Author: Vanderbilt Law Review

0

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc Skilling Roundtable

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc is pleased to present its latest Roundtable on Skilling v. United States. Professor Nancy King lays the foundation for the Roundtable with her introduction, and professors Julie O’Sullivan and Ellen Podgor and practitioners William Farmer, Abbe Lowell, and Timothy O’Toole offer their first takes on the case.


Nancy J. King, Introduction: Skilling v. United States, 63 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 1 (2010).

William H. Farmer, Presumed Prejudiced, but Fair?, 63 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 5 (2010)

Abbe David Lowell, Christopher D. Man & Paul M. Thompson, “Not Every Wrong is a Crime”: The Legal and Practical Problems with the Federal “Honest-Services” Statute, 63 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 11 (2010).

Julie R. O’Sullivan, Honest-Services Fraud: A (Vague) Threat to Millions of Blissfully Unaware (and Non-Culpable) American Workers, 63 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 23 (2010).

Timothy P. O’Toole, The Honest-Services Surplus: Why There’s No Need (or Place) for a Federal Law Prohibiting “Criminal-esque” Conduct in the Nature of Bribes and Kickbacks, 63 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 49 (2010).

Ellen S. Podgor, Intangible Rights-A Déjà Vu, 63 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 63 (2010).

0

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 63, Number 1 (January 2010)

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 63, Number 1 (January 2010)

ARTICLES

Jennifer G. Hill, Subverting Shareholder Rights: Lessons from News Corp.’s Migration to Delaware, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1 (2010).

Brian Sheppard & Fiery Cushman, Evaluating Norms: An Empirical Analysis of the Relationship between Norm-Content, Operator, and Charitable Behavior, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 55 (2010).

Charles Silver & Geoffrey P. Miller, The Quasi-Class Action Method of Managing Multi-District Litigations: Problems and a Proposal, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 107 (2010).

Verity Winship, Cooperative Interbranch Federalism: Certification of State-Law Questions by Federal Agencies, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 181 (2010).

NOTES

Benjamin K. Raybin, “Objection: Your Honor is Being Unreasonable!”-Law and Policy Opposing the Federal Sentencing Order Objection Requirement, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 235 (2010).

Jennifer Bennett Shinall, Slipping Away from Justice: The Effect of Attorney Skill on Trial Outcomes, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 267 (2010).

Interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Check out our website for more details.

0

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc PCAOB Roundtable

Logo

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc is pleased to present the response pieces, as well as Professor Strauss’s table setting article, for its inaugural Roundtable. Professors Peter Strauss, Hal Bruff, Steven Calabresi, Gary Lawson, and Christopher Yoo have responded to the “first take” articles each wrote last month. The debate is on Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board.

TABLE SETTING ARTICLE

Peter L. Strauss, Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, 62 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 51 (2009).

RESPONSES

Peter L. Strauss, Our Twenty-First Century Constitution, 62 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 121 (2009).

Harold H. Bruff, On Hunting Elephants in Mouseholes, 62 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 127 (2009).

Steven G. Calabresi & Christopher S. Yoo, Why Professors Bruff and Pildes are Wrong about the PCAOB Case, 62 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 133 (2009).

Gary Lawson, It Depends, 62 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 139 (2009).

0

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 62, Number 6 (November 2009)

Logo

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 62, Number 6 (November 2009)

ARTICLES

Brian T. Fitzpatrick, The End of Objector Blackmail?, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1623 (2009).

Raymond Shih Ray Ku, Jiayang Sun & Yiying Fan, Does Copyright Law Promote Creativity? An Empirical Analysis of Copyright’s Bounty, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1669 (2009).

William E. Nelson, Harvey Rishikof, I. Scott Messinger & Michael Jo, The Liberal Tradition of the Supreme Court Clerkship: Its Rise, Fall, and Reincarnation?, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1749 (2009).

Noah M. Sachs, Jumping the Pond: Transnational Law and the Future of Chemical Regulation, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1817 (2009).

NOTES

Joel A. Heller, Fearing Fear Itself: Photo Identification Laws, Fear of Fraud, and the Fundamental Right to Vote, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1871 (2009)

Ryan T. Holt, A Uniform System for the Enforceability of Forum Selection Clauses in Federal Courts, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1913 (2009).

Michael A. Thomason, Jr., Auditing the PCAOB: A Test to the Accountability of the Uniquely Structured Regulator of Accountants, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1953 (2009).

Interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Check out our website for more details.

1

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc PCAOB Roundtable

Logo

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc is pleased to present the “first take” pieces for its inaugural Roundtable from Professors Hal Bruff, Steven Calabresi, Gary Lawson, Rick Pildes, and Christopher Yoo. The debate is on Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Professor Peter Strauss’s previously laid the foundation for the debate with his introductory piece. We will also be publishing response pieces from the professors on December 7.

Harold H. Bruff, Bringing the Independent Agencies in from the Cold, 62 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 63 (2009).

Gary Lawson, The “Principal” Reason Why the PCAOB is Unconstitutional, 62 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 73 (2009).

Richard H. Pildes, Putting Power Back Into Separation of Powers Analysis: Why the SEC-PCAOB Structure is Constitutional, 62 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 85 (2009).

Steven G. Calabresi & Christopher S. Yoo, Remove Morrison v. Olson, 62 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 103 (2009).

1

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 62, Number 5 (October 2009)

vlr3

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 62, Number 5 (October 2009)

ARTICLES

Kerry Abrams, The Hidden Dimension of Nineteenth-Century Immigration Law, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1353 (2009).

Robert A. Mikos, On the Limits of Supremacy: Medical Marijuana and the States’ Overlooked Power to Legalize Federal Crime, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1421 (2009).

Alan R. Palmiter & Ahmed E. Taha, Star Creation: The Incubation of Mutual Funds, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1485

COMMENT

Andrew R. Gould, The Hidden Second Amendment Framework within District of Columbia v. Heller, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1535 (2009).

NOTE

Christopher Hamp-Lyons, The Dragon in the Room: China’s Anti-Monopoloy Law and International Merger Review, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1577 (2009).

Interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Check out our website for more details.

0

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 62, Number 4 (May 2009)

 

vlr3 

 

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 62, Number 4 (May 2009)

 

ARTICLES

 

Kristin A. Collins, Administering Marriage: Marriage-Based Entitlements, Bureaucracy, and the Legal Construction of the Family, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1085 (2009).

 

Kevin M. Stack, The Reviewability of the President’s Statutory Powers, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1171 (2009).

 

ESSAY

 

Grant Hayden & Matthew Bodie, Arrow’s Theorem and the Exclusive Shareholder Franchise, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1217 (2009).

 

NOTES

 

Lauren Lowe, What Employees Say, or What Employers Do: How Post-Cleveland Decisions Continue to Obscure Discrimination, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1245 (2009).

 

John Benjamin Schrader, Reawakening “Privileges or Immunities”: An Originalist Blueprint for Invalidating State Felon Disenfranchisement Laws, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1285 (2009).

 

Charles Thompson Switzer, Escaping the Takings Maze: Impact Fees and the Limits of the Takings Clause, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1315 (2009).

 

Interested in writing a response to one of these articles? Check out our website to find out how.

0

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc

en-banc-white

 

Defending a Social Learning Explanation: A Comment on The Origins of Shared Intuitions of Justice

 

by Christopher Brett Jaeger

 

            This Response addresses the November 2007 Vanderbilt Law Review Article, The Origins of Shared Intuitions of Justice, by Professors Paul H. Robinson, Robert Kurzban, and Owen D. Jones. The Article reviews empirical evidence that people share surprisingly similar moral inclinations—especially with respect to core social principles like opposition to unprovoked physical harm, the taking of property, and cheating in exchanges—and argues that a specific evolved human mechanism provides a more plausible explanation of these similarities than an accumulated social learning theory.

 

This Response defines the “accumulated social learning” theory and defends it, addressing its purported shortcomings and highlighting areas in which accumulated social learning theory explains present evidence better than an evolutionary theory. Specifically, this Response explains that accumulated social learning theory predicts that people will widely share core moral inclinations, just like evolutionary theory. Furthermore, on the more peripheral issues in which the data demonstrate that moral inclinations differ, social learning theory better accounts for the differences. This Response concludes that accumulated social learning theory provides the simpler, cleaner explanation of the current data.

0

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc

Vanderbilt-LR-Forum-Logo1.gif

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc

Reforming the Legal Ethics Curriculum: A Comment on Edward Rubin’s “What’s Wrong with Langdell’s Method and What To Do About It”

by Lauren Solberg

This Response addresses Edward Rubin’s March 2007 article “What’s Wrong With Langdell’s Method and What to Do About It,” which discusses the need for curriculum reform in U.S. law schools. He proposes a curriculum overhaul to reform, at a minimum, first-year law school courses, and he advocates that law schools develop more concentrations—programs akin to undergraduate majors—to offer students a more cohesive curriculum. Rubin also briefly mentions general student and faculty distaste for the course in professional responsibility required by most law schools but proposes no remedy for this issue.

This Response proposes to supplement Rubin’s suggested comprehensive reform with just such a remedy. Recent publications suggest that the required professional responsibility course in its current form is indeed disliked, outdated, and fails to teach law students adequately about real-world ethical issues in legal practice. To resolve this problem, law schools should implement a re-tooled legal ethics curriculum that weaves legal ethics into each core course in the law school curriculum. This method of integration, known as the “pervasive method,” will educate students about practical and relevant ethical issues associated with the particular legal discipline in conjunction with the standard course material. It will serve to reduce monotony in the coursework and provide a better setting than the standard Professional Responsibility course for examining real-world ethical issues in legal practice.

This Response will discuss how to implement the pervasive method in the law school setting and the advantages and disadvantages that accompany it.

Interested in writing a response for En Banc? Check out our website to find out how.

0

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 62, Number 3 (April 2009)

Vand-L-Rev-Logo.jpg

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 62, Number 3 (April 2009)

ARTICLES

Tomer Broude & Doron Teichman, Outsourcing and Insourcing Crime: The Political Economy of Globalized Criminal Activity, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 795 (2009).

Terry A. Maroney, Emotional Common Sense as Constitutional Law, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 851 (2009).

Caren Myers Morrison, Privacy, Accountability, and the Cooperating Defendant: Towards a New Role for Internet Access to Court Records, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 921 (2009).

NOTES

Lesley R. Attkisson, Putting a Stop to Sprawl: State Intervention as a Tool for Growth Management, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 979 (2009).

Lauren Gaffney, The Circle of Assent: How “Agreement” Can Save Mandatory Arbitration in Long-Term Care Contracts, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1017 (2009).

Georgia Lee Sims, The Criminalization of Mental Illness: How Theoretical Failures Create Real Problems in the Criminal Justice System, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1053 (2009).

Interested in writing a response to one of these articles? Check out En Banc to find out how.