nucleation

LIT-1600: The Supreme Court, 1978 Term

1 min read

Properties4
StatusActive — read 2026-10-29 (NOTE-1364) in full, from Yale Law School's repository (openYLS, fss_papers/1220); worth reading as the defence of structural reform as adjudication: courts exist to give meaning to public values, not to resolve disputes, so a judge may restructure a state bureaucracy through a continuing, revisable injunction, in which victim, spokesman and beneficiary come apart and the wrongdoer disappears. Read it knowing that its hard problem is the remedy — rights and remedies jointly fix a value's meaning, and a judge dependent on others for success 'will tailor the right to fit the remedy' — and that Fiss leaves this as a dilemma to live with; the formula 'Reversal ≠ Repair ≠ Structural reform' is the exchange's, not his.
Version2
Tagssociety-and-governance
Cited as “paper” byNOTE-1364 — Fiss — The forms of justice

Graph View

Fiss, O. M. (1979). The Supreme Court, 1978 Term — Foreword: The Forms of Justice. Harvard Law Review, 93(1), 1. doi:10.2307/1340507.

Read in full on 2026-10-29 (NOTE-1364), from Yale Law School’s repository.

Why this is here

A8 used it to separate legal restitution from organizational reconstruction (“Reversal ≠ Repair ≠ Structural reform”), the distinction CASE-176 and CASE-172 draw, and as a challenge to restoration as return to an earlier state: sometimes the earlier arrangement is what violated the right.

Backlinks