Category: Law Rev Forum

0

The Harvard Law Review Online Forum: Responding to Jody Freeman and Jim Rossi, Agency Coordination in Shared Regulatory Space, 125 Harv. L. Rev. 1131 (2012)

Harvard Law Review

Online Forum

The More the Merrier: Multiple Agencies and the Future of Administrative Law Scholarship

Eric Biber :: Multiple agencies are all the rage in administrative law. As Professors Jody Freeman and Jim Rossi note, the traditional focus in administrative law has been on investigating how individual agencies function, and how interactions with the White House, Congress, and the courts shape (for better or for worse) their decisionmaking. In contrast, the newer scholarship looks at how multiple agencies interact. Some of that scholarship focuses on particular areas of law, calling on policymakers to consider using a combination of multiple agencies, rather than one single agency, to solve particular policy problems. Other scholarship is more cross-cutting, trying to identify larger patterns that run across substantive areas, describing how the existence of multiple agencies and their interactions might shape agency decisionmaking and what we might (or might not) want to do about it. Freeman and Rossi’s piece, though it draws on a particular case study, has a broader ambition and makes an important and useful contribution to this second category. READ MORE

 

0

Harvard Law Review Online Forum

 

Harvard Law Review

Online Forum

Reaction: Salvaging Perry

Andrew Koppelman :: The Ninth Circuit, in Perry v. Brown, deftly avoided forcing the Supreme Court’s hand on the big claim that the Constitution requires recognition of same-sex marriage — a claim likely to be rejected now, though perhaps not a few years from now. Instead, it held that California’s Proposition 8, which stripped same-sex couples of their right to have their unions called “marriages,” was unconstitutional because it reflected a bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group.  READ MORE

Reaction: Splitting the Difference: Reflections on Perry v. Brown

Jane S. Schacter :: The latest chapter in California’s long running debate over marriage equality began when the voters passed Proposition 8 in 2008. Several months earlier, the California Supreme Court had interpreted the state constitution to protect the right of same-sex couples to marry, and Prop 8 amended the constitution to eliminate that right.  READ MORE

Reaction: A Marriage is a Marriage is a Marriage: The Limits of Perry v. Brown

Robin West :: The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Perry v. Brown, authored by Judge Reinhardt, has been widely lauded in the last few weeks by marriage equality proponents for its creative minimalism. In keeping with commentators’ expectations, the court found a way to determine that California’s Proposition 8 violated the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, namely that the provision took away an entitlement that had previously been enjoyed by same-sex couples — the right to the appellation of one’s partnership as a “marriage” — for no rational reason.  READ MORE

 

 

0

Harvard Law Review

Online Forum

Reaction: A Marriage is a Marriage is a Marriage: The Limits of Perry v. Brown

Robin West :: The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Perry v. Brown, authored by Judge Reinhardt, has been widely lauded in the last few weeks by marriage equality proponents for its creative minimalism. In keeping with commentators’ expectations, the court found a way to determine that California’s Proposition 8 violated the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, namely that the provision took away an entitlement that had previously been enjoyed by same-sex couples — the right to the appellation of one’s partnership as a “marriage” — for no rational reason. The People of California’s categorization and differential treatment of same-sex couples as compared with opposite-sex couples, the court held, failed the test of minimal rationality required for upholding state action. The two types of couples were simply too indistinguishable to carry the weight of the difference between them that the People of California had tried to codify. Thus, the court struck down the state constitutional amendment.  READ MORE

 

 

0

The Harvard Law Review Online Forum: Responding to Rebecca Tushnet, Worth a Thousand Words: The Images of Copyright, 125 Harv. L. Rev. 683 (2012)

Harvard Law Review

Online Forum

More Than a Thousand Words in Response to Rebecca Tushnet

Christina Spiesel :: In this response to Professor Rebecca Tushnet, Professor Christina Spiesel argues that the contrast Tushnet uses to differentiate pictures and words poses problems in view of the challenges posed by the Internet. Online, all expression is representation made of the same material and everything is first a picture or a sound behind a picture, so the different status of words and pictures requires further sorting. Professor Spiesel complicates the conversation Professor Tushnet began by showing that copyright law is now at the center of very large debates about the Internet and our public lives.  READ MORE

 

 

0

The Harvard Law Review Online Forum: Responding to Jamal Greene, The Anticanon, 125 Harv. L. Rev. 379 (2011)

Harvard Law Review

Online Forum

Hollow Hopes and Exaggerated Fears: The Canon/Anticanon in Context

Mark A. Graber :: The conventional constitutional canon and constitutional anticanon promote courts as powerful institutions. But neither the canonical nor the anticanonical constitutional decisions by the Supreme Court have produced the wonderful results or horrible evils sometimes attributed to them. In many cases, elected officials made cotemporaneous constitutional decisions that had as much influence as the celebrated or condemned judicial rulings. More often than not, judicial rulings matter by changing the political dynamics than by directly changing public policy. READ MORE

 

0

The Harvard Law Review Online Forum: Responding to Dan M. Kahan, Neutral Principles, Motivated Cognition, and Some Problems for Constitutional Law, 125 Harv. L. Rev. 1 (2011)

 

Harvard Law Review

Online Forum

 

Democracy’s Distrust: Contested Values and the Decline of Expertise

Suzanna Sherry :: In this response to Professor Dan Kahan’s Foreword, Neutral Principles, Motivated Cognition, and Some Problems for Constitutional Law, Professor Suzanna Sherry argues that while Kahan accurately describes the contemporary “neutrality crisis” and the consequent popular mistrust of the Supreme Court, he has mistaken its cause and thus proposes the wrong solution. READ MORE

“I Couldn’t See It Until I Believed It”: Some Notes on Motivated Reasoning in Constitutional Adjudication

Mark Tushnet :: In this response to Neutral Principles, Motivated Cognition, and Some Problems for Constitutional Law, Professor Mark Tushnet raises two potential problems with Professor Dan Kahan’s argument that the Supreme Court can restore public faith in its neutrality by avoiding “motivated reasoning” and instead writing opinions that affirm the values of citizens with strikingly different cultural orientations. READ MORE

 

1

University of Toronto Law Journal – Volume 61, Number 2 /2011

University of Toronto Law Journal –  Volume 61, Number 2 /2011


Special Issue: Understanding Law on its Own Terms: Essays on the Occasion of Ernest Weinrib’s Killam Prize

In 2009, the internationally leading scholar of private law and Canada’s pre-eminent legal theorist, Ernest Weinrib, was awarded the Killam Prize in the social sciences, the country’s highest honor for scholarly career achievement.  On the occasion of the prize, Weinrib presented a public lecture on Private Law and Public Right, developing a new set of ideas.  In this special issue, Weinrib’s lecture is published together with pieces by former students of his who have made important contributions to private law theory.

Editor’s Note
Arthur Ripstein

Ernie’s Three Worlds
Bruce Chapman

Private Law And Public Right
Ernest J Weinrib

Formalism In Music And Law
Allan Beever

The Idea Of Consideration
Peter Benson

Private Law And Kantian Right
Alan Brudner

Legal Positivism As An Idea About Morality
Martin Stone

0

University of Toronto Law Journal – Volume 61, Number 1 /2011

University of Toronto Law Journal – Volume 61, Number 1, 2011

Empire And International Law: The Real Spanish Contribution
Martti Koskenniemi

Distinctions Of Power And The Power Of Distinctions: A Response To Professor Koskenniemi
Arthur Ripstein

FOCUS: THE AIR INDIA REPORT AND THE REGULATION OF CHARITIES AND TERRORISM FINANCING

In June 2010, the Air India Commission released its long-awaited report on the investigation of the 1985 bombing and efforts taken in Canada since that time to prevent similar terrorist attacks.  In this focus feature, experts address major issues of terrorism financing and the regulation of charities in light of the Commission’s report and other recent developments.

The Air India Report And The Regulation Of Charities And Terrorism Financing
Kent Roach

Combating Terrorist Financing: Is Canada’s Legal Regime Effective?
Anita I. Anand

Charities And Terrorist Financing
David G. Duff

Choices And Approaches: Anti-Terrorism Law And Civil Society In The United States And The United Kingdom After September 11
Mark Sidel

REVIEW ARTICLES

A Hegelian Criminal Law
Stephen P. Garvey

Ending Impunity: Critical Reflections On The Prosecution Of Heads Of State
Renu Mandhane

Book Review

The Transformation of the Supreme Court of Canada: An Empirical Examination( DONALD R SONGER )
Benjamin Alarie

0

Iowa Law Review, Volume 96, Issue 2 (January 2011)

Iowa Law Review

Articles

The Coercion of Trafficked Workers
Kathleen Kim

IP Misuse as Foreclosure
Christina Bohannan

Consent to Retaliation: A Civil Recourse Theory of Contractual Liability
Nathan B. Oman

Automation and the Fourth Amendment
Matthew Tokson

Essay

No Middle Ground? Reflections on the Citizens United Decision
Randall P. Bezanson

Notes

(Potentially) Resolving the Ever-Present Debate over Whether Noncitizens in Removal Proceedings Have a Due-Process Right to Effective Assistance of Counsel
Walter S. Gindin

Princo, Patent Pools, and the Risk of Foreclosure: A Framework for Assessing Misuse
Phillip W. Goter

Holden Caulfield Grows Up: Salinger v. Colting, the Promotion-of-Progress Requirement, and Market Failure in a Derivative-Works Regime
John M. Newman

Is Senator Grassley Our Savior?: The Crusade Against “Charitable” Hospitals Attacking Patients for Unpaid Bills
Amanda W. Thai

0

Iowa Law Review, Volume 96, Issue 1 (November 2010)

Iowa Law Review

Articles

Real Copyright Reform
Jessica Litman

Policy Reversal on Reverse Payments: Why Courts Should Not Follow the New DOJ Position on Reverse-Payment Settlements of Pharmaceutical Patent Litigation
Henry N. Butler & Jeffrey Paul Jarosch

The Uneasy Case for the Inside Director
Lisa M. Fairfax

Judging Myopia in Hindsight: Bivens Actions, National Security Decisions, and the Rule of Law
Peter Margulies

Tort Liability and the Original Meaning of the Freedom of Speech, Press, and Petition
Eugene Volokh

Essay

Automobile Bankruptcies, Retiree Benefits, and the Futility of Springing Priorities in Chapter 11 Reorganizations
Daniel Keating

Notes

Out-of-State Civil Unions in Iowa After Varnum v. Brien: Why the State of Iowa Should Recognize Civil Unions as Marriages
Drew A. Cumings-Peterson

Al-Kidd v. Ashcroft: Clearly Established Confusion
James E. Mosimann

Sexting: How the State Can Prevent a Moment of Indiscretion from Leading to a Lifetime of Unintended Consequences for Minors and Young Adults
Elizabeth M. Ryan

The FLSA Antiretaliation Provision: Defining the Outer Contours of What Constitutes an Employee Complaint
Erin M. Snider