Critical analysis of excess interpretations in law highlights regulatory implications for legal knowledge.
The aim of this article—part of this special issue devoted to Gerald J. Postema’s Law’s Rule —is to critically examine certain conceptions of excess in law by offering a conceptual and normative analysis of this notion, taking as a starting point Postema’s critique of the unnecessary “ubiquity of law” in regulating social life. The analysis begins by examining categories in the legal literature associated with this notion, including hyperlexis , and subsequently clarifies the evaluative structure of excess in law by examining its constitutive elements and their implications for legal knowledge.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yuneisy Boada Pérez (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: