# Judiciary `kaal:entity:judiciary` **Status.** derived This node is assembled mechanically from the 2 claims that carry the concept tag `judiciary`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself. ## Every claim under this term 2 claims across 1 works, 2016 to 2016. **2016** - [2831040-015](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2831040-015) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- The three core law and technology proposals for the pacing problem, regulation via the judiciary, early stage regulation of innovation, and principles based regulation, all have practical limitations and none of them uses dynamic regulatory elements. > None of these proposals uses dynamic regulatory elements. By contrast, dynamic regulation emphasizes dynamic elements in regulating innovation. Wulf A. Kaal, Dynamic Regulation for Innovation (2016). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2831040 - [2831040-016](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2831040-016) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Addressing the regulatory issues created by innovation outpacing law through the judiciary is insufficient in the face of exponential innovation, because increasing evidence shows courts cannot sufficiently counterbalance the shortcomings of the legislative system. > Addressing the regulatory issues associated with innovation outpacing law via the judiciary is insufficient in the face of exponential innovation. Wulf A. Kaal, Dynamic Regulation for Innovation (2016). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2831040 ## Verify Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust. curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/judiciary.md | sha256sum **Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.