Author Archive for yale-law-journal

The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 119, Issue 4 & Forthcoming Supreme Court Conference

posted by Yale Law Journal

January 2010 | Volume 119, Issue 4

ARTICLES
	Antibankruptcy Douglas G. Baird & Robert K. Rasmussen	648
	Fourth Amendment Seizures of Computer Data Orin S. Kerr	700
FEATURE
	American Needle v. NFL: An Opportunity To Reshape Sports Law Michael A. McCann	726
NOTE
	Strategic or Sincere? Analyzing Agency Use of Guidance Documents Connor N. Raso	782
COMMENTS
	Suspending the Writ at Guantánamo: Take III?	825
	Constitutional Avoidance Step Zero	837

On Tuesday, March 23, 2010, The Yale Law Journal Online will join with the Yale Law School Supreme Court Advocacy Clinic to host the concluding segment of “Important Questions of Federal Law: Assessing the Supreme Court’s Case Selection Process.”  The panel will bring together federal judges, members of the legal academia, and practitioners to discuss potential reforms to the Supreme Court’s certiorari process. All events will be held at Yale Law School’s Sterling Law Building in New Haven, CT. Please click here for more information.

IMPORTANT QUESTIONS OF FEDERAL LAW
Yale Law School | New Haven, CT | March 23, 2010

Panel I: The Judge’s Perspective: Is the Court Taking the “Right” Cases?
4:10pm‐5:30pm, Room 129

Moderator: Linda Greenhouse (Yale Law School)
Panelists:
The Honorable José Cabranes (2d Cir.)
Drew Days (Yale Law School)
The Honorable Brett Kavanaugh (D.C. Cir.)
The Honorable Sandra Lynch (1st Cir.)

Panel II: The Practitioners’ Perspective: What Makes An Issue “Important” to the Court?
5:40pm‐6:55pm, Room 127

Moderator: Charles Rothfeld (Mayer Brown LLP and Yale Law School)
Panelists:
John Elwood (Vinson & Elkins LLP)
Orin Kerr (George Washington University Law School)
Patricia Millett (Akin Gump LLP)
Judith Resnik (Yale Law School)

  March 9, 2010 at 9:44 pm   Posted in: Administrative Law, Bankruptcy, Civil Rights, Conferences, Constitutional Law, Cyberlaw, Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Contents, Law Rev Forum, Supreme Court   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal Online: The Justice as Commissioner: Benching the Judge-Umpire Analogy

posted by Yale Law Journal

The approach of viewing federal judges in the United States as baseball umpires has gained traction with the recent nomination processes of the Supreme Court, and sparked debate in both legal academia and across the political spectrum. The Yale Law Journal Online is therefore pleased to announce the publication of The Justice as Commissioner: Benching the Judge-Umpire Analogy by Aaron Zelinsky (Yale Law School). Mr. Zelinsky offers a timely assessment and critique of this analogy, as well as alternatives to envisioning the role of the Supreme Court.

Preferred citation: Aaron Zelinsky, The Justice as Commissioner: Benching the Judge-Umpire Analogy, 119 YALE L.J. ONLINE 113 (2010), http://yalelawjournal.org/2010/03/03/zelinsky.html.

  March 8, 2010 at 9:39 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum, Supreme Court   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal Online: Richard Lazarus and Sanford Levinson on the Supreme Court’s Certiorari Process

posted by Yale Law Journal

Concluding its series on proposed reforms to the certiorari process, The Yale Law Journal Online is pleased to present pieces by Richard Lazarus of the Georgetown Law Center and Sanford Levinson of the University of Texas Law School.  Lazarus and Levinson approach the issue of the Supreme Court’s docket composition through a variety of perspectives, and shed light on the ongoing debate over whether the declining number of cases before the Court presents a problem for the American judicial system.

The Yale Law Journal Online and the Yale Law School Supreme Court Advocacy Clinic will be a hosting a second conference on the subject on March 23, 2010 at Yale Law School in New Haven, Connecticut.  Further details will be provided shortly.

Preferred Citations:

Richard J. Lazarus, Docket Capture at the High Court, 119 Yale L.J. Online 89 (2009), available at http://yalelawjournal.org/2010/01/24/lazarus.html.

Sanford Levinson, Assessing the Supreme Court’s Current Caseload: A Question of Law or Politics?, 119 Yale L.J. Online 99 (2010), available at http://yalelawjournal.org/2010/02/01/levinson.html.

  February 2, 2010 at 11:29 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum, Supreme Court   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 119, Issue 3 (December 2009)

posted by Yale Law Journal

  January 12, 2010 at 9:48 pm   Posted in: Constitutional Law, Immigration, International & Comparative Law, Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Contents, Property Law, Tax   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal Online: Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson’s “If It Ain’t Broke . . .”

posted by Yale Law Journal

The Yale Law Journal Online is pleased to present its last publication of 2009.  The Hon. J. Harvie Wilkinson III addresses the recent calls to reform the Supreme Court’s certiorari process in this Essay, which cautions against reforms that may cause significant collateral damage to the American judicial system.  Judge Wilkinson addresses the recent contraction of the Supreme Court’s docket, challenging the notion that a smaller docket is cause for alarm.  He also challenges a number of the proposals on the table, invoking a historical perspective to argue against tampering with the fundamental structure and role of the Court.  These arguments continue Judge Wilkinson’s previous remarks on the subject at the Yale Law School-sponsored conference, “Important Questions of Federal Law.”

Preferred Citation: J. Harvie Wilkinson III, If It Ain’t Broke . . ., 119 YALE L.J. ONLINE 67 (2009), available at http://yalelawjournal.org/2009/12/16/wilkinson.html.

  December 25, 2009 at 12:54 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum, Supreme Court   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal Online: Is It Important To Be Important?: Evaluating the Supreme Court’s Case-Selection Process

posted by Yale Law Journal

On September 19, 2009, Frederick Schauer discussed the state of the Supreme Court’s certiorari process at a conference sponsored by The Yale Law Journal Online and the Yale Law School Supreme Court Advocacy Clinic.  Professor Schauer’s Essay on the topic, evaluating the dwindling caseload of the Court, the potential for an informational disadvantage on the part of the Justices themselves, and means by which a solution may be found, is now available on YLJ Online.

  December 9, 2009 at 8:27 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum, Supreme Court, Uncategorized   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal Vol. 119, Issue 2 (2009)

posted by Yale Law Journal

Article
	Presidential Power over International Law: Restoring the Balance Oona A. Hathaway	140
Notes
	Disastrously Misunderstood: Judicial Deference in the Japanese-American Cases Jonathan M. Justl	270
	Created in Its Image: The Race Analogy, Gay Identity, and Gay Litigation in the 1950s-1970s Craig J. Konnoth	316
Comment
	A Case for Varying Interpretive Deference at the State Level	373

  December 7, 2009 at 8:29 am   Posted in: Administrative Law, Feminism and Gender, International & Comparative Law, Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Contents   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal Online: Marriage, Property and [In]Equality: Remedying ERISA’s Disparate Impact on Spousal Wealth

posted by Yale Law Journal

The Yale Law Journal Online is pleased to announce the publication of Marriage, Property and [In]Equality: Remedying ERISA’s Disparate Impact on Spousal Wealth, by Paula A. Monopoli.  In this piece, Monopoli argues that Congress has a historic opportunity to resolve an ongoing gender disparity in ERISA through considered pension reforms.  She outlines the steps that may be necessary to bring federal pension law into alignment with the general movement toward gender equality in marriage property law.

Preferred citation: Paula A. Monopoli, Marriage, Property and [In]Equality: Remedying ERISA’s Disparate Impact on Spousal Wealth, 119 YALE L.J. ONLINE 61 (2009), http://yalelawjournal.org/2009/11/4/monopoli.html.

  November 6, 2009 at 8:08 am   Posted in: Uncategorized   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal Vol. 119, Issue 1 (2009)

posted by Yale Law Journal

Article
	Proposing a Place for Politics in Arbitrary and Capricious Review Kathryn A. Watts	2
Note
	When the Interests of Municipalities and Their Officials Diverge: Municipal Dual Representation and Conflicts of Interest in § 1983 Litigation Dina Mishra	86
Comment
	Fantasy Liability: Publicity Law, the First Amendment, and Fantasy Sports	131

  November 2, 2009 at 8:35 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Contents   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal Online: Citizens Not United: The Lack of Stockholder Voluntariness in Corporate Political Speech

posted by Yale Law Journal

 

The Yale Law Journal Online is pleased to announce the publication of Citizens Not United: The Lack of Stockholder Voluntariness in Corporate Political Speech by Elizabeth Pollman, a Stanford Law Fellow and former practitioner at Latham & Watkins LLP.  Pollman’s piece covers the potential for sweeping changes to corporate political speech law in light of the Supreme Court proceedings in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

  October 26, 2009 at 1:30 pm   Posted in: Corporate Law, Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum, Media Law, Politics, Supreme Court   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal Online

posted by Yale Law Journal

The Yale Law Journal is pleased to present its new online platform, The Yale Law Journal Online (http://www.yalelawjournal.org/). YLJ Online will continue the Journal’s mission of providing accessible and substantive scholarship through the online medium. It offers original essays on timely and novel legal developments and responses to articles in the print Journal, as well as adapted lectures and recordings/podcasts of featured pieces.

When the Journal launched The Pocket Part in 2005, it was the first law review to establish an original online companion; as the Journal nears its 120th anniversary, YLJ Online represents the next step in that endeavor. The launch of YLJ Online’s original content section features an essay by Hiro N. Aragaki, addressing the Hall Street v. Mattel litigation and manifest disregard, as well as responses by selected scholars to Michael Stokes Paulsen’s The Constitutional Power To Interpret International Law (118 Yale L.J. 1762 (2009)).

In the coming weeks, YLJ Online will present a variety of essays and features on marriage, property, and corporate law, as well as a selection of pieces from the Hon. J. Harvie Wilkinson III and other participants in its inaugural Washington, D.C. conference on the Supreme Court’s certiorari process. Among the many features that YLJ Online offers are Essays (4,000-6,000 words), Commentaries (under 2,000 words), Responses, adapted lectures and solicited pieces. More information can be found on the Submissions page (http://www.yalelawjournal.org/submissions.html). All YLJ Online publications are available and fully searchable through LexisNexis and Westlaw. The Journal also provides all YLJ Online pieces in PDF/reprint format, and podcasts on its website/iTunes for selected pieces. For questions regarding YLJ Online, please contact the Journal’s Managing Online Editor, Jeff K. Lee, here.

Now available on YLJ Online:

Essay

Hiro N. Aragaki, The Mess of Manifest Disregard, 119 Yale L.J. Online 1 (2009). [HTML] [PDF]

Responses

Julian Ku, The Prospects for the Peaceful Co-Existence of Constitutional and International Law, 119 Yale L.J. Online 15 (2009). [HTML] [PDF]

Peter J. Spiro, Wishing International Law Away, 119 Yale L.J. Online 23 (2009). [HTML] [PDF]

Margaret E. McGuinness, Old W(h)ine, Old Bottles: A Response to Professor Paulsen, 119 Yale L.J. Online 31 (2009). [HTML] [PDF]

Robert Ahdieh, The Fog of Certainty, 119 Yale L.J. Online 41 (2009). [HTML] [PDF]

  October 2, 2009 at 7:28 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Contents, Law Rev Forum, Law School (Law Reviews)   Print This Post   No Comments

Conference: Important Questions of Federal Law—Assessing the Supreme Court’s Case Selection Process

posted by Yale Law Journal

The Yale Law School Supreme Court Advocacy Clinic and The Yale Law Journal Online, the forthcoming online platform of The Yale Law Journal, will host a half-day conference, “Important Questions of Federal Law”: Assessing the Supreme Court’s Case Selection Process, on September 18, 2009, at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. The conference will consider the nature and causes of changes in the Supreme Court’s docket in recent years, as well as suggestions for reform of the certiorari process. The conference is made possible by the generous support of the Oscar M. Ruebhausen Fund. Practicing attorneys, judges, academics, and students are invited to attend. There is no charge for the conference, but space is limited, so all attendees must pre-register here. Breakfast and refreshments will be provided. If you are unable to attend, podcasts of conference sessions and downloadable papers from the panelists will be made available by Yale Law School’s main website. Select papers will also be published by The Yale Law Journal Online. Information on the conference can also be downloaded by clicking here.  For more information on The Yale Law Journal Online and the conference, please contact YLJ Online Editor Kathleen Claussen here.

  August 31, 2009 at 7:14 pm   Posted in: Conferences, Constitutional Law, Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum, Supreme Court   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal Online: Sonia Sotomayor’s Note

posted by Yale Law Journal

The Yale Law Journal Online* is pleased to present the Note published by Sonia Sotomayor in Volume 88 (1979).  Judge Sotomayor, who has been nominated by President Obama to the Supreme Court of the United States, was a member of the Yale Law School Class of 1979 and an editor of The Yale Law Journal.   If confirmed by the U.S Senate, she would be the Court’s first Hispanic justice and its third woman.  Judge Sotomayor would also join two other Yale Law School graduates currently on the Court—Justice Clarence Thomas ’74 and former Journal editor Justice Samuel Alito ’75.

Judge Sotomayor’s piece, Statehood and the Equal Footing Doctrine: The Case for Puerto Rican Seabed Rights, analyzed issues regarding Puerto Rico’s ability to maintain rights to its seabed if it pursued statehood.   The Note can be accessed here.

*Effective Fall 2009, The Pocket Part will be integrated into The Yale Law Journal Online, the new online companion and platform of the Journal.  Further details will be forthcoming.

  June 1, 2009 at 7:07 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum, Supreme Court   Print This Post   No Comments

The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part: The Example of America

posted by Yale Law Journal

  May 10, 2009 at 8:29 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum   Print This Post   Comments Closed

The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part: The Mismatch Between Probable Cause and Partial Matching

posted by Yale Law Journal

Volume 118 of The Pocket Part is pleased to announce our final publication, The Mismatch Between Probable Cause and Partial Matching by Natalie Ram. Ram’s piece discusses a new rule requiring federal officials to collect and retain DNA not only from persons convicted of a federal offense, but also from those merely arrested on suspicion of being involved in a federal offense. Among its flaws, this rule exacerbates the tension between the shared nature of genetic information and the standards justifying DNA collection and retention. By linking DNA collection to probable cause, the new regulation threatens to destabilize our understandings about what constitutes probable cause and to put millions of never-arrested individuals under perpetual genetic suspicion.

  April 13, 2009 at 10:16 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum   Print This Post   Comments Closed

The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part: Roberts Court Jurisprudence and Legislative Enactment Costs

posted by Yale Law Journal

The Pocket Part is proud to announce the publication of Roberts Court Jurisprudence and Legislative Enactment Costs by William Rinner. The piece highlights a crucial but overlooked function of the judiciary in crafting doctrines that discourage constitutionally problematic statutes. Rinner argues that rather than drawing explicit boundaries of permissible and impermissible statutory schemes, courts can and do produce constitutional doctrine that leaves these boundaries blurry, thus raising the risk of reversal for time- and resource-strapped legislators.

  March 31, 2009 at 11:19 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum   Print This Post   Comments Closed

The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part: Bruce Ackerman on Mirijan Damaška

posted by Yale Law Journal

The Pocket Part is please to announce the publication of a short essay by Bruce A. Ackerman written in tribute to his long time friend and colleague Mirijan Damaška.

  March 23, 2009 at 9:15 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum   Print This Post   Comments Closed

The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part: Legal Ethics Symposium

posted by Yale Law Journal

The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part is pleased to announce the publication of our symposium on legal ethics. This week presents the final Pocket Part symposium issue of the academic year.

  March 4, 2009 at 8:40 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum   Print This Post   Comments Closed

The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part: The Continuing Viability of Medicaid Rights After the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005

posted by Yale Law Journal

In the latest edition of The Pocket Part Harper Jean Tobin and Rochelle Bobroff, attorneys at the Federal Rights Project of the National Senior Citizens Law Center, respond to a recent note in The Yale Law Journal, in which Jon Donenberg argued that (1) program changes in Medicaid ushered in by the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA) sub silentio rendered Medicaid’s basic availability provision unenforceable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and (2) state fair hearing procedures constitute the best alternative for enforcement of beneficiary rights. Tobin and Bobroff argue that Donenberg misreads both the DRA and § 1983 jurisprudence, overstates the usefulness of fair hearings, and overlooks the better alternative of preemption claims to enforce the Medicaid Act.

  February 9, 2009 at 9:05 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum   Print This Post   Comments Closed

The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part: Virtual Worlds Symposium

posted by Yale Law Journal

The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part is pleased to announce the publication of a symposium on legal issues surrounding the rise of virtual worlds. This week presents the second of the two part virtual worlds symposium issue with pieces by Leandra Ledermann and Zachery Jones.

  January 26, 2009 at 8:32 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Yale), Law Rev Forum   Print This Post   Comments Closed

• « Older Entries