<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Concurring Opinions &#187; Harvard Law Review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/author/Harvard-Law-Review/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com</link>
	<description>The Law, the Universe, and Everything</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:52:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.3</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 122:6 (April 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/04/harvard_law_rev_11.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/04/harvard_law_rev_11.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 22:43:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2009/04/harvard-law-review-1226-april-2009.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;">Vol. 122 · April 2009 · No. 6</p>




 ARTICLES


FORESEEABILITY AND</p>
<p>COPYRIGHT INCENTIVES

 </p>
<p>Shyamkrishna Balganesh


 </p>
<p>ANTI-INQUISITORIALISM
 David Alan Sklansky








NOTES


Retreat: The Supreme Court and the New Police


Go Directly to Jail: White Collar Sentencing After the Sarbanes-Oxley Act


Church, Choice, and Charters: A New Wrinkle for Public Education?


RECENT CASES</p>
<p>


 Third Circuit Holds University Sexual Harassment Policy
Unconstitutional.— DeJohn v. Temple University, 537 F.3d 301 (3d Cir. 2008).


Wisconsin Supreme Court Applies Sexual Assault Statute to Attempted
Sexual Intercourse with a Corpse. — State v. Grunke, 752 N.W.2d 769 (Wis. 2008).


RECENT PUBLICATIONS</p>
<p>Full</p>
<p>Text




]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>--></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="aligncenter" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org">Vol. 122 · April 2009 · No. 6</a></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table style="width: 97%;" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>ARTICLES</strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="&lt;/p"><span style="font-family: times;">FORESEEABILITY AND</span></a></p>
<p><a href="&lt;/p"><span style="font-family: times;">COPYRIGHT INCENTIVES<br />
</span></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="top"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Shyamkrishna Balganesh</em></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p">ANTI-INQUISITORIALISM</a></span></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><em>David Alan Sklansky</em></span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table style="width: 95%;" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>NOTES</strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="&lt;/p"><span style="font-family: times;">Retreat: The Supreme Court and the New Police</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="&lt;/p"><span style="font-family: times;">Go Directly to Jail: White Collar Sentencing After the Sarbanes-Oxley Act</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="&lt;/p"><span style="font-family: times;">Church, Choice, and Charters: A New Wrinkle for Public Education?</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>RECENT CASES</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><strong></strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a><a href="&lt;/p"><span style="font-family: times;">Third Circuit Holds University Sexual Harassment Policy<br />
Unconstitutional.</span><span style="font-family: times;">— <em>DeJohn v. Temple University</em>, 537 F.3d 301 (3d Cir. 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="&lt;/p"><span style="font-family: times;">Wisconsin Supreme Court Applies Sexual Assault Statute to Attempted<br />
Sexual Intercourse with a Corpse. — <em>State v. Grunke</em>, 752 N.W.2d 769 (Wis. 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/index.shtml">Full</a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/index.shtml">Text</a></span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/04/harvard_law_rev_11.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 122:5 (March 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/03/harvard_law_rev_14.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/03/harvard_law_rev_14.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:10:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2009/03/harvard-law-review-1225-march-2009.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;">Vol. 122 · March 2009 · No. 5</p>




 </p>
<p>IN</p>
<p>MEMORIAM: OLIVER OLDMAN</p>
<p>


 William P. Alford         Richard M. Bird</p>
<p> Michael J. McIntyre


 Minoru Nakazato and J. Mark Ramseyer     Richard Pomp</p>
<p> Eric M. Zolt


 ARTICLES


 INTIMATE DISCRIMINATION: THE STATE&#8217;S ROLE IN THE ACCIDENTS OF SEX AND LOVE

 Elizabeth F. Emens


ADJUSTING ALIENABILITY
 Lee Anne Fennell








NOTES


 Political Gerrymandering 2000-2008: &#8220;A Self-Limiting Enterprise&#8221;?


 Designing the Public Domain


 The Rule of Law in the Marketplace of Ideas:
Pledges or Promises by Candidates for Judicial Election


RECENT CASES</p>
<p>


 Seventh Circuit Allows Employee Terminated for Undergoing
In Vitro Fertilization To Bring Sex Discrimination Claim.
— Hall v. Nalco Co., 534 F.3d 644 (7th Cir. 2008).


 D.C. Circuit Again Invalidates FEC Regulations Implementing
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002. — Shays v. FEC,
528 F.3d [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>--></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org">Vol. 122 · March 2009 · No. 5</a></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table style="width: 97%;" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><strong><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/march09/march09.shtml">IN</a></strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><strong><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/march09/march09.shtml">MEMORIAM: OLIVER OLDMAN</a></strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><strong></strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" width="65%" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;">William P. Alford         Richard M. Bird</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"> Michael J. McIntyre</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" width="65%" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;">Minoru Nakazato and J. Mark Ramseyer     Richard Pomp</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"> Eric M. Zolt</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>ARTICLES</strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p">INTIMATE DISCRIMINATION: THE STATE&#8217;S ROLE IN THE ACCIDENTS OF SEX AND LOVE<br />
</a></span></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="top"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Elizabeth F. Emens</em></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/march09/fennell.shtml">ADJUSTING ALIENABILITY</a></span></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Lee Anne Fennell</em></span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table style="width: 95%;" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>NOTES</strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p">Political Gerrymandering 2000-2008: &#8220;A Self-Limiting Enterprise&#8221;?</a></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p">Designing the Public Domain</a></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p">The Rule of Law in the Marketplace of Ideas:<br />
Pledges or Promises by Candidates for Judicial Election</a></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>RECENT CASES</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><strong></strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p">Seventh Circuit Allows Employee Terminated for Undergoing<br />
In Vitro Fertilization To Bring Sex Discrimination Claim.<br />
— <em>Hall v. Nalco Co.</em>, 534 F.3d 644 (7th Cir. 2008).</a></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p">D.C. Circuit Again Invalidates FEC Regulations Implementing<br />
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002. — <em>Shays v. FEC</em>,<br />
528 F.3d 914 (D.C. Cir. 2008).</a></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p">Second Circuit Suggests that Statutory Interpretations in Agency Manuals<br />
Are Ineligible for<em> Chevron</em> Deference.<br />
— <em>Estate of Landers v. Leavitt</em>, 545 F.3d 98 (2d Cir. 2008).</a></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p">California Supreme Court Declares Prohibition of Same-Sex Marriages<br />
Unconstitutional.— <em>In re Marriage Cases</em>, 183 P.3d 384 (Cal. 2008).</a></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/march09/march09.shtml">Full</a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/march09/march09.shtml">Text</a></span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/03/harvard_law_rev_14.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 122:4 (February 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/02/harvard_law_rev_13.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/02/harvard_law_rev_13.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 22:06:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2009/02/harvard-law-review-1224-february-2009.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>

<p></p>
<p>Vol. 122 · February 2009 · No. 4</p>

</p>

ARTICLES</p>
<p>


TRIMMING
Cass R. Sunstein


OUR SCHMITTIAN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Adrian Vermeule




<p></p>
</p>

DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW &#8211;</p>
<p>ACCESS TO COURTS</p>
<p>Full</p>
<p>Text


Table of</p>
<p>Contents


I.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Introduction


II.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Compensating Victims of Wrongful Detention,</p>
<p>Torture, and Abuse in the</p>
<p>&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;U.S. War on</p>
<p>Terror


III.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Mandatory Arbitration Clauses: Proposals for</p>
<p>Reform of Consumer-</p>
<p>&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Defendant</p>
<p>Arbitration


IV.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Access to Courts and Videoconferencing in</p>
<p>Immigration Court</p>
<p>&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Proceedings


V.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;The Political Question Doctrine, Executive</p>
<p>Deference, and Foreign</p>
<p>&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Relations


VI.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Aesthetic Injuries, Animal Rights, and</p>
<p>Anthropomorphism




</p>

</p>
<p>NOTE</p>
<p>


Prediction Markets and Law: A Skeptical Account


</p>
<p>RECENT CASES</p>
<p>


En Banc Third Circuit Strikes Down Federal Statute Prohibiting the Interstate</p>
<p>Sale of Depictions of Animal Cruelty. &#8212; United States v. Stevens, 533 F.3d</p>
<p>218 (3d Cir. 2008) (en banc).


Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Accepts Loss of a Chance in Medical</p>
<p>Malpractice Suits. &#8212; Matsuyama v. Birnbaum, 890 N.E.2d 819 (Mass.</p>
<p>2008).


</p>
<p>Tenth Circuit Strikes Down Colorado Law Exempting</p>
<p>&#8220;Pervasively Sectarian&#8221; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<style type="text/css">
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
</style>
<p><center><img alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org">Vol. 122 · February 2009 · No. 4</a></center></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="97%"  cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"><b>ARTICLES</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/feb09/sunstein.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">TRIMMING<br /></font></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"><i>Cass R. Sunstein</i></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/feb09/vermeule.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">OUR SCHMITTIAN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW<br /></font></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"><i>Adrian Vermeule</i></font></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<p></p>
<table width="95%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"><b>DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW &#8211;</p>
<p>ACCESS TO COURTS</b></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/feb09/feb09.shtml">Full</p>
<p>Text</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1">Table of</p>
<p>Contents</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">I.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Introduction</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">II.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Compensating Victims of Wrongful Detention,</p>
<p>Torture, and Abuse in the</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;U.S. War on</p>
<p>Terror</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">III.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Mandatory Arbitration Clauses: Proposals for</p>
<p>Reform of Consumer-</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Defendant</p>
<p>Arbitration</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">IV.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Access to Courts and Videoconferencing in</p>
<p>Immigration Court</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Proceedings</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">V.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The Political Question Doctrine, Executive</p>
<p>Deference, and Foreign</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Relations</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">VI.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Aesthetic Injuries, Animal Rights, and</p>
<p>Anthropomorphism</font></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="95%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>NOTE</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/feb09/feb09.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">Prediction Markets and Law: A Skeptical Account</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT CASES</p>
<p></b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/feb09/feb09.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">En Banc Third Circuit Strikes Down Federal Statute Prohibiting the Interstate</p>
<p>Sale of Depictions of Animal Cruelty. &#8212; <i>United States v. Stevens</i>, 533 F.3d</p>
<p>218 (3d Cir. 2008) (en banc).</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/feb09/feb09.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Accepts Loss of a Chance in Medical</p>
<p>Malpractice Suits. &#8212; <i>Matsuyama v. Birnbaum</i>, 890 N.E.2d 819 (Mass.</p>
<p>2008).</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/feb09/feb09.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">Tenth Circuit Strikes Down Colorado Law Exempting</p>
<p>&#8220;Pervasively Sectarian&#8221; Religious Colleges from State Scholarship Program. &#8212;</p>
<p><i>Colorado Christian University v. Weaver</i>, 534 F.3d 1245 (10th Cir.</p>
<p>2008).</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/feb09/feb09.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">Supreme Court of Michigan Holds that Public Employers May Not Provide</p>
<p>Healthcare Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Employees. &#8212; <i>National Pride</p>
<p>at Work, Inc. v. Governor of Michigan</i>, 748 N.W.2d 524 (Mich. 2008).</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT LEGISLATION</p>
<p></b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/feb09/feb09.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">Congress Grants Telecommunications Companies Retroactive</p>
<p>Immunity from Civil Suits for Complying with NSA Terrorist Surveillance Program. &#8212;</p>
<p>FISA Amendments Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-261, 122 Stat. 2436.</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</b></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/feb09/feb09.shtml">Full</p>
<p>Text</a></font></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/02/harvard_law_rev_13.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 122:3 (January 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/01/harvard_law_rev_12.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/01/harvard_law_rev_12.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 21:53:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2009/01/harvard-law-review-1223-january-2009.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;">Vol. 122 · January 2009 · No. 3</p>




ARTICLE


 </p>
<p>WHOSE EYES ARE YOU GOING TO BELIEVE?
SCOTT V. HARRIS AND THE PERILS OF
COGNITIVE ILLIBERALISM
 
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Dan M. Kahan,
David A. Hoffman,
and Donald Braman


BOOK REVIEW



</p>
<p>BEYOND SOVEREIGNTY AND UNIFORMITY:
THE CHALLENGES FOR EQUAL CITIZENSHIP
IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
 
</p>
<p>Rogers M. Smith








NOTES


Touch and Concern, the Restatement (Third)
of Property: Servitudes, and a Proposal


The Eighth Amendment, Proportionality,
and the Changing Meaning of “Punishments”


RECENT CASES</p>
<p>


D.C. Circuit Holds that EPA Cannot Prevent State and Local Authorities from Supplementing Inadequate Emissions Monitoring Requirements in the Absence of EPA Regulation. — Sierra Club v. EPA, 536 F.3d 673 (D.C. Cir. 2008).


Federal Court Dismisses Juror Refusing To Apply Law As Instructed. — United States v. Luisi, 568 F. Supp. 2d 106 (D. Mass. 2008).


New York Court of Appeals [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>--></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/jan09.shtml">Vol. 122 · January 2009 · No. 3</a></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table style="width: 97%;" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>ARTICLE</strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/kahan_hoffman_braman.shtml"><span> </span></a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/kahan_hoffman_braman.shtml"><span>WHOSE EYES ARE YOU GOING TO BELIEVE?<em><br />
SCOTT V. HARRIS</em> AND THE PERILS OF<br />
COGNITIVE ILLIBERALISM</span></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Dan M. Kahan,<br />
David A. Hoffman,<br />
and Donald Braman</em></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>BOOK REVIEW</strong><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/smith.shtml"></a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/smith.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">BEYOND SOVEREIGNTY AND UNIFORMITY:<br />
THE CHALLENGES FOR EQUAL CITIZENSHIP<br />
IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY</span></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Rogers M. Smith</em></span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table style="width: 95%;" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>NOTES</strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/jan09.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">Touch and Concern, the Restatement (Third)<br />
of Property: Servitudes, and a Proposal</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/jan09.shtml"><span>The Eighth Amendment, Proportionality,<br />
and the Changing Meaning of “Punishments”</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>RECENT CASES</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><strong></strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/jan09.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">D.C. Circuit Holds that EPA Cannot Prevent State and Local Authorities from Supplementing Inadequate Emissions Monitoring Requirements in the Absence of EPA Regulation. — <em>Sierra Club v. EPA</em>, 536 F.3d 673 (D.C. Cir. 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/jan09.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">Federal Court Dismisses Juror Refusing To Apply Law As Instructed. — <em>United States v. Luisi</em>, 568 F. Supp. 2d 106 (D. Mass. 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="&lt;/p"><span style="font-family: times;">New York Court of Appeals Holds that Insurers May Be Liable for Consequential Damages. — <em>Bi-Economy Market, Inc. v. Harleysville Insurance Co.,</em> 886 N.E.2d 127 (N.Y. 2008).</span><span> </span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a></p>
<p><a href="&lt;/p"><span>Seventh Circuit Holds that State Law Disproportionately Burdening Out-of-State Businesses Has Only Incidental Effects on Interstate Commerce. — <em>Baude v. Heath</em>, 538 F.3d 608 (7th Cir. 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/jan09.shtml"><span>Ninth Circuit Holds that Single Sale on eBay Does Not Provide Sufficient Minimum Contacts with Buyer&#8217;s State. —<em> Boschetto v. Hansing</em>, 539 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/jan09.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">Eighth Circuit Holds that a Cotenant&#8217;s Consent at the Time of the Search Can Overrule a Suspect&#8217;s Recent Objection. — <em>United States v. Hudspeth</em>, 518 F.3d 954 (8th Cir. 2008) (en banc).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/jan09.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">Colorado Supreme Court Holds Defendants Liable for Full Profits from the Sale of a Home by Applying Unjust Enrichment Theory to an Informal Agreement Between Close Relatives. — <em>Lewis v. Lewis</em>, 189 P.3d 1134 (Colo. 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>RECENT LEGISLATION</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><strong></strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/jan09.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">Congress Restricts Use of Genetic Information by Insurers and Employers. — Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-233, 122 Stat. 881 (to be codified in scattered sections of 26, 29, and 42 U.S.C.).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/jan09.shtml">Full</a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/jan09/jan09.shtml">Text</a></span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/01/harvard_law_rev_12.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 122:2 (December 2008)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/12/harvard_law_rev_5.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/12/harvard_law_rev_5.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2008 19:50:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2008/12/harvard-law-review-1222-december-2008.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;">Vol. 122 · December 2008 · No. 2</p>




ARTICLES



 </p>
<p>CAUSAL INFERENCE IN
CIVIL RIGHTS LITIGATION
 
</p>
<p>D. James Greiner


 </p>
<p>TREATIES AS LAW OF THE LAND:
THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE AND THE
JUDICIAL ENFORCEMENT OF TREATIES
 
</p>
<p>Carlos Manuel Vázquez


BOOK REVIEW



</p>
<p>GOVERNANCE IN THE RUINS
 
</p>
<p>David A. Skeel, Jr.








NOTES


Defending Federalism: Realizing Publius&#8217;s Vision


Judicial Review of Congressional Factfinding


RECENT CASES</p>
<p>


California Supreme Court Holds that Free Exercise of Religion Does Not Give
Fertility Doctors Right To Deny Treatment to Lesbians. — North Coast
Women’s Care Medical Group, Inc. v. San Diego County Superior
Court, 189 P.3d 959 (Cal. 2008).


Rhode Island Supreme Court Holds that Threats by Defendants Cannot Disqualify
Prosecutors. — State v. McManus, 941 A.2d 222 (R.I. 2008).


District Court Rejects Challenge to Reauthorized Section Five.
— Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. One v. Mukasey, No. 06-1384,
2008 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>--></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org">Vol. 122 · December 2008 · No. 2</a></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table style="width: 97%;" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>ARTICLES</strong><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/greiner.shtml"><span> </span></a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/greiner.shtml"><span>CAUSAL INFERENCE IN<br />
CIVIL RIGHTS LITIGATION</span></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><em>D. James Greiner</em></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/vazquez.shtml"><span> </span></a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/vazquez.shtml"><span>TREATIES AS LAW OF THE LAND:<br />
THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE AND </span><span>THE<br />
JUDICIAL ENFORCEMENT OF TREATIES</span></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Carlos Manuel Vázquez</em></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>BOOK REVIEW</strong><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/skeel.shtml"></a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/skeel.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">GOVERNANCE IN THE RUINS</span></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><em>David A. Skeel, Jr.</em></span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table style="width: 95%;" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>NOTES</strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/dec08.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">Defending Federalism: Realizing Publius&#8217;s Vision</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/dec08.shtml"><span>Judicial Review of Congressional Factfinding</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>RECENT CASES</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><strong></strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/dec08.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">California Supreme Court Holds that Free Exercise of Religion Does Not Give<br />
Fertility Doctors Right To Deny Treatment to Lesbians. —<em> North Coast<br />
Women’s Care Medical Group, Inc. v. San Diego County Superior<br />
Court</em>, 189 P.3d 959 (Cal. 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/dec08.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">Rhode Island Supreme Court Holds that Threats by Defendants Cannot Disqualify<br />
Prosecutors. — <em>State v. McManus</em>, 941 A.2d 222 (R.I. 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/dec08.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">District Court Rejects Challenge to Reauthorized Section Five.<br />
— <em>Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. One v. Mukasey</em>, No. 06-1384,<br />
2008 WL 4097645 (D.D.C. Sept. 4, 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/dec08.shtml"><span>Ninth Circuit Holds that School&#8217;s Strip Search of a Student<br />
Violated the Fourth Amendment Under Clearly Established Law.<br />
— <em>Redding v. Safford Unified School District No. 1</em>, 531 F.3d 1071<br />
(9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/dec08.shtml"><span>Second Circuit Holds that Government May Withhold Classified<br />
Information Unless Information Would Be &#8220;Relevant and Helpful&#8221;<br />
to Defense. —<em> United States v. Aref</em>, 533 F.3d 72 (2d Cir. 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href="&lt;/p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/dec08.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;">Western District of Texas Upholds Gun Regulation Under Intermediate Scrutiny in<br />
</span><span style="font-family: times;">Post-<em>Heller</em> Decision. — <em>United States v. Bledsoe</em>, No. SA-08-CR-13(2),<br />
2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60522 (W.D. Tex. Aug. 8, 2008).</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/dec08.shtml">Full</a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/dec08/dec08.shtml">Text</a></span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/12/harvard_law_rev_5.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 122:1 (November 2008)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/11/harvard_law_rev_10.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/11/harvard_law_rev_10.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:57:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2008/11/harvard-law-review-1221-november-2008.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;">Vol. 122 · November 2008 · No. 1</p>




THE</p>
<p>SUPREME COURT, 2007 TERM
 
</p>
<p> 


 FOREWORD:</p>
<p>DEMOSPRUDENCE</p>
<p>THROUGH DISSENT
 Lani Guinier


 COMMENTS:</p>
<p> </p>
<p>DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA V. HELLER:
THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS


 HELLER, HLR, AND
HOLISTIC LEGAL REASONING
 Akhil Reed Amar


 DEAD OR ALIVE: ORIGINALISM AS
POPULAR CONSTITUTIONALISM IN HELLER
 Reva B. Siegel


 SECOND AMENDMENT MINIMALISM:
HELLER AS GRISWOLD
 Cass R. Sunstein


LEADING CASES:</p>

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Commerce Clause  Dormant Commerce Clause — State Taxation of Municipal Bonds:
Department of Revenue of Kentucky v. Davis
Criminal Law and Procedure

Eighth Amendment — Death Penalty — Lethal
Injection Drug Protocol:
Baze v. Rees

Eighth Amendment — Death Penalty —
Punishment for Child Rape:
Kennedy v. Louisiana

Sixth Amendment — Attachment of Right to
Counsel:
Rothgery v. Gillespie County

Sixth Amendment — Competency Standard for
Self-Representation at Trial:
Indiana v. Edwards

Sixth Amendment — Federal Sentencing Guidelines
— Deviation [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>--></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org">Vol. 122 · November 2008 · No. 1</a></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table style="width: 97%;" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>THE</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>SUPREME COURT, 2007 TERM</strong></span></td>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left" valign="bottom"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>FOREWORD:</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/guinier.shtml">DEMOSPRUDENCE</a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/guinier.shtml">THROUGH DISSENT</a></span></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="middle"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Lani Guinier</em></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="left" valign="top"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>COMMENTS:</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/index.shtml"><em>DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA V. HELLER</em>:<br />
THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS</a></span></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left" valign="top"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/amar.shtml"><em>HELLER</em>,<em> HLR</em>, AND<br />
HOLISTIC LEGAL REASONING</a></span></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="middle"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Akhil Reed Amar</em></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left" valign="top"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/siegel.shtml">DEAD OR ALIVE: ORIGINALISM AS<br />
POPULAR CONSTITUTIONALISM IN <em>HELLER</em></a></span></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="middle"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Reva B. Siegel</em></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left" valign="top"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/sunstein.shtml">SECOND AMENDMENT MINIMALISM:<em><br />
HELLER</em> AS <em>GRISWOLD</em></a></span></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="middle"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Cass R. Sunstein</em></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="left" valign="top"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>LEADING CASES:</strong></span></p>
<ol type="I">
<li><span style="font-family: times;">CONSTITUTIONAL LAW</span>
<ol type="A">
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Commerce Clause </span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Dormant Commerce Clause — State Taxation of Municipal Bonds</em>:</span></a><a href="&lt;/p"><br />
Department of Revenue of Kentucky v. Davis</a></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Criminal Law and Procedure</span>
<ol type="1">
<li><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Eighth Amendment — Death Penalty — Lethal</em></span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Injection Drug Protocol</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Baze v. Rees<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Eighth Amendment — Death Penalty —</em></span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Punishment for Child Rape</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Kennedy v. Louisiana<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Sixth Amendment — Attachment of Right to</em></span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Counsel</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Rothgery v. Gillespie County<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Sixth Amendment — Competency Standard for</em></span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Self-Representation at Trial</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"><br />
</a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml">Indiana v. Edwards</a></span><a href="&lt;/p"><br />
</a></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Sixth Amendment — Federal Sentencing Guidelines</em></span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
— Deviation Based on Policy Disagreements</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Kimbrough v. United States<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Sixth Amendment — Witness Confrontation —</em></span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Forfeiture by Wrongdoing Doctrine</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"><br />
</a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml">Giles. v. California<br />
</a></span></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Equal Protection</span>
<ol type="1">
<li><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Jury Selection</em> — Batson <em>Challenges</em>: </span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"><br />
</a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml">Snyder v. Louisiana</p>
<p></a></span><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></a></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Photo Identification Requirement for In-Person</em></span><span style="font-family: times;"><em> Voting</em></span><span style="font-family: times;">:<br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml">Crawford v. Marion County Election Board</a></p>
<p></span></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Freedom of Association</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
State Primary Regulation</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"><br />
New York State Board of Elections v. López Torres</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Freedom of Speech and Expression</span>
<ol type="1">
<li><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Campaign Finance Regulation</em>: </span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;p"><br />
Davis v.</a></span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml">FEC</a><br />
</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Overbreadth Doctrine</em>: <a href="&lt;p"><br />
United</a></span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;p"></a><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"> States v. Williams</a><br />
</span></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Suspension Clause</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Extraterritorial Reach of Writ of Habeas Corpus</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Boumediene v. Bush<br />
</a></span></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">FEDERAL JURISDICTION AND PROCEDURE</span>
<ol type="A">
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Federal Preemption of State Law</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Preemption of State Common Law Claims</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc.<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Habeas Corpus</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Jurisdiction over Americans Held Overseas</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Munaf v. Geren<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">State Postconviction Proceedings</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Retroactive Application of New Rules</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Danforth v. Minnesota<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Status of International Law</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Self-Execution of Treaties</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Medellín v. Texas<br />
</a></span></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">FEDERAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS</span>
<ol type="A">
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Age Discrimination in Employment Act</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Retaliation</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Gómez-Pérez v. Potter<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Federal Magistrates Act</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Voir Dire Jurisdiction</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Gonzalez v. United States<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Immigration and Nationality Act</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Voluntary Departure</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Dada v. Mukasey<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Money Laundering</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Rule of Lenity</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
United States v. Santos<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Securities Exchange Act of 1934</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Scope of Secondary Actor Liability</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc.<br />
</a></span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">Voting Rights Act of 1965</span><span style="font-family: times;"><em><br />
Need for Preclearance</em>:</span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
Riley v. Kennedy<br />
</a></span></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li><span style="font-family: times;">ORIGINAL JURISDICTION</span>
<div style="margin-left: 2em">
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><em>Controversy Between States — Border Dispute</em>:<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml"><br />
New Jersey v. Delaware</a></span></div>
</li>
</ol>
</td>
<td width="35%" align="right"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"> </a></span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="&lt;/p"><strong>THE STATISTICS</strong></a><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><span style="font-family: times;"><strong>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml">Full</a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/122/nov08/nov08.shtml">Text</a></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="top"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/11/harvard_law_rev_10.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 121:8 (June 2008)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/06/harvard_law_rev_9.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/06/harvard_law_rev_9.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 22:52:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2008/06/harvard-law-review-1218-june-2008.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>

<p></p>
<p>Vol. 121 · June 2008 · No. 8</p>

</p>

ARTICLE</p>
<p>


UNEQUAL JUSTICE
</p>
<p>William J. Stuntz


</p>
<p>BOOK REVIEW</p>
<p>


THE CONSULTANTS&#8217; REPUBLIC
</p>
<p>Douglas A. Kysar




</p>

</p>
<p>NOTES</p>
<p>


The Immunity-Conferring Power of the Office of Legal Counsel


The Alien Tort Statute, Forum Shopping, and the Exhaustion of Local Remedies Norm


</p>
<p>Rule Porousness and the Design of Legal Directives


</p>
<p>&#8220;Trading Action for Access&#8221;: The Myth of Meritocracyand the Failure To Remedy Structural Discrimination


</p>
<p>Cross-Jurisdictional Forum Non Conveniens Preclusion


</p>
<p>Shifting the FISA Paradigm: Protecting Civil Libertiesby Eliminating Ex Ante Judicial Approval


</p>
<p>RECENT CASES</p>
<p>


</p>
<p>Seventh Circuit Holds that RICO Conspiracy Charges Can Proceed to Trial Despite Unresolved Double Jeopardy Claims. &#8212; United States v. Calabrese, 490 F.3d 575 (7th Cir. 2007).


</p>
<p>Third Circuit Holds that Government Appeals of Alleged Plea Agreement Breaches by Defendants Are Reviewed De [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<style type="text/css">
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
</style>
<p><center><img alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org">Vol. 121 · June 2008 · No. 8</a></center></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="97%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center" ><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"><br /><b>ARTICLE</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/stuntz.shtml"><font face=</p>
<p>"times" size="-1">UNEQUAL JUSTICE</font></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom" ><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"></p>
<p><i>William J. Stuntz</i></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center" ><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>BOOK REVIEW</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left" ><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/kysar.shtml"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">THE CONSULTANTS&#8217; REPUBLIC</font></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"></p>
<p><i>Douglas A. Kysar</i></font></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="95%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>NOTES</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" ><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">The Immunity-Conferring Power of the Office of Legal Counsel</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" ><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">The Alien Tort Statute, Forum Shopping,<br /> and the Exhaustion of Local Remedies Norm</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">Rule Porousness and the Design of Legal Directives</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" ><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">&#8220;Trading Action for Access&#8221;: The Myth of Meritocracy<br />and the Failure To Remedy Structural Discrimination</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" ><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">Cross-Jurisdictional Forum Non Conveniens Preclusion</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" ><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">Shifting the FISA Paradigm: Protecting Civil Liberties<br />by Eliminating Ex Ante Judicial Approval</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT CASES</p>
<p></b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">Seventh Circuit Holds that RICO Conspiracy Charges Can Proceed to Trial Despite Unresolved Double Jeopardy Claims. &#8212; <i>United States v. Calabrese</i>, 490 F.3d 575 (7th Cir. 2007).</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">Third Circuit Holds that Government Appeals of Alleged Plea Agreement Breaches by Defendants Are Reviewed De Novo. &#8212; <i>United States v. Williams</i>, 510 F.3d 416 (3d Cir. 2007).</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">Seventh Circuit Holds that a Codefendant&#8217;s Repeated and Violent Outbursts, Coupled with Intimidation from the Gallery, Denied Defendant a Fair Trial. &#8212; <i>United States v.</p>
<p>Mannie</i>, 509 F.3d 851 (7th Cir. 2007).</p>
<p></font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">Federal District Court Denies § 230 Immunity to Website that Solicits Illicit Content. &#8212; <i>FTC v. Accusearch, Inc.</i>, No. 06-CV-105, 2007 WL 4356786 (D. Wyo. Sept. 28, 2007).</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1"> General Court of Qatif Sentences Gang-Rape Victim to Prison and Lashings for Violating &#8220;Illegal Mingling&#8221; Law.</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT PROPOSED LEGISLATION</p>
<p></b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">Congress Considers Bill To Invalidate Pre-Dispute Arbitration Clauses for Consumers, Employees, and Franchisees. &#8212; Arbitration Fairness Act 2007, S. 1782, 110th Cong. (2007).</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</b></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/june08/june08.shtml">Full</p>
<p>Text</a></font></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/06/harvard_law_rev_9.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 121:6 (April 2008)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/04/harvard_law_rev_4.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/04/harvard_law_rev_4.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 21:30:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2008/04/harvard-law-review-1216-april-2008.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>

<p></p>
<p>Vol. 121 · April 2008 · No. 6</p>

</p>

ARTICLE</p>
<p>


LAND ASSEMBLY DISTRICTS
</p>
<p>Michael Heller</p>
<p>and Rick Hills


</p>
<p>BOOK REVIEW</p>
<p>


THE END OF THE GLOBALIZATION DEBATE: A REVIEW ESSAY
</p>
<p>Robert Howse




</p>

</p>
<p>NOTES</p>
<p>


Mechanisms of Secrecy


Regulating Eugenics


</p>
<p>Leegin&#8217;s Unexplored &#8220;Change in Circumstance&#8221;: The</p>
<p>Internet and Resale Price Maintenance


</p>
<p>Counterinsurgency and Constitutional Design


</p>
<p>RECENT CASES</p>
<p>


</p>
<p>Washington Supreme Court Declines To Apply Professional</p>
<p>Rescue Doctrine in Suit by Policeman Against Fellow Officer. &#8212; Beaupre v. Pierce</p>
<p>County, 166 P.3d 712 (Wash. 2007).


</p>
<p>En Banc Ninth Circuit Holds that RICO Enterprise Need Not</p>
<p>Have Any Particular Organizational Structure. &#8212; Odom v. Microsoft Corp.,</p>
<p>486 F.3d 541 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 464</p>
<p>(2007).


Seventh Circuit Holds that Defendant&#8217;s Waiver of the Right To Testify Was Valid</p>
<p>Despite District Court&#8217;s Failure To Engage in an On-the-Record [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<style type="text/css">
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
</style>
<p><center><img alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org">Vol. 121 · April 2008 · No. 6</a></center></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="97%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"><b>ARTICLE</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/heller_hills.shtml"><font face=</p>
<p>"times" size="-1">LAND ASSEMBLY DISTRICTS<br /></font></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"></p>
<p><i>Michael Heller</p>
<p>and Rick Hills</i></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>BOOK REVIEW</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/howse.shtml"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">THE END OF THE GLOBALIZATION DEBATE: <br />A REVIEW ESSAY<br /></font></a></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"></p>
<p><i>Robert Howse</i></font></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="95%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>NOTES</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/april08.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">Mechanisms of Secrecy</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/april08.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">Regulating Eugenics</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/april08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1"><i>Leegin</i>&#8217;s Unexplored &#8220;Change in Circumstance&#8221;:<br /> The</p>
<p>Internet and Resale Price Maintenance</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/april08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">Counterinsurgency and Constitutional Design</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT CASES</p>
<p></b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/april08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">Washington Supreme Court Declines To Apply Professional</p>
<p>Rescue Doctrine in Suit by Policeman Against Fellow Officer. &#8212; <i>Beaupre v. Pierce</p>
<p>County</i>, 166 P.3d 712 (Wash. 2007).</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/april08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">En Banc Ninth Circuit Holds that RICO Enterprise Need Not</p>
<p>Have Any Particular Organizational Structure. &#8212; <i>Odom v. Microsoft Corp</i>.,</p>
<p>486 F.3d 541 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc), <i>cert. denied</i>, 128 S. Ct. 464</p>
<p>(2007).</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/april08.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">Seventh Circuit Holds that Defendant&#8217;s Waiver of the Right To Testify Was Valid</p>
<p>Despite District Court&#8217;s Failure To Engage in an On-the-Record Colloquy Regarding the</p>
<p>Decision. &#8212; <i>United States v. Stark</i>, 507 F.3d 512 (7th Cir.</p>
<p>2007).</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/april08.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">Ninth Circuit Considers Community&#8217;s Racial Tension with Police in Finding</p>
<p>Illegal Seizure and Lack of Voluntary Consent. &#8212; United States v. Washington, 490</p>
<p>F.3d 765 (9th Cir. 2007).</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/april08.shtml"><font face="times"</p>
<p>size="-1">Ninth Circuit Holds that &#167; 1983 Does Not Provide a Right of Action for</p>
<p>Violations of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. &#8212; <i>Cornejo v. County</p>
<p>of San Diego</i>, 504 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2007), <i>reh&#8217;g and reh&#8217;g en banc</p>
<p>denied</i>, No. 05-56202 (9th Cir. Feb. 4, 2008).</font></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/april08/april08.shtml"></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1">En Banc D.C. Circuit Rejects Fundamental Right to</p>
<p>Experimental Medications. &#8212; <i>Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental</p>
<p>Drugs v. von Eschenbach</i>, 495 F.3d 695 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (en banc), <i>cert.</p>
<p>denied</i>, 128 S. Ct. 1069 (2008).</font></a></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/04/harvard_law_rev_4.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review Forum, 121 (2008)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/04/harvard_law_review_forum_121_2008.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/04/harvard_law_review_forum_121_2008.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 21:32:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2008/04/harvard-law-review-forum-121-2008.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p></p>
<p>Harvard Law Review Forum, 121 (2008)</p>
<p> Governing Health</p>
<p>Jennifer Prah Ruger</p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><center><img alt="Harvard-forum2.jpg" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/Harvard-forum2.jpg" width="408" height="158" /></center></p>
<p></p>
<p>Harvard Law Review Forum, 121 (2008)</p>
<p> <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/forum/issues/120/may07/ruger.shtml" STYLE="TEXT-DECORATION: NONE"><b>Governing Health</a></p>
<p><i>Jennifer Prah Ruger</i></b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/04/harvard_law_review_forum_121_2008.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 121:5 (March 2008)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/03/harvard_law_rev_7.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/03/harvard_law_rev_7.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:56:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2008/03/harvard-law-review-1215-march-2008.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>

<p></p>
<p>Vol. 121 · March 2008 · No. 5</p>

</p>

ARTICLE</p>
<p>


VALUING LAWS AS LOCAL AMENITIES
Anup Malani


ESSAY</p>
<p>


THE ASCENT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE AND THE DEMISE OF MERCY
</p>
<p>Rachel E. Barkow





</p>

</p>
<p>NOTES</p>
<p>


</p>
<p>Public-Private Partnerships and Insurance Regulation


The Principles for User Generated Content Services: A Middle-Ground Approach to Cyber-Governance


Government Counsel and Their Obligations


</p>
<p>BOOK NOTE</p>
<p>


</p>
<p>Justice Thomas&#8217;s Inconsistent Originalism


</p>
<p>RECENT CASES</p>
<p>


</p>
<p>Eighth Circuit Holds that the First Amendment Protects Online Fantasy Baseball Providers&#8217; Use of Baseball Statistics in the Public Domain. &#8212; C.B.C. Distribution &#038; Marketing, Inc. v. Major League</p>
<p>Baseball Advanced Media, L.P., 505 F.3d 818 (8th Cir. 2007), reh’g and</p>
<p>reh’g en banc denied, Nos. 06-3357 &#038; 06-3358 (8th Cir. Nov. 26, 2007).


Eighth Circuit Holds that Benefits Plans Excluding All Contraceptives Do Not Discriminate Based on [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<style type="text/css">
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
</style>
<p><center><img alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/march08/march08.shtml">Vol. 121 · March 2008 · No. 5</a></center></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="97%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center" font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"><b>ARTICLE</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left" font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/march08/malani.shtml">VALUING LAWS AS LOCAL AMENITIES<br /></a></font></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom" font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"><i>Anup Malani</i></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center" font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"><br /><b>ESSAY</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left" font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/march08/barkow.shtml">THE ASCENT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE AND THE DEMISE OF MERCY<br /></a></font></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom" font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"></p>
<p><i>Rachel E. Barkow</i></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="95%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center" font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>NOTES</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org"></p>
<p>Public-Private Partnerships and Insurance Regulation</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/march08/march08.shtml">The Principles for User Generated Content Services: A Middle-Ground Approach to Cyber-Governance</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/march08/march08.shtml">Government Counsel and Their Obligations</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center" font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>BOOK NOTE</p>
<p></b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/march08/march08.shtml"></p>
<p>Justice Thomas&#8217;s Inconsistent Originalism</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center" font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT CASES</p>
<p></b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/march08/march08.shtml"></p>
<p>Eighth Circuit Holds that the First Amendment Protects Online Fantasy Baseball Providers&#8217; Use of Baseball Statistics in the Public Domain. &#8212; <i>C.B.C. Distribution &#038; Marketing, Inc. v. Major League</p>
<p>Baseball Advanced Media, L.P.</i>, 505 F.3d 818 (8th Cir. 2007), <i>reh’g and</p>
<p>reh’g en banc denied</i>, Nos. 06-3357 &#038; 06-3358 (8th Cir. Nov. 26, 2007).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/march08/march08.shtml">Eighth Circuit Holds that Benefits Plans Excluding All Contraceptives Do Not Discriminate Based on Sex. &#8212; <i>In re Union Pacific Railroad</p>
<p>Employment Practices Litigation</i>, 479 F.3d 936 (8th Cir. 2007),</p>
<p><i>reh’g and reh’g en banc denied</i>, No. 06-1706 (8th Cir. May 23, 2007).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left" font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/march08/march08.shtml">Second Circuit Upholds Perpetual Anti-Bootlegging Protection Against Copyright Clause Challenge. &#8212; <i>United States v.</p>
<p>Martignon</i>, 492 F.3d 140 (2d Cir. 2007).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center" font face="times" size="-1">
<p><b>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</b></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/march08/march08.shtml">Full</p>
<p>Text</a></font></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<p></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/03/harvard_law_rev_7.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 121:4 (February 2008)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/02/harvard_law_rev_6.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/02/harvard_law_rev_6.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:22:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2008/02/harvard-law-review-1214-february-2008.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>

<p></p>
<p>Vol. 121 · February 2008 · No. 4</p>

</p>

ARTICLE</p>
<p>


THE COMMANDER</p>
<p>IN CHIEF AT THE LOWEST EBB &#8212; A CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY
</p>
<p></p>
<p>David J. Barron and Martin S. Lederman




<p></p>
</p>

DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW &#8211;</p>
<p>THE LAW OF MENTAL ILLNESS</p>
<p>Full</p>
<p>Text


Table of</p>
<p>Contents


I.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Introduction


II.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Sell v. United States: Forcibly Medicating the Mentally Ill To Stand</p>
<p>Trial


III.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Booker, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines,</p>
<p>and Violent Mentally Ill</p>
<p>&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Offenders


IV.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;The Impact of the Prison Litigation Reform Act on</p>
<p>Correctional Mental</p>
<p>&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160; Health</p>
<p>Litigation


V.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;The Supreme Court&#8217;s Pursuit of Procedural</p>
<p>Maxima over Substantive</p>
<p>&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Minima in Mental Capacity</p>
<p>Determinations


VI.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Mental Health Courts and the Trend Toward a</p>
<p>Rehabilitative Justice</p>
<p>&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160; System


VII.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Voting Rights and the Mentally Incapacitated




</p>

</p>
<p>NOTES</p>
<p>


</p>
<p>Fixing Medical Malpractice Through Health Insurer Enterprise Liability


The</p>
<p>Charming Betsy Canon, Separation of Powers, and Customary International</p>
<p>Law


</p>
<p>BOOK NOTE</p>
<p>


</p>
<p>Forced Sex in the Workplace as Rape: Applying Sex Equality to Criminal</p>
<p>Remedies


</p>
<p>RECENT CASES</p>
<p>


Ninth</p>
<p>Circuit Holds [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<style type="text/css">
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
</style>
<p><center><img alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/feb08/feb08.shtml">Vol. 121 · February 2008 · No. 4</a></center></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="97%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"><b>ARTICLE</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/feb08/barron_lederman2.shtml">THE COMMANDER</p>
<p>IN CHIEF AT THE LOWEST EBB &#8212; A CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY<br /></a></font></td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"></p>
<p></p>
<p><i>David J. Barron and Martin S. Lederman</i></font></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<p></p>
<table width="95%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1"><b>DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW &#8211;</p>
<p>THE LAW OF MENTAL ILLNESS</b></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/feb08/feb08.shtml">Full</p>
<p>Text</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1">Table of</p>
<p>Contents</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">I.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Introduction</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">II.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<i>Sell v. United States</i>: Forcibly Medicating the Mentally Ill To Stand</p>
<p>Trial</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">III.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<i>Booker</i>, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines,</p>
<p>and Violent Mentally Ill</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Offenders</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">IV.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The Impact of the Prison Litigation Reform Act on</p>
<p>Correctional Mental</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Health</p>
<p>Litigation</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">V.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The Supreme Court&#8217;s Pursuit of Procedural</p>
<p>Maxima over Substantive</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Minima in Mental Capacity</p>
<p>Determinations</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">VI.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Mental Health Courts and the Trend Toward a</p>
<p>Rehabilitative Justice</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; System</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size=</p>
<p>"-1">VII.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Voting Rights and the Mentally Incapacitated</font></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="95%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style=</p>
<p>"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"></p>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>NOTES</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/feb08/feb08.shtml"></p>
<p>Fixing Medical Malpractice Through Health Insurer Enterprise Liability</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/feb08/feb08.shtml">The</p>
<p><i>Charming Betsy</i> Canon, Separation of Powers, and Customary International</p>
<p>Law</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>BOOK NOTE</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/feb08/feb08.shtml"></p>
<p>Forced Sex in the Workplace as Rape: Applying Sex Equality to Criminal</p>
<p>Remedies</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT CASES</p>
<p></b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/feb08/feb08.shtml">Ninth</p>
<p>Circuit Holds that Motive Is Not an Element of Willful Blindness &#8212; <i>United States</p>
<p>v. Heredia</i>, 483 F.3d 913 (9th Cir.) (en banc), <i>cert. denied</i>, 76 U.S.L.W. 3303</p>
<p>(U.S. Dec. 11, 2007) (No. 07-5762).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/feb08/feb08.shtml">California</p>
<p>Supreme Court Extends Assumption of Risk to Noncontact Sports &#8212; <i>Shin v. Ahn</i>,</p>
<p>165 P.3d 581 (Cal. 2007).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href=</p>
<p>"http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/feb08/feb08.shtml">Ninth</p>
<p>Circuit Upholds Issuance of Warrant Based on E-mail Recipient List &#8212; <i>United</p>
<p>States v. Kelley</i>, 482 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2007).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</b></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/feb08/feb08.shtml">Full</p>
<p>Text</a></font></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<p></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/02/harvard_law_rev_6.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 121:3 (January 2008)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/01/harvard_law_rev_3.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/01/harvard_law_rev_3.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 23:45:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2008/01/harvard-law-review-1213-january-2008.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>

<p></p>
<p>Vol. 121 · January 2008 · No. 3</p>



ARTICLE</p>



THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF AT THE LOWEST EBB — FRAMING THE PROBLEM, DOCTRINE, AND ORIGINAL UNDERSTANDING</p>
<p></p>

</p>
<p>David J. Barron and Martin S. Lederman






ESSAY

(UN)COVERING IDENTITY IN CIVIL RIGHTS AND POVERTY LAW</p>
<p></p>

Anthony V. Alfieri






NOTES</p>
<p>


Taxing Private Equity Carried Interest Using an Incentive Stock Option Analogy

Defining the Reach of Heck v. Humphrey: Should the Favorable Termination Rule Apply to Individuals Who Lack Access to Habeas Corpus?


RECENT CASES</p>
<p>

Fifth Circuit Holds that Plaintiffs Must Prove Loss Causation Before Being Certified as a Class. — Oscar Private</p>
<p>Equity Investments v. Allegiance Telecom, Inc., 487 F.3d 261 (5th Cir.</p>
<p>2007).

D.C.</p>
<p>Circuit Declines To Overturn Lower Court&#8217;s Finding of Justiciability in Tort Suit Brought by Indonesian Villagers. — Doe [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<style type="text/css">
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
</style>
<p><center><img alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org">Vol. 121 · January 2008 · No. 3</a></center></p>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="95%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto">
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"><b>ARTICLE</b></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/jan08/barron_lederman.shtml">THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF AT THE LOWEST EBB — FRAMING THE PROBLEM, DOCTRINE, AND ORIGINAL UNDERSTANDING</p>
<p></a--></p>
</td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><i>David J. Barron and Martin S. Lederman</i></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="95%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto">
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><b>ESSAY</b></td>
</tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/jan08/alfieri.shtml">(UN)COVERING IDENTITY IN CIVIL RIGHTS AND POVERTY LAW</p>
<p></a--></p>
</td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><i>Anthony V. Alfieri</i></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center">
<table width="95%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto">
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align=center><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><b>NOTES</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/jan08/jan08.shtml">Taxing Private Equity Carried Interest Using an Incentive Stock Option Analogy</a></td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/jan08/jan08.shtml">Defining the Reach of <i>Heck v. Humphrey</i>: Should the Favorable Termination Rule Apply to Individuals Who Lack Access to Habeas Corpus?</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align=center><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><b>RECENT CASES</b></font></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/jan08/jan08.shtml">Fifth Circuit Holds that Plaintiffs Must Prove Loss Causation Before Being Certified as a Class. — <i>Oscar Private</p>
<p>Equity Investments v. Allegiance Telecom, Inc.</i>, 487 F.3d 261 (5th Cir.</p>
<p>2007).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/jan08/jan08.shtml">D.C.</p>
<p>Circuit Declines To Overturn Lower Court&#8217;s Finding of Justiciability in Tort Suit Brought by Indonesian Villagers. — <i>Doe v. Exxon Mobil Corp.</i>, 473 F.3d 345 (D.C. Cir.</p>
<p>2007).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/jan08/jan08.shtml">New York Court of Appeals Holds that Shooting Victim&#8217;s Statements to Responding Police Officer Were Not Testimonial. —</p>
<p><i>People v. Nieves-Andino</i>, 872 N.E.2d 1188 (N.Y. 2007).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/jan08/jan08.shtml">D.C.</p>
<p>Circuit Holds that FBI Search of Congressional Office Violated Speech or Debate Clause. — <i>United States v.</p>
<p>Rayburn House Office Building</i>, 497 F.3d 654 (D.C. Cir. 2007), <i>reh’g en</p>
<p>banc denied</i>, No. 06-3015, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 26295 (D.C. Cir.</p>
<p>Nov. 9, 2007).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/jan08/jan08.shtml">Sixth Circuit Denies Standing To Challenge Terrorist Surveillance Program. — <i>ACLU v. NSA</i>, 493 F.3d 644 (6th Cir. 2007).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/jan08/jan08.shtml">Texas District Court Extends § 230 Immunity to Social Networking Sites. — <i>Doe v. MySpace, Inc.</i>, 474 F. Supp. 2d 843 (W.D.</p>
<p>Tex. 2007).</a></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</b></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/jan08/jan08.shtml">Full Text</a></font></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/01/harvard_law_rev_3.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 121:2 (December 2007)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/12/harvard_law_rev_2.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/12/harvard_law_rev_2.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:41:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/12/harvard-law-review-1212-december-2007.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>

<p></p>
<p>Vol. 121 · December 2007 · No. 2</p>

IN MEMORIAM: CLARK BYSE</p>



Justice Stephen G. Breyer&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Elena Kagan&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Andrew L. Kaufman


Todd D. Rakoff&#160;&#160;&#160; Peter L. Strauss &#160;&#160;&#160;Richard K. Willard</p>



ARTICLES</p>



EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND INHERITANCE TAXATION</p>
<p></p>

Anne L. Alstott  

TIMING RULES AND LEGAL INSTITUTIONS</p>
<p></p>

</p>
<p>Jacob&#160;E.&#160;Gersen&#160;and Eric A. Posner


NOTES</p>
<p>


The Case for Compulsory Voting in the United States</p>


Oversight and Insight:Legislative Review of Agenciesand Lessons from the States</p>



RECENT CASES</p>
<p>

North Carolina Supreme Court Finds No Jurisdiction over New York Trust. — Skinner v. Preferred Credit, 638 S.E.2d 203</p>
<p>(N.C. 2006), reh’g denied, 643 S.E.2d 591 (N.C. 2007).</p>


New Jersey Supreme Court Holds that Restrictions in Common Interest Community Do Not Violate the State&#8217;s Constitution. — Committee for a Better Twin Rivers v. Twin Rivers Homeowners’ Ass’n, 929 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<style type="text/css">
<p>A:link {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:visited {</p>
<p>color: 993333;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:active {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: none;</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>A:hover {</p>
<p>color: blue;</p>
<p>text-decoration: underline;</p>
<p>}</p>
</style>
<p><center><img alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org">Vol. 121 · December 2007 · No. 2</a></center></p>
<table>
<td colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"><strong><br /><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/index.shtml">IN MEMORIAM: CLARK BYSE</a></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1">Justice Stephen G. Breyer&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Elena Kagan&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Andrew L. Kaufman<br ></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1">Todd D. Rakoff&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Peter L. Strauss &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Richard K. Willard</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><b>ARTICLES</b></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/dec07/alstott.shtml">EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND INHERITANCE TAXATION</p>
<p></a--></p>
</td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="middle"><font face="times" size="-1"><i>Anne L. Alstott  </i></td>
</tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/dec07/gersen_posner.shtml">TIMING RULES AND LEGAL INSTITUTIONS</p>
<p></a--></p>
</td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="middle"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><i>Jacob&nbsp;E.&nbsp;Gersen&nbsp;and Eric A. Posner</i></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><b>NOTES</b></p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/dec07/dec07.shtml">The Case for Compulsory Voting in the United States</a></p>
</td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/dec07/dec07.shtml">Oversight and Insight:<br />Legislative Review of Agencies<br />and Lessons from the States</a></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align=center><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><b>RECENT CASES</p>
<p></font></td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/dec07/dec07.shtml">North Carolina Supreme Court Finds No Jurisdiction over New York Trust. — <i>Skinner v. Preferred Credit</i>, 638 S.E.2d 203</p>
<p>(N.C. 2006), <i>reh’g denied</i>, 643 S.E.2d 591 (N.C. 2007).</a></p>
</td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/dec07/dec07.shtml">New Jersey Supreme Court Holds that Restrictions in Common Interest Community Do Not Violate the State&#8217;s Constitution. — <i>Committee for a Better Twin Rivers v. Twin Rivers Homeowners’ Ass’n</i>, 929 A.2d 1060 (N.J. 2007).</a></p>
</td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/dec07/dec07.shtml">Ninth Circuit Removes Bar on Admission of a Defendant&#8217;s Reading Material To Show Intent To Solicit a Minor. — <i>United States v. Curtin</i>, 489 F.3d 935 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc).</a></p>
</td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/dec07/dec07.shtml">Tenth Circuit Invalidates Oklahoma Statute Barring Recognition of Out-of-State Adoptions by Same-Sex Couples. — <i>Finstuen v. Crutcher</i>, 496 F.3d 1139 (10th Cir. 2007).</a></p>
</td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/dec07/dec07.shtml">Ninth Circuit Holds that 18 U.S.C. § 924(C)(1)(A) Defines a Single Firearm Offense. — <i>United States v. Arreola</i>, 446 F.3d 926 (9th Cir.), <i>superseded on denial of reh’g and reh’g en banc</i>, 467 F.3d 1153 (9th Cir. 2006), <i>cert. denied</i>, 127 S. Ct. 3002 (2007).</a></p>
</td>
</tr>
<td width="85%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/dec07/dec07.shtml">Texas Supreme Court Holds that Trial Court Lacks Subject Matter Jurisdiction over Professional Negligence Claim Against Professional Counselor/Church Pastor. — <i>Westbrook v. Penley</i>, 231 S.W.3d 389 (Tex. 2007).</a></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan=2 ><font face="times" size="-1"><center></p>
<p><b>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</b></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/dec07/dec07.shtml">Full Text</a></p>
<p></center></td>
</tr>
</table>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/12/harvard_law_rev_2.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review Forum, 121 (2007)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/12/harvard_law_rev_1.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/12/harvard_law_rev_1.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2007 08:25:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/12/harvard-law-review-forum-121-2007.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p></p>
<p>Harvard Law Review Forum, 121 (2007)</p>
<p> Substitution Strategies</p>
<p>Jacob E. Gersen </p>
<p></p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img alt="Harvard-forum2.jpg" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/Harvard-forum2.jpg" width="408" height="158" /></p>
<p></p>
<p>Harvard Law Review Forum, 121 (2007)</p>
<p> <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/forum/issues/120/dec06/gersen.shtml" STYLE="TEXT-DECORATION: NONE"><b>Substitution Strategies</a></p>
<p><i>Jacob E. Gersen </i></p>
<p></b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/12/harvard_law_rev_1.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 121:1 (November 2007)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/11/harvard_law_rev.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/11/harvard_law_rev.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 20:58:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Harvard)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/11/harvard-law-review-1211-november-2007.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p>Vol. 121&#160;&#183;&#160;November 2007&#160;&#183;&#160;No. 1</p>
<p></p>


THE SUPREME COURT, 2006 TERM
&#160;&#160;


</p>
<p>FOREWORD:</p>
<p>CONSTITUTIONS AND CAPABILITIES:&#8220;PERCEPTION&#8221; AGAINST LOFTY FORMALISM</p>

</p>
<p>Martha C. Nussbaum


COMMENT:</p>
<p>PARENTS INVOLVED IN COMMUNITY SCHOOLS V. SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. I:VOLUNTARY RACIAL INTEGRATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS</p>


JUSTICE KENNEDY AND THE DOMAINS OF EQUAL PROTECTION</p>

Heather K. Gerken

THE SUPREME COURT AND VOLUNTARY INTEGRATION</p>

James E. Ryan

THE SEATTLE AND LOUISVILLE SCHOOL CASES: THERE IS NO OTHER WAY</p>

J. Harvie Wilkinson III


</p>
<p>LEADING CASES:</p>

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Constitutional Remedies 
<p>Bivens Damages — Takings Clause Retaliation: Wilkie v. Robbins</p>
Criminal Law and Procedure

Eighth Amendment —  Death Penalty —  Consideration of Mitigating Evidence: Abdul-Kabir v. Quarterman; Brewer v. Quarterman
Eighth Amendment —  Death Penalty —  Execution of the Presently Incompetent: Panetti v. Quarterman
Fourth Amendment — Reasonableness of Forcible Seizure: Scott v. Harris
Sixth Amendment —  Allocation of Factfinding in Sentencing: Cunningham v. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/link.css">
<p><center></p>
<p><img alt="HLR-logo2a.bmp" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/HLR-logo2a.bmp" width="443" height="119" /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Vol. 121&nbsp;&#183;&nbsp;November 2007&nbsp;&#183;&nbsp;No. 1</a></center></p>
<p></p>
<table width="100%" align="top" style="height: 30px">
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"><b>THE SUPREME COURT, 2006 TERM</b></td>
<td colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1">&nbsp;<br />&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left" valign="middle"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><strong>FOREWORD:</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nussbaum.shtml">CONSTITUTIONS AND CAPABILITIES:<br />&#8220;PERCEPTION&#8221; AGAINST LOFTY FORMALISM</a></p>
</td>
<td width="35%" align="right"  valign="middle"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><i>Martha C. Nussbaum</i></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align="left" valign="top"><font face="times" size="-1"><strong>COMMENT:</strong></p>
<p><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml"><i>PARENTS INVOLVED IN COMMUNITY SCHOOLS<br /> V. SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. I</i>:<br />VOLUNTARY RACIAL INTEGRATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS</font></a></p>
</td>
</tr>
<td width="65%" align="left" valign="top"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/gerken.shtml">JUSTICE KENNEDY AND THE DOMAINS OF EQUAL PROTECTION</font></a></p>
</td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="middle"><font face="times" size="-1"><i>Heather K. Gerken</td>
</tr>
<td width="65%" align="left" valign="top"><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/ryan.shtml">THE SUPREME COURT AND VOLUNTARY INTEGRATION</font></a></p>
</td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="bottom"><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><i>James E. Ryan</i></td>
</tr>
<td width="65%" align="left" valign="top"><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/wilkinson.shtml">THE SEATTLE AND LOUISVILLE SCHOOL CASES: THERE IS NO OTHER WAY</font></a></p>
</td>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="middle"><font face="times" size="-1"><br /><i>J. Harvie Wilkinson III</i></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align="left" valign="top"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><strong>LEADING CASES:</strong></p>
<ol type="I">
<li>CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
<ol type="A">
<li>Constitutional Remedies 
<p>Bivens <i>Damages — Takings Clause Retaliation</i>:<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml"> Wilkie v. Robbins</a></p>
<li>Criminal Law and Procedure
<ol type="1">
<li><i>Eighth Amendment —  Death Penalty —  Consideration of Mitigating Evidence</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Abdul-Kabir v. Quarterman; Brewer v. Quarterman</a>
<li><i>Eighth Amendment —  Death Penalty —  Execution of the Presently Incompetent</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Panetti v. Quarterman</a>
<li><i>Fourth Amendment — Reasonableness of Forcible Seizure</i>:<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml"> Scott v. Harris</a>
<li><i>Sixth Amendment —  Allocation of Factfinding in Sentencing</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Cunningham v. California</a>
<li><i>Sixth Amendment —  Death Qualification Decisions</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Uttecht v. Brown</a>
<li><i>Sixth Amendment —  Federal Sentencing Guidelines — Presumption of Reasonableness</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Rita v. United States</a>
<li><i>Sixth Amendment — Ineffective Assistance of Counsel</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Schriro v. Landrigan</a>
</ol>
<li>Due Process
<ol type="1">
<li><i>Abortion Rights —  &#8220;Partial Birth&#8221; Abortion</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Gonzales v. Carhart</a>
<li><i>Punitive Damages</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Philip Morris USA v. Williams</a>
</ol>
<li>Freedom of Speech and Expression
<ol type="1">
<li><i>Campaign Finance Regulation</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.</a>
<li><i>Student Speech</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Morse v. Frederick</a>
</ol>
</ol>
<li>FEDERAL JURISDICTION AND PROCEDURE
<ol type="A">
<li>Civil Procedure<br /> <i>Pleading Standards</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly</a>
<li>Jurisdictional Status of Rules<br /> <i>Statutory Time Limits to Appeal</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Bowles v. Russell</a>
<li>Standing<br /> <i>Taxpayer Standing — Establishment Clause Violations</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc.</a>
</ol>
<li>FEDERAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS
<ol type="A">
<li>Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act<br /><i>&#8220;Clearly Established Law&#8221; in Habeas Review</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Carey v. Musladin</a>
<li>Armed Career Criminal Act<br /><i>Definition of &#8220;Violent Felony&#8221;</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">James v. United States</a>
<li>Civil Rights Act, Title VII<br /><i>Statute of Limitations</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire &#038; Rubber Co.</a>
<li>Individuals with Disabilities Education Act <br /><i>Parental Rights</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Winkelman v. Parma City School District</a>
<li>Patent <br /><i>Obviousness</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.</a>
<li>Private Securities Litigation Reform Act <br /><i>&#8220;Strong Inference&#8221; Pleading Standard</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Tellabs, Inc v. Makor Issues &#038; Rights, Ltd.</a>
<li>Review of Administrative Action
<ol type="1">
<li>Chevron <i>Deference</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Zuni Public School District No. 89 v. Department of Education</a>
<li><i>Deference to Agency Interpretation of Conflicting Statutes</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">National Ass&#8217;n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife</a>
<li><i>Limits on Agency Discretion</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Massachusetts v. EPA</a>
</ol>
<li>Sherman Act<br /> <i>Minimum Resale Price Maintenance</i>: <a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc.</a>
</ol>
</ol>
<p></font></td>
<td width="35%" align="right"><font face="times" size="-1">&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="65%" align="left"><font face="times" size="-1"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml"><strong>THE STATISTICS</strong></a></p>
<p></p>
</td>
<tr>
<td colspan=2 align="center"><font face="times" size="-1"></p>
<p><b>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</b></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/121/nov07/nov07.shtml">Full Text</a></td>
</tr>
<td width="35%" align="right" valign="top"><font face="times" size="-1">&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
</table>
<p></body></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/11/harvard_law_rev.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
