits are spread across time, and hence how they are distributed to the advantage or disadvantage of different private groups, citizens, and governmental officials. We argue that timing rules are, and should be, used to reduce agency problems within the legislature and between the legislature and the public, and to mitigate deliberative pathologies.

121 Harv. L. Rev. 543 (2007) | DOWNLOAD PDF | LEXIS NEXIS | WESTLAW

RESPONSE TO THIS ARTICLE

Optimal Timing of Legal Intervention: The Role of Timing Rules
By Barbara Luppi & Francesco Parisi



MORE FROM THIS ISSUE

IN MEMORIAM: In Memoriam: Clark Byse

ARTICLE: Equal Opportunity and Inheritance Taxation

NOTE: The Case for Compulsory Voting in the United States

NOTE: Oversight and Insight: Legislative Review of Agencies and Lessons from the States

RECENT CASE: North Carolina Supreme Court Finds No Jurisdiction over New York Trust. — Skinner v. Preferred Credit, 638 S.E.2d 203 (N.C. 2006), reh'g denied, 643 S.E.2d 591 (N.C. 2007).

RECENT CASE: New Jersey Supreme Court Holds that Restrictions in Common Interest Community Do Not Violate the State's Constitution. — Committee for a Better Twin Rivers v. Twin Rivers Homeowners' Ass'n, 929 A.2d 1060 (N.J. 2007).

RECENT CASE: Ninth Circuit Removes Bar on Admission of a Defendent's Reading Material To Show Intent To Solicit a Minor. — United States v. Curtin, 489 F.3d 935 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc).

RECENT CASE: Tenth Circuit Invalidates Oklahoma Statute Barring Recognition of Out-of-State Adoptions by Same-Sex Couples. — Finstuen v. Crutcher, 496 F.3d 1139 (10th Cir. 2007).

RECENT CASE: Ninth Circuit Holds that 18 U.S.C. § 924(C)(1)(A) Defines a Single Firearm Offense. — United States v. Arreola, 446 F.3d 926 (9th Cir.), superseded on denial of reh'g and reh'g en banc, 467 F.3d 1153 (9th Cir. 2006), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 3002 (2007).

RECENT CASE: Texas Supreme Court Holds that Trial Court Lacks Subject Matter Jurisdiction over Professional Negligence Claim Against Professional Counselor/Church Pastor. — Westbrook v. Penley, 231 S. W.3d 389 (Tex. 2007).

RECENT PUBLICATIONS: Recent Publications


Harvard Law Review
Gannett House
1511 Massachusetts Ave
Cambridge, MA 02138

Editorial Office:
617-495-7889
617-496-5053 (fax)

Business Office:
617-495-4650
617-495-2748 (fax)