It is always difficult, of course, to try to group a diverse collection of scholars together and suggest that they might subscribe to a single "school" of thought. Indeed, the practice of founding schools of legal analysis seems to have gone somewhat out of fashion. There is law and economics, of course (and in particular, the "Chicago School"), critical legal studies, law and feminism, critical race theory, legal history, law and society, as well as the original New Haven School of International Law (described by its founders as the school of law, science, and policy), but most of these are at least a generation old by now, and they are perhaps better thought of as broad movements or clusters of scholars working on a set of topics with a shared interest in certain methodologies, than as schools of thought. Moreover, we might question the need for any new school of international legal thought, given that the original New Haven School, the Transnational Legal Process School, and a variety of other schools are still alive and kicking. Finally, we might wonder what difference it makes whether or not we can identify and classify a "new" New Haven School, or a school by any other name, given that all of the scholars involved are likely to continue to do the work they have been doing, regardless of the label.
Laura A. Dickinson,
Toward a "New" New Haven School of International Law?,
Yale J. Int'l L.
Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjil/vol32/iss2/11