<?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; Law Rev Contents</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/category/law-rev-contents/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com</link>
	<description>The Law, the Universe, and Everything</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 03:47:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 123:5 (2010)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/harvard-law-review-1235-2010.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/harvard-law-review-1235-2010.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:09:36 +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.concurringopinions.com/?p=26202</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center"> </p>
Volume 123 · March 2010 · Number 5
<p style="text-align: left"> </p>
<p style="text-align: left">ARTICLES
Economic Crisis and the Rise of Judicial Elections and Judicial Review
Jed Handelsman Shugerman</p>
<p>Shareholder Opportunism in a World of Risky Debt
Richard Squire</p>
<p>ESSAY
Inducing Moral Deliberation: On the Occasional Virtues of Fog
Seana Valentine Shiffrin</p>
<p>DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW
Developments in the Law – State Action and the Public/Private Distinction</p>
<p>NOTES
The Single Publication Rule and Online Copyright: Tensions Between Broadcast, Licensing, and Defamation Law</p>
<p>Designing a Prisoner Reentry System Hardwired To Manage Disputes</p>
<p>RECENT CASES
First Circuit Adopts Plain Meaning of Requirement that Plaintiffs Give Government Their Information Before Filing Suit. — United States ex rel. Duxbury v. Ortho Biotech Products, L.P., 579 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2009). </p>
<p>Ninth Circuit Requires Case-by-Case Prudential Analysis of Exhaustion of Local Remedies in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/index.php"><img src="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/images/hlr_logo.gif" border="0" alt="Harvard Law Review" /></a> </p>
<h1 style="text-align: center">Volume 123 · March 2010 · Number 5</h1>
<p style="text-align: left"><strong> </strong></p>
<p style="text-align: left"><strong>ARTICLES</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/march10/Article_6868.php">Economic Crisis and the Rise of Judicial Elections and Judicial Review</a><br />
<em>Jed Handelsman Shugerman</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/march10/Article_6878.php">Shareholder Opportunism in a World of Risky Debt</a><br />
<em>Richard Squire</em></p>
<p><strong>ESSAY</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/march10/Essay_6888.php">Inducing Moral Deliberation: On the Occasional Virtues of Fog</a><br />
<em>Seana Valentine Shiffrin</em></p>
<p><strong>DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/march10/Developments_in_the_Law_6898.php">Developments in the Law – State Action and the Public/Private Distinction</a></p>
<p><strong>NOTES</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/march10/Note_6908.php">The Single Publication Rule and Online Copyright: Tensions Between Broadcast, Licensing, and Defamation Law</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/march10/Note_6918.php">Designing a Prisoner Reentry System Hardwired To Manage Disputes</a></p>
<p><strong>RECENT CASES</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/march10/Recent_Case_6928.php">First Circuit Adopts Plain Meaning of Requirement that Plaintiffs Give Government Their Information Before Filing Suit. — <em>United States ex rel. Duxbury v. Ortho Biotech Products, L.P.</em>, 579 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2009). </a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/march10/Recent_Case_6938.php">Ninth Circuit Requires Case-by-Case Prudential Analysis of Exhaustion of Local Remedies in Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act Suits. — <em>Cassirer v. Kingdom of Spain</em>, 580 F.3d 1048 (9th Cir. 2009). </a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/march10/Recent_Case_6948.php">Ninth Circuit Strikes Down California Law Extending Statute of Limitations for the Recovery of Holocaust-Era Artwork. — <em>Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art at Pasadena</em>, No. 07-56691, 2010 WL 114959 (9th Cir. Jan 14, 2010). </a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/harvard-law-review-1235-2010.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cornell Law Review, Volume 95 Number 3 (March 2010)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/cornell-law-review-volume-95-number-3-march-2010.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/cornell-law-review-volume-95-number-3-march-2010.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:09:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Cornell Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Cornell)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=26081</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p>Cornell Law Review, Volume 95 Number 3 (March 2010)</p>
<p>Articles</p>
<p>Liberating  Copyright: Thinking Beyond Free Speech
Jennifer E. Rothman</p>
<p>Off  the Hook
Kevin Werbach</p>
<p>Notes</p>
<p>Invisible  and Involuntary: Female Genital Mutilation as a Basis for Asylum
Zsaleh Harivandi</p>
<p>Fraud  on the Global Market: U.S. Courts Don&#8217;t Buy It; Subject-Matter  Jurisdiction in F-Cubed Securities Class Actions
Julie B. Rubenstein</p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/cornell2.jpg" alt="cornell2.jpg" width="498" height="66" /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/Current-Issue.cfm">Cornell Law Review, Volume 95 Number 3 (March 2010)</a></p>
<p><strong>Articles</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/upload/Rothman-final.pdf">Liberating  Copyright: Thinking Beyond Free Speech<br />
</a><em>Jennifer E. Rothman</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/upload/Werbach-final.pdf">Off  the Hook<br />
</a><em>Kevin Werbach</em></p>
<p><strong>Notes</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/upload/Harivandi-final.pdf">Invisible  and Involuntary: Female Genital Mutilation as a Basis for Asylum<br />
</a><em>Zsaleh Harivandi</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/upload/Rubenstein-final.pdf">Fraud  on the Global Market: U.S. Courts Don&#8217;t Buy It; Subject-Matter  Jurisdiction in F-Cubed Securities Class Actions</a><br />
<em>Julie B. Rubenstein</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/cornell-law-review-volume-95-number-3-march-2010.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fordham Law Review, Volume 78 Number 4 (March 2010)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/fordham-law-review-volume-78-number-4-march-2010.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/fordham-law-review-volume-78-number-4-march-2010.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:33:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fordham Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Fordham)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=26017</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>
</p>



Volume 78

<p align="center">March 2010</p>


<p align="right">Number 4</p>




<p align="center">ARTICLES
</p>
<p>Property in Crisis
Nestor M. Davidson &#38; Rashmi Dyal-Chand</p>
<p>Prospective Compensation in Lieu of a Final
Injunction in Patent and Copyright Cases
H. Tomás Gómez-Arostegui</p>
<p align="center">ESSAY
</p>
<p>Reducing Information Gaps To Reduce the Tax Gap:
When Is Information Reporting Warranted?
Leandra Lederman</p>
<p align="center">NOTES
</p>
<p>To Catch a Predator or To Save His Marriage:
Advocating for an Expansive Child Abuse Exception
to the Marital Privileges in Federal Courts
Emily C. Aldridge</p>
<p>Freedom, Finality, and Federal Preemption:
Seeking Expanded Judicial Review of Arbitration
Awards Under State Law After Hall Street
Brian T. Burns</p>
<p>The CAFA Mass Action Numerosity Requirement:
Three Problems with Counting to 100
Guyon Knight</p>
<p>Matters of Public Safety and the Current
Quarrel over the Scope of the Quarles
Exception to Miranda
Rorie A. Norton</p>
<p>Using Disparate Impact Analysis in Fair Housing
Act Claims:  Landlord Withdrawal from
the Section 8 Voucher Program
Rebecca Tracy Rotem</p>
<p>Strictly Wrong [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/fordham-law-review/7983.htm"><br />
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-21298" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/fordhamlrev_header.jpg" border="0" alt="fordhamlrev_header" width="500" height="177" /></a></p>
<table align="center" style="width: 500px" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="167">Volume 78</td>
<td width="166">
<p align="center">March 2010</p>
</td>
<td width="167">
<p align="right">Number 4</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p align="center"><b>ARTICLES<br />
</b></p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Davidson_-_Dyal-Chand__March_2010.pdf">Property in Crisis</a><br />
Nestor M. Davidson &amp; Rashmi Dyal-Chand</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Gomez-Arostegui__March_2010.pdf">Prospective Compensation in Lieu of a Final<br />
Injunction in Patent and Copyright Cases</a><br />
H. Tomás Gómez-Arostegui</p>
<p align="center"><b>ESSAY<br />
</b></p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Lederman__March_2010.pdf">Reducing Information Gaps To Reduce the Tax Gap:<br />
When Is Information Reporting Warranted?</a><br />
Leandra Lederman</p>
<p align="center"><b>NOTES<br />
</b></p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Aldridge__March_2010.pdf">To Catch a Predator or To Save His Marriage:<br />
Advocating for an Expansive Child Abuse Exception<br />
to the Marital Privileges in Federal Courts</a><br />
Emily C. Aldridge</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Burns_March_2010.pdf">Freedom, Finality, and Federal Preemption:<br />
Seeking Expanded Judicial Review of Arbitration<br />
Awards Under State Law After Hall Street</a><br />
Brian T. Burns</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Knight__March_2010.pdf">The CAFA Mass Action Numerosity Requirement:<br />
Three Problems with Counting to 100</a><br />
Guyon Knight</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Norton__March_2010.pdf">Matters of Public Safety and the Current<br />
Quarrel over the Scope of the <em>Quarles</em><br />
Exception to <em>Miranda</em></a><br />
Rorie A. Norton</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Rotem__March_2010.pdf">Using Disparate Impact Analysis in Fair Housing<br />
Act Claims:  Landlord Withdrawal from<br />
the Section 8 Voucher Program</a><br />
Rebecca Tracy Rotem</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Shin-Li_March_2010.pdf">Strictly Wrong as a Tax Policy:  The Strict<br />
Liability Penalty Standard in Noneconomic<br />
Substance Transactions</a><br />
Mik Shin-Li</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/fordham-law-review-volume-78-number-4-march-2010.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 119, Issue 4 &amp; Forthcoming Supreme Court Conference</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/the-yale-law-journal-vol-119-issue-4-forthcoming-supreme-court-conference.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/the-yale-law-journal-vol-119-issue-4-forthcoming-supreme-court-conference.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 04:44:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Yale Law Journal</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Administrative Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conferences]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cyberlaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Yale)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Forum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=25943</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p>January  2010 &#124; Volume 119,  Issue 4</p>



ARTICLES


 
Antibankruptcy
Douglas G. Baird &#38; 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



<p>
</p>
<p></p>
<p>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 &#8220;Important Questions of Federal Law: Assessing the  Supreme Court&#8217;s Case Selection Process.&#8221;  The panel will bring together  federal judges, members of the legal academia, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/"><img src="../wp-content/uploads/2009/11/cop_ylj.jpg" alt="The Yale Law Journal" width="530" height="102" /></a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: medium"><strong>January  2010 | Volume 119,  Issue 4</strong></span></p>
<table style="width: 367px;height: 369px" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" valign="top"><span style="font-size: small">ARTICLES</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal/content-pages/antibankruptcy/">Antibankruptcy</a><br />
Douglas G. Baird &amp; Robert K. Rasmussen</span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top"><span style="font-size: small">648</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal/content-pages/fourth-amendment-seizures-of-computer-data/">Fourth Amendment Seizures of  Computer Data</a><br />
Orin S. Kerr</span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top"><span style="font-size: small">700</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" valign="top"><span style="font-size: small">FEATURE</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal/content-pages/american-needle-v.-nfl:-an-opportunity-to-reshape-sports-law/"><em>American Needle v. NFL</em>:  An Opportunity<br />
To Reshape Sports Law</a><br />
Michael A. McCann</span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top"><span style="font-size: small">726</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" valign="top"><span style="font-size: small">NOTE</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal/content-pages/strategic-or-sincere?-analyzing-agency-use-of-guidance-documents/">Strategic or Sincere? Analyzing  Agency Use of<br />
Guidance Documents</a><br />
Connor N. Raso</span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top"><span style="font-size: small">782</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" valign="top"><span style="font-size: small">COMMENTS</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal/content-pages/suspending-the-writ-at-guant%c3%a1namo:-take-iii?/">Suspending the Writ at  Guantánamo: Take III?</a></span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top"><span style="font-size: small">825</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"> </span></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal/content-pages/constitutional-avoidance-step-zero/">Constitutional Avoidance Step  Zero </a></span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top"><span style="font-size: small">837</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><span style="font-size: small"><br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: small"><em><img src="../wp-content/uploads/2009/10/yljonline-550x97.jpg" alt="yljonline" width="550" height="97" /></em></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: small">On Tuesday, March 23, 2010, <em>The Yale Law Journal Online </em>will  join with the Yale Law School Supreme Court Advocacy Clinic to host the  concluding segment of &#8220;Important Questions of Federal Law: Assessing the  Supreme Court&#8217;s Case Selection Process.&#8221;  The panel will bring together  federal judges, members of the legal academia, and practitioners to  discuss potential reforms to the Supreme Court&#8217;s certiorari process. All events will be held at Yale Law School&#8217;s Sterling Law Building in  New Haven, CT. Please click <a href="http://www.yalelawjournal.org/journal-news/journal-happenings/ylj-online-and-the-supreme-court-clinic-host-federal-judges-and-experts-in-conference/">here</a> for more information.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: small"><span style="font-size: medium"><strong>IMPORTANT QUESTIONS OF FEDERAL LAW </strong></span><br />
Yale Law School |  New Haven, CT | March 23, 2010</p>
<p><strong>Panel I: The Judge&#8217;s Perspective: Is the Court  Taking the &#8220;Right&#8221; Cases?</strong><br />
4:10pm‐5:30pm, Room 129</p>
<p>Moderator:  Linda Greenhouse (Yale Law School)<br />
Panelists:<br />
The Honorable José  Cabranes (2d Cir.)<br />
Drew Days (Yale Law School)<br />
The Honorable Brett  Kavanaugh (D.C. Cir.)<br />
The Honorable Sandra Lynch (1st Cir.)</p>
<p><strong>Panel  II: The Practitioners&#8217; Perspective: What Makes An Issue “Important” to  the Court?</strong><br />
5:40pm‐6:55pm, Room 127</p>
<p>Moderator: Charles  Rothfeld (Mayer Brown LLP and Yale Law School)<br />
Panelists:<br />
John  Elwood (Vinson &amp; Elkins LLP)<br />
Orin Kerr (George Washington  University Law School)<br />
Patricia Millett (Akin Gump LLP)<br />
Judith  Resnik (Yale Law School)</span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/the-yale-law-journal-vol-119-issue-4-forthcoming-supreme-court-conference.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 123:4 (2010)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/harvard-law-review-1234-2010.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/harvard-law-review-1234-2010.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 17:38:33 +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.concurringopinions.com/?p=25654</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center"></p>
Volume 123 · February 2010 · Number 4
<p> </p>
<p>ARTICLE
Intellectual Property Law and the Sumptuary Code
Barton Beebe</p>
<p>BOOK REVIEW
The Possibilities and Limitations of Privatization
Edward Rubin</p>
<p>NOTES
Prosecutorial Power and the Legitimacy of the Military Justice System</p>
<p>Badging: Section 230 Immunity in a Web 2.0 World</p>
<p>Making Ballot Initiatives Work: Some Assembly Required</p>
<p>RECENT CASES
En Banc Ninth Circuit Holds that the Government Should Waive Reliance on Plain View Doctrine in Digital Contexts. — United States v. Comprehensive Drug Testing, Inc., 579 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc).</p>
<p>Maryland Court of Appeals Sets Out Process Required Before Court May Compel Identification of Anonymous Internet Defendants. — Independent Newspapers, Inc. v. Brodie, 966 A.2d 432 (Md. 2009).</p>
<p>Fifth Circuit Equally Divides on Decision To Uphold Judgment Against District Attorney&#8217;s Office for Withholding Exculpatory Evidence. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/index.php"><img src="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/images/hlr_logo.gif" border="0" alt="Harvard Law Review" /></a></p>
<h1 style="text-align: center">Volume 123 · February 2010 · Number 4</h1>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>ARTICLE</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Article_6838.php">Intellectual Property Law and the Sumptuary Code</a><br />
<em>Barton Beebe</em></p>
<p><strong>BOOK REVIEW</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Book_Review_6839.php">The Possibilities and Limitations of Privatization</a><br />
<em>Edward Rubin</em></p>
<p><strong>NOTES</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Note_6840.php">Prosecutorial Power and the Legitimacy of the Military Justice System</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Note_6842.php">Badging: Section 230 Immunity in a Web 2.0 World</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Note_6841.php">Making Ballot Initiatives Work: Some Assembly Required</a></p>
<p><strong>RECENT CASES</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Recent_Case_6843.php">En Banc Ninth Circuit Holds that the Government Should Waive Reliance on Plain View Doctrine in Digital Contexts. — <em>United States v. Comprehensive Drug Testing, Inc.</em>, 579 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc).</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Recent_Case_6844.php">Maryland Court of Appeals Sets Out Process Required Before Court May Compel Identification of Anonymous Internet Defendants. — <em>Independent Newspapers, Inc. v. Brodie</em>, 966 A.2d 432 (Md. 2009).</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Recent_Case_6845.php">Fifth Circuit Equally Divides on Decision To Uphold Judgment Against District Attorney&#8217;s Office for Withholding Exculpatory Evidence. — <em>Thompson v. Connick</em>, 578 F.3d 293 (5th Cir. 2009) (en banc).</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Recent_Case_6846.php">Third Circuit Issues Split Decision in Case Involving Gay Man&#8217;s Harassment Claims. — <em>Prowel v. Wise Business Forms, Inc.</em>, No. 07-3997, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 19350 (3d Cir. Aug. 28, 2009). </a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Recent_Case_6847.php">Fourth Circuit Upholds Award of Punitive but Not Statutory Damages. — <em>Van Alstyne v. Electronic Scriptorium</em>, <em>Ltd. </em>, 560 F.3d 199 (4th Cir. 2009). </a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Recent_Case_6848.php">Ninth Circuit Holds Montana Election Contribution Disclosure Requirements Unconstitutional as Applied to De Minimis Contributions. — <em>Canyon Ferry Road Baptist Church of East Helena, Inc. v. Unsworth</em>, 556 F.3d 1021 (9th Cir. 2009).</a></p>
<p><strong>RECENT SIGNING STATEMENT</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Recent_Signing_Statement_6849.php">President Obama Issues First Constitutional Signing Statement, Declares Appropriations Bill Provisions Unenforceable. — Statement on Signing the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, Daily Comp. Pres. Doc. No. DCPD200900145 (Mar. 11, 2009).</a></p>
<p><strong>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/february10/Recent_Publications_6850.php">Recent Publications</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/harvard-law-review-1234-2010.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cornell Law Review, Volume 95 Number 2 (January 2010)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/02/cornell-law-review-volume-95-number-2-january-2010-2.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/02/cornell-law-review-volume-95-number-2-january-2010-2.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 13:45:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Cornell Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Cornell)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=24820</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p>Cornell Law Review, Volume 95 Number 2 (January 2010)</p>
<p>Articles</p>
<p>Environmental Law as a Legal Field: An Inquiry in Legal Taxonomy
Todd S. Aagaard</p>
<p>Tracing Basis Through Virtual Spaces
Adam Chodorow</p>
<p>Death Ineligibility and Habeas Corpus
Lee Kovarsky</p>
<p>Notes</p>
<p>Preemption of Local Regulations Beyond Lozano v. City of Hazleton: Reconciling Local Enforcement and Federal Immigration Policy
Mark S. Grube</p>
<p>The Impact of West Tankers on Parties&#8217; Choice of a Seat of Arbitration
Daniel Rainer</p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/cornell2.jpg" alt="cornell2.jpg" width="498" height="66" /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/Current-Issue.cfm">Cornell Law Review, Volume 95 Number 2 (January 2010)</a></p>
<p><strong>Articles</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/upload/Aagaard-final.pdf">Environmental Law as a Legal Field: An Inquiry in Legal Taxonomy<br />
</a>Todd S. Aagaard</p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/upload/Chodorow-final.pdf">Tracing Basis Through Virtual Spaces<br />
</a>Adam Chodorow</p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/upload/Kovarsky-final.pdf">Death Ineligibility and Habeas Corpus<br />
</a>Lee Kovarsky</p>
<p><strong>Notes</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/upload/Grube-final.pdf">Preemption of Local Regulations Beyond Lozano v. City of Hazleton: Reconciling Local Enforcement and Federal Immigration Policy<br />
</a>Mark S. Grube</p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/cornell-law-review/upload/Rainer-final.pdf">The Impact of West Tankers on Parties&#8217; Choice of a Seat of Arbitration</a><br />
Daniel Rainer</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/02/cornell-law-review-volume-95-number-2-january-2010-2.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Boston College Law Review, Issue 51:1 (January 2010)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/boston-college-law-review-issue-511-january-2010.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/boston-college-law-review-issue-511-january-2010.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 00:28:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Boston College Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Boston College)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=24753</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p>Boston College Law Review, Issue 51:1 (January 2010)
</p>
<p>Articles
</p>
<p>Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Jr., The Shot (Not) Heard &#8216;Round the World: Reconsidering the Perplexing U.S. Preoccupation with the Separation of Executive and Legislative Powers, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 1 (2010) [PDF]
</p>
<p>Gregg D. Polsky and Brant J. Hellwig, Taxing Structured Settlements, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 39 (2010) [PDF]
</p>
<p>Joseph A. Seiner, Pleading Disability, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 95 (2010) [PDF]
</p>
<p>Essay
</p>
<p>Robert L. Tsai, John Brown&#8217;s Constitution, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 151 (2010) [PDF]
</p>
<p>Notes
</p>
<p>Michael McGarry, A Statute in Particularly Serious Need of Reinterpretation: The Particularly Serious Crime Exception to Withholding of Removal, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 209 (2010) [PDF]
</p>
<p>Mark D. Pezold, When To Be a Court of Last Resort: The Search for a Standard of Review for the Suspension Clause, 51 B.C. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/BC-logo2.jpg" alt="Boston College Law Review Logo" /></p>
<p><b><i>Boston College Law Review</i>, Issue 51:1 (January 2010)</b>
</p>
<p><b>Articles</b>
</p>
<p>Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Jr., <i>The Shot (Not) Heard &#8216;Round the World: Reconsidering the Perplexing U.S. Preoccupation with the Separation of Executive and Legislative Powers</i>, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 1 (2010) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/51_1/01_krotoszynski.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>Gregg D. Polsky and Brant J. Hellwig, <i>Taxing Structured Settlements</i>, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 39 (2010) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/51_1/02_polsky_hellwig.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>Joseph A. Seiner, <i>Pleading Disability</i>, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 95 (2010) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/51_1/03_seiner.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p><b>Essay</b>
</p>
<p>Robert L. Tsai, <i>John Brown&#8217;s Constitution</i>, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 151 (2010) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/51_1/04_tsai.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p><b>Notes</b>
</p>
<p>Michael McGarry, <i>A Statute in Particularly Serious Need of Reinterpretation: The Particularly Serious Crime Exception to Withholding of Removal</i>, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 209 (2010) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/51_1/05_mcgarry.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>Mark D. Pezold, <i>When To Be a Court of Last Resort: The Search for a Standard of Review for the Suspension Clause</i>, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 243 (2010) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/51_1/06_pezold.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p><i>Contents of <a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview.html">current</a> and <a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/Past_Issues.html">past</a> issues are available at our website.</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/boston-college-law-review-issue-511-january-2010.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Virginia Law Review 95:8 (December 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/virginia-law-review-958-december-2009.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/virginia-law-review-958-december-2009.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 22:20:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Virginia Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Virginia)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=25399</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center">VOLUME 95      NOVEMBER 2009     ISSUE 7</p>
<p style="text-align: center"></p>
<p style="text-align: center">Virginia Law Review 95:8 (December 2009)</p>
<p style="text-align: center"> ARTICLES</p>
<p style="text-align: center">Making Good on Good Intentions by Katharine T. Bartlett</p>
<p style="text-align: center">The State of State Anti-takeover Law by Michal Barzuza</p>
<p style="text-align: center">NOTES</p>
<p style="text-align: center">Incarceration, Accommodation, and Strict Scrutiny by James Nelson</p>
<p style="text-align: center">Internet Radio: The Case for a Technology Neutral Royalty Standard by Andrew Stockment</p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center">VOLUME 95      NOVEMBER 2009     ISSUE 7</p>
<p style="text-align: center"><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/rotunda3.gif" alt="" width="189" height="154" /></p>
<p style="text-align: center"><a href="http://virginialawreview.org/articles.php?issue=59">Virginia Law Review 95:8 (December 2009)</a></p>
<p style="text-align: center"> ARTICLES</p>
<p style="text-align: center"><a href="http://www.concurringopinions.com/wp-admin/articles.php?article=282">Making Good on Good Intentions</a> by Katharine T. Bartlett</p>
<p style="text-align: center"><a href="http://www.concurringopinions.com/wp-admin/articles.php?article=284">The State of State Anti-takeover Law</a> by Michal Barzuza</p>
<p style="text-align: center">NOTES</p>
<p style="text-align: center"><a href="http://www.concurringopinions.com/wp-admin/articles.php?article=279">Incarceration, Accommodation, and Strict Scrutiny</a> by James Nelson</p>
<p style="text-align: center"><a href="http://www.concurringopinions.com/wp-admin/articles.php?article=280">Internet Radio: The Case for a Technology Neutral Royalty Standard</a> by Andrew Stockment</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/virginia-law-review-958-december-2009.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Stanford Law Review, Issue 62:2 (January 2010)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/stanford-law-review.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/stanford-law-review.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 07:28:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stanford Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Stanford)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=24559</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p>Stanford Law Review, Issue 62:2 (January 2010)</p>

ARTICLES



Deep Secrecy

David E. Pozen

257


Commercializing Patents
Ted Sichelman
341


Irrelevant Confusion

Mark A. Lemley &#38; Mark McKenna
413


The Disintegration of Intellectual Property? A Classical Liberal Response to a Premature Obituary
Richard A. Epstein
455



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



An Empirical Analysis of Section 1983 Qualified Immunity Actions and Implications of Pearson v. Callahan

Greg Sobolski &#38; Matt Steinberg
523



<p>
COMMENT
</p>
<p></p>



Fourth Amendment Remedial Equilibration: A Comment on Herring v. United States and Pearson v. Callahan

Greg Sobolski &#38; Matt Steinberg
523



]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/Banner%20Draft%205.jpg" alt="Banner Draft 5.jpg" width="355" height="101" /></p>
<p><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/index.htm">Stanford Law Review, Issue 62:2 (January 2010)</a></p>
<div><span style="font-size: small"><br />
<strong>ARTICLES</strong></span></div>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol62/issue2/Pozen.pdf"><span style="font-size: small">Deep Secrecy</span><br />
</a></td>
<td><em><span style="font-size: small">David E. Pozen</span></em><strong><br />
</strong></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small">257</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol62/issue2/Sichelman.pdf">Commercializing Patents</a></span></td>
<td><em><span style="font-size: small">Ted Sichelman</span></em></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small">341</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol62/issue2/Lemley-McKenna.pdf">Irrelevant Confusion<br />
</a></span></td>
<td><em><span style="font-size: small">Mark A. Lemley &amp; Mark McKenna</span></em></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small">413</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol62/issue2/Epstein.pdf">The Disintegration of Intellectual Property? A Classical Liberal Response to a Premature Obituary</a></span></td>
<td><em><span style="font-size: small">Richard A. Epstein</span></em></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small">455</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><span style="font-size: small"><strong><br />
NOTE<br />
</strong></p>
<p></span></p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol62/issue2/Sobolski-Steinberg.pdf">An Empirical Analysis of Section 1983 Qualified Immunity Actions and Implications of <em>Pearson v. Callahan</em><br />
</a></span></td>
<td><em><span style="font-size: small">Greg Sobolski &amp; Matt Steinberg</span></em></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small">523</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><span style="font-size: small"><strong><br />
COMMENT<br />
</strong></p>
<p></span></p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol62/issue2/Owens.pdf">Fourth Amendment Remedial Equilibration: A Comment on <em>Herring v. United States</em> and <em>Pearson v. Callahan</em><br />
</a></span></td>
<td><em><span style="font-size: small">Greg Sobolski &amp; Matt Steinberg</span></em></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small">523</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/stanford-law-review.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 123:3 (2010)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/harvard-law-review-1233-2010.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/harvard-law-review-1233-2010.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 22:05:27 +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.concurringopinions.com/?p=24491</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center"></p>
Volume 123 · January 2010 · Number 3
<p style="text-align: center"> </p>
<p>ARTICLES
Complementary Constraints: Separation of Powers, Rational Voting, and Constitutional Design
Jide O. Nzelibe and Matthew C. Stephenson</p>
<p>Enabling Employee Choice: A Structural Approach to the Rules of Union Organizing
Benjamin I. Sachs</p>
<p>NOTE
Central Bank and Intellectual Property</p>
<p>RECENT CASES
Constitutional Law — Eighth Amendment — Eastern District of California Holds that Prisoner Release Is Necessary To Remedy Unconstitutional California Prison Conditions — Coleman v. Schwarzenegger, No. CIV S-90-0520 LKK JFM P, 2009 WL 2430820 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2009).</p>
<p>Criminal Law — Sentencing Guidelines — Seventh Circuit Holds that Involuntary Manslaughter Is Not a Crime of Violence for Sentencing Guidelines&#8217; Recidivism Enhancement. — United States v. Woods, 576 F.3d 400 (7th Cir. 2009).</p>
<p>Federal Statutes — Alien Tort Statute — [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center"><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/index.php"><img src="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/images/hlr_logo.gif" border="0" alt="Harvard Law Review" /></a></p>
<h1 style="text-align: center">Volume 123 · January 2010 · Number 3</h1>
<p style="text-align: center"><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>ARTICLES</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/january10/Article_6747.php">Complementary Constraints: Separation of Powers, Rational Voting, and Constitutional Design</a><br />
<em>Jide O. Nzelibe and Matthew C. Stephenson</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/january10/Article_6757.php">Enabling Employee Choice: A Structural Approach to the Rules of Union Organizing</a><br />
<em>Benjamin I. Sachs</em></p>
<p><strong>NOTE</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/january10/Note_6767.php"><em>Central Bank</em> and Intellectual Property</a></p>
<p><strong>RECENT CASES</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/january10/Recent_Case_6777.php">Constitutional Law — Eighth Amendment — Eastern District of California Holds that Prisoner Release Is Necessary To Remedy Unconstitutional California Prison Conditions — <em>Coleman v. Schwarzenegger</em>, No. CIV S-90-0520 LKK JFM P, 2009 WL 2430820 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2009).</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/january10/Recent_Case_6787.php">Criminal Law — Sentencing Guidelines — Seventh Circuit Holds that Involuntary Manslaughter Is Not a Crime of Violence for Sentencing Guidelines&#8217; Recidivism Enhancement. — <em>United States v. Woods</em>, 576 F.3d 400 (7th Cir. 2009).</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/january10/Recent_Case_6797.php">Federal Statutes — Alien Tort Statute — Second Circuit Looks Beyond Complaint To Find State Action Requirement Satisfied. — <em>Abdullahi v. Pfizer, Inc.</em>, 562 F.3d 163 (2d Cir. 2009). </a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/january10/Recent_Case_6807.php">Criminal Law — Supervised Release — Third Circuit Approves Decade-Long Internet Ban for Sex Offender — <em>United States v. Thielemann</em>, 575 F.3d 265 (3d Cir. 2009).</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/january10/Recent_Case_6817.php">First Amendment — Defamation Law — First Circuit Applies Libel Law that Does Not Allow Truth as a Defense in Cases of &#8220;Actual Malice.&#8221; — <em>Noonan v. Staples, Inc.</em>, 556 F.3d 20, <em>reh’g denied</em>, 561 F.3d 4 (1st Cir. 2009). </a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/january10/Recent_Case_6827.php">Federal Government Litigation — Equal Access to Justice Act — Fourth Circuit Holds that Attorney&#8217;s Fees Are Payable to Claimant and Are Eligible for Administrative Offset. — <em>Stephens ex rel. R.E. v. Astrue</em>, 565 F.3d 131 (4th Cir. 2009). </a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/january10/Recent_Case_6837.php">Constitutional Law — Equal Protection — New York Court of Appeals Holds that State May Restrict Legal Alien Access to Disability Benefits. — <em>Khrapunskiy v. Doar</em>, 909 N.E.2d 70 (N.Y. 2009).</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/harvard-law-review-1233-2010.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 119, Issue 3 (December 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/the-yale-law-journal-vol-119-issue-3-december-2009.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/the-yale-law-journal-vol-119-issue-3-december-2009.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 04:48:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Yale Law Journal</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International & Comparative Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Yale)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=24027</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
December 2009 &#124; Volume 119,  Issue 3





<p>ARTICLES




Property as Process: How Innovation
Markets Select Innovation Regimes
Jonathan M. Barnett

384



The President and Immigration Law 
Adam B. Cox &#38; Cristina M. Rodríguez
458



Government in Opposition 
David Fontana
548







COMMENTS




INA Section 242(g): Immigration Agents,
Immunity, and Damages Suits
625



Taxing Unreasonable Compensation:
§ 162(a)(1) and Managerial Power
637




<p> </p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/"><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/cop_ylj.jpg" alt="The Yale Law Journal" width="530" height="102" /></a></p>
<div><span style="font-size: medium"><strong>December 2009 | Volume 119,  Issue 3</strong></span></div>
<div>
<table style="width: 600px;height: 456px" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" valign="top">
<p><span><strong>ARTICLES</strong><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=836"><span><span>Property as Process: How Innovation<br />
Markets Select Innovation Regimes</span></span></a><span><br />
Jonathan M. Barnett<br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top">384</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=837"><span><span>The President and Immigration Law </span></span></a><br />
<span>Adam B. Cox &amp; Cristina M. Rodríguez</span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top">458</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=838"><span><span>Government in Opposition </span></span></a><br />
<span>David Fontana</span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top">548</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" valign="top"><span><strong>COMMENTS</strong><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"><span><span><span><span><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=839"><span><span><span><span>INA Section 242(g): Immigration Agents,<br />
Immunity, and Damages Suits</span></span></span></span></a></span></span></span></span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top">625</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"><span><span><span><span><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=840"><span><span><span><span>Taxing Unreasonable Compensation:<br />
§ 162(a)(1) and Managerial Power</span></span></span></span></a></span></span></span></span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top">637</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p><span style="font-size: medium"><strong> </strong></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/the-yale-law-journal-vol-119-issue-3-december-2009.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Iowa Law Review, Volume 95, Issue 1 (November 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/iowa-law-review-volume-95-issue-1-november-2009.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/iowa-law-review-volume-95-issue-1-november-2009.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:28:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Iowa Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Iowa)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Forum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law School (Law Reviews)]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=23924</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p>Articles</p>
<p>Juvenile Justice: The Fourth Option
Christopher Slobogin &#38; Mark R. Fondacaro</p>
<p>Testing Modern Trademark Law’s Theory of Harm
Mark P. McKenna</p>
<p>Ignorance Is Effectively Bliss: Collateral Consequences, Silence, and Misinformation in the Guilty-Plea Process
Jenny Roberts</p>
<p>Formalism and Pragmatism in Ruins (Mapping the Logics of Collapse)
Pierre Schlag</p>
<p>Notes</p>
<p>Making Taxes More Certain: Iowa State Legislators’ Guide to Combined Reporting
Lindsay C. McAfee</p>
<p>Rescuecom Corp. v. Google Inc.: A Conscious Analytical Shift
Jessica A.E. McKinney</p>
<p>An Iowa Immigration Raid Leads to Unprecedented Criminal Consequences: Why ICE Should Rethink the Postville Model
Cassie L. Peterson</p>
<p>Clearing the Air: Analyzing the Constitutionality of the Iowa Smokefree Air Act’s Gaming-Floor Exemption
Kevin D. Sherlock</p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a title="Iowa Law Review" href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~ilr/"><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/Iowa%20Law%20Review%20Banner.jpg" alt="Iowa Law Review" width="540" height="119" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Articles</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~ilr/issues/ILR_95-1_Slobogin.pdf"><em>Juvenile Justice: The Fourth Option</em></a><br />
Christopher Slobogin &amp; Mark R. Fondacaro</p>
<p><a href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~ilr/issues/ILR_95-1_McKenna.pdf"><em>Testing Modern Trademark Law’s Theory of Harm</em></a><br />
Mark P. McKenna</p>
<p><a href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~ilr/issues/ILR_95-1_Roberts.pdf"><em>Ignorance Is Effectively Bliss: Collateral Consequences, Silence, and Misinformation in the Guilty-Plea Process</em></a><br />
Jenny Roberts</p>
<p><a href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~ilr/issues/ILR_95-1_Schlag.pdf"><em>Formalism and Pragmatism in Ruins (Mapping the Logics of Collapse)</em></a><br />
Pierre Schlag</p>
<p><strong>Notes</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~ilr/issues/ILR_95-1_McAfee.pdf"><em>Making Taxes More Certain: Iowa State Legislators’ Guide to Combined Reporting</em></a><br />
Lindsay C. McAfee</p>
<p><a href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~ilr/issues/ILR_95-1_McKinney.pdf">Rescuecom Corp. v. Google Inc.<em>: A Conscious Analytical Shift</em></a><br />
Jessica A.E. McKinney</p>
<p><a href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~ilr/issues/ILR_95-1_Peterson.pdf"><em>An Iowa Immigration Raid Leads to Unprecedented Criminal Consequences: Why ICE Should Rethink the Postville Model</em></a><br />
Cassie L. Peterson</p>
<p><a href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~ilr/issues/ILR_95-1_Sherlock.pdf"><em>Clearing the Air: Analyzing the Constitutionality of the Iowa Smokefree Air Act’s Gaming-Floor Exemption</em></a><br />
Kevin D. Sherlock</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/iowa-law-review-volume-95-issue-1-november-2009.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New York University Law Review, 84:6 (December 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/new-york-university-law-review-846-december-2009.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/new-york-university-law-review-846-december-2009.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:31:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NYU Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (NYU)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=23847</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[










Volume 84
December 2009
Number 6



<p>&#160;</p>
<p>THOMAS M. FRANCK TRIBUTE</p>
<p>Professor Thomas M. Franck</p>
<p>Richard L. Revesz</p>
<p>Remembering Thomas Franck</p>
<p>Thomas Buergenthal</p>
<p>Thomas M. Franck</p>
<p>Normen Dorsen</p>
<p>In Memoriam: Thomas M. Franck (1931-2009)</p>
<p>Michael J. Glennon</p>
<p>The Invisible College of Thomas Franck </p>
<p>Harold Hongju Koh, Miriam E. Saprio, Christopher J. Borgen, Peter A. Gutherie &#38; Michael J. Mattler</p>
<p>Thomas M. Franck: A Selected Bibliography</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>ARTICLES</p>
<p>The Rights of Migrants: An Optimal Contract Framework</p>
<p>Adam B. Cox &#38; Eric A. Posner</p>
<p>Protecting Them from Themselves: The Persistence of Mutual Benefits Arguments for Sex and Race Inequality</p>
<p>Jill Elaine Hasday</p>
<p>Tax Expenditures and Global Labor Mobility</p>
<p>Ruth Mason</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>NOTES</p>
<p>Reining in Non-State Actors: State Responsibility and Attribution in Cases of Genocide</p>
<p>Berglind Halldorsdottir Birkland</p>
<p>Preventing Real Takings for Imaginary Purposes: A Post-Kelo Public Use Proposal</p>
<p>William A. Curran</p>
<p>An Administrative Law Approach to Reforming the State Secrets Privilege</p>
<p>Beth George</p>
<p>Paying-to-Play in Securities Class Actions: [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<table style="width: 100%" border="0" bgcolor="#111d5f">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/nyulrevbanner.jpg" alt="New York University Law Review" width="519" height="150" /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<hr />
<table style="width: 100%" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="33%" align="left">Volume 84</td>
<td width="33%" align="center">December 2009</td>
<td width="33%" align="right">Number 6</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>THOMAS M. FRANCK TRIBUTE</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064057.pdf">Professor Thomas M. Franck</a></p>
<p><em>Richard L. Revesz</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064058.pdf">Remembering Thomas Franck</a></p>
<p><em>Thomas Buergenthal</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064059.pdf">Thomas M. Franck</a></p>
<p><em>Normen Dorsen</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064060.pdf">In Memoriam: Thomas M. Franck (1931-2009)</a></p>
<p><em>Michael J. Glennon</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064061.pdf">The Invisible College of Thomas Franck </a></p>
<p><em>Harold Hongju Koh, Miriam E. Saprio, Christopher J. Borgen, Peter A. Gutherie &amp; Michael J. Mattler</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064062.pdf">Thomas M. Franck: A Selected Bibliography</a></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>ARTICLES</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064063.pdf">The Rights of Migrants: An Optimal Contract Framework</a></p>
<p><em>Adam B. Cox &amp; Eric A. Posner</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064064.pdf">Protecting Them from Themselves: The Persistence of Mutual Benefits Arguments for Sex and Race Inequality</a></p>
<p><em>Jill Elaine Hasday</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064065.pdf">Tax Expenditures and Global Labor Mobility</a></p>
<p><em>Ruth Mason</em></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>NOTES</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064066.pdf">Reining in Non-State Actors: State Responsibility and Attribution in Cases of Genocide</a></p>
<p><em>Berglind Halldorsdottir Birkland</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064067.pdf">Preventing Real Takings for Imaginary Purposes: A Post-Kelo Public Use Proposal</a></p>
<p><em>William A. Curran</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064068.pdf">An Administrative Law Approach to Reforming the State Secrets Privilege</a></p>
<p><em>Beth George</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064069.pdf">Paying-to-Play in Securities Class Actions: A Look at Lawyers&#8217; Campaign Contributions</a></p>
<p><em>Drew T. Johnson-Skinner</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064070.pdf">Blameless Ignorance? The Ledbetter Act and Limitations Period for Title VII Pay Discrimination Claims</a></p>
<p><em>Jeremy A. Weinberg</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pro_064071.pdf">The Choice-of-Law Problem(s) in the Class Action Context</a></p>
<p><em>Genevieve G. York-Erwin</em></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/new-york-university-law-review-846-december-2009.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Michigan Law Review, Issue 108:4 (January 2010)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/michigan-law-review-issue-1084-january-2010.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/michigan-law-review-issue-1084-january-2010.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jan 2010 20:00:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michigan Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Michigan)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=24984</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
<p style="text-align: center"></p>
<p style="text-align: center">Michigan Law Review, Issue 108:4 (January 2010)</p>
<p style="text-align: center">(Past issues are available on our website.)</p>
<p>ARTICLES</p>
<p>Nelson Tebbe &#38; Robert L. Tsai, Constitutional Borrowing, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 460 (2010)</p>
<p>Tun-Jen Chiang, Fixing Patent Boundaries, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 524 (2010)</p>
<p>NOTES</p>
<p>Kathryn Ladewski, Preserving a Racial Hierarchy: A Legal Analysis of the Disparate Racial Impact of Legacy Preferences in University Admissions, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 578 (2010)</p>
<p>Lance J. Phillips, The Implications of IFRS on the Functioning of the Securities Antifraud Regime in the United States, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 604 (2010)</p>

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<p style="text-align: center"><img class="aligncenter" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/Michigan-logo1.jpg" alt="Michigan-logo1.jpg" width="498" height="142" /></p>
<p style="text-align: center"><a href="http://www.michiganlawreview.org/issues/53">Michigan Law Review, Issue 108:4 (January 2010)</a></p>
<p style="text-align: center">(Past issues are <a href="http://www.michiganlawreview.org/">available on our website</a>.)</p>
<p>ARTICLES</p>
<p>Nelson Tebbe &amp; Robert L. Tsai, <a href="http://www.michiganlawreview.org/articles/constitutional-borrowing">Constitutional Borrowing</a>, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 460 (2010)</p>
<p>Tun-Jen Chiang, <a href="http://www.michiganlawreview.org/articles/fixing-patent-boundaries">Fixing Patent Boundaries</a>, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 524 (2010)</p>
<p>NOTES</p>
<p>Kathryn Ladewski, <a href="http://www.michiganlawreview.org/articles/preserving-a-racial-hierarchy-a-legal-analysis-of-the-disparate-racial-impact-of-legacy-preferences-in-university-admissions">Preserving a Racial Hierarchy: A Legal Analysis of the Disparate Racial Impact of Legacy Preferences in University Admissions</a>, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 578 (2010)</p>
<p>Lance J. Phillips, <a href="http://www.michiganlawreview.org/articles/the-implications-of-ifrs-on-the-functioning-of-the-securities-antifraud-regime-in-the-united-states">The Implications of IFRS on the Functioning of the Securities Antifraud Regime in the United States</a>, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 604 (2010)</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/01/michigan-law-review-issue-1084-january-2010.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard Law Review, 123:2 (2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/harvard-law-review-1232-2009.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/harvard-law-review-1232-2009.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 21:35:13 +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.concurringopinions.com/?p=23899</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

<p style="text-align: center"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center"> </p>
 Volume 123 · December 2009 · Number 2
 
<p>ARTICLES
Tying, Bundled Discounts, and the Death of the Single Monopoly Profit Theory
Einer Elhauge</p>
<p>Mobile Capital, Local Economic Regulation, and the Democratic City
Richard C. Schragger</p>
<p>NOTE
Textualism as Fair Notice</p>
<p>RECENT CASES
Constitutional Law — Speech or Debate Clause — D.C. Circuit Quashes Subpoenas for Congressman&#8217;s Testimony to the House Ethics Committee. — In re Grand Jury Subpoenas, 571 F.3d 1200 (D.C. Cir. 2009). </p>
<p>Customary International Law — Extradition — Eleventh Circuit Holds that &#8220;Rule of Specialty&#8221; Applies Only When Provided by Treaty. — United States v. Valencia-Trujillo, 573 F.3d 1171 (11th Cir. 2009).</p>
<p>Civil Procedure — Pleading Requirements — Eleventh Circuit Dismisses Alien Tort Statute Claims Against Coca-Cola Under Iqbal&#8217;s Plausibility Pleading Standard. — Sinaltrainal v. Coca-Cola Co., No. 06-15851, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/index.php"></a></div>
<div><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/index.php"></a></div>
<p style="text-align: center"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center"> <img src="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/images/hlr_logo.gif" border="0" alt="Harvard Law Review" /></p>
<h1 style="text-align: center"> Volume 123 · December 2009 · Number 2</h1>
<h1> </h1>
<p><strong>ARTICLES</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/december09/Article_6647.php">Tying, Bundled Discounts, and the Death of the Single Monopoly Profit Theory</a><br />
<em>Einer Elhauge</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/december09/Article_6657.php">Mobile Capital, Local Economic Regulation, and the Democratic City</a><br />
<em>Richard C. Schragger</em></p>
<p><strong>NOTE</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/december09/Note_6667.php">Textualism as Fair Notice</a></p>
<p><strong>RECENT CASES</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/december09/Recent_Case_6677.php">Constitutional Law — Speech or Debate Clause — D.C. Circuit Quashes Subpoenas for Congressman&#8217;s Testimony to the House Ethics Committee. — <em>In re Grand Jury Subpoenas</em>, 571 F.3d 1200 (D.C. Cir. 2009). </a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/december09/Recent_Case_6687.php">Customary International Law — Extradition — Eleventh Circuit Holds that &#8220;Rule of Specialty&#8221; Applies Only When Provided by Treaty. — <em>United States v. Valencia-Trujillo</em>, 573 F.3d 1171 (11th Cir. 2009).</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/december09/Recent_Case_6697.php">Civil Procedure — Pleading Requirements — Eleventh Circuit Dismisses Alien Tort Statute Claims Against Coca-Cola Under <em>Iqbal&#8217;s</em> Plausibility Pleading Standard. — <em>Sinaltrainal v. Coca-Cola Co.</em>, No. 06-15851, 2009 WL 2431463 (11th Cir. Aug. 11, 2009). </a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/december09/Recent_Case_6707.php">Criminal Law — Search and Seizure — D.C. Circuit Holds that Police Checkpoint Program Likely Violates the Fourth Amendment. — <em>Mills v. District of Columbia</em>, 571 F.3d 1304 (D.C. Cir. 2009).</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/december09/Recent_Case_6717.php">Constitutional Law — Free Exercise Clause — Ninth Circuit Rejects Strict Scrutiny for Pharmacy Dispensing Requirement. — <em>Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky</em>, 571 F.3d 960 (9th Cir. 2009).</a></p>
<p><strong>RECENT REGULATION</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/december09/Recent_Regulation_6727.php">Employment Law — Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 — Department of Labor Regulations Alter Substitution of Paid Leave Provision Under the FMLA. — FMLA Final Rule, 73 Fed. Reg. 67,934 (Nov. 17, 2008) (codified at 29 C.F.R. pt. 825 (2009)). </a></p>
<p><strong>RECENT PUBLICATIONS</strong><br />
<a href="http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/123/december09/Recent_Publications_6737.php">Recent Publications</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/harvard-law-review-1232-2009.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Stanford Law Review, Issue 62:1 (December 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/stanford-law-review-issue-621-december-2009.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/stanford-law-review-issue-621-december-2009.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Dec 2009 03:47:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stanford Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Stanford)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=23269</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p>Stanford Law Review, Issue 62:1 (December 2009)</p>
<p>ARTICLES</p>



Promoting Civil Rights Through Proactive Policing Reform

Rachel A. Harmon

1


The Democracy Canon
Richard L. Hasen
69


Delaware&#8217;s Shrinking Half-Life

Mark J. Roe
125


Breaking the Law to Enforce It: Undercover Police Participation in Crime
Elizabeth E. Joh
155


Nonlethal Self-Defense, (Almost Entirely) Nonlethal Weapons, and the Rights to Keep and Bear Arms and Defend Life

Eugene Volokh
199



<p>
</p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/Banner%20Draft%205.jpg" alt="Banner Draft 5.jpg" width="355" height="101" /></p>
<p><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/index.htm">Stanford Law Review, Issue 62:1 (December 2009)</a></p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size: small">ARTICLES</span></strong></p>
<table style="width: 525px;height: 238px" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol62/issue1/Harmon.pdf"><span style="font-size: small">Promoting Civil Rights Through Proactive Policing Reform<br />
</span></a></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small"><em>Rachel A. Harmon</em></span><strong><br />
</strong></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small">1</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol62/issue1/Hasen.pdf"><span style="font-size: small">The Democracy Canon</span></a></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small"><em>Richard L. Hasen</em></span></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small">69</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol62/issue1/Roe.pdf"><span style="font-size: small">Delaware&#8217;s Shrinking Half-Life<br />
</span></a></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small"><em>Mark J. Roe</em></span></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small">125</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol62/issue1/Joh.pdf"><span style="font-size: small">Breaking the Law to Enforce It: Undercover Police Participation in Crime</span></a></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small"><em>Elizabeth E. Joh</em></span></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small">155</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol62/issue1/Volokh.pdf"><span style="font-size: small">Nonlethal Self-Defense, (Almost Entirely) Nonlethal Weapons, and the Rights to Keep and Bear Arms and Defend Life<br />
</span></a></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small"><em>Eugene Volokh</em></span></td>
<td><span style="font-size: small">199</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><strong><br />
</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/stanford-law-review-issue-621-december-2009.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fordham Law Review, Volume 78 Number 3 (December 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/fordham-law-review-volume-78-number-3-december-2009.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/fordham-law-review-volume-78-number-3-december-2009.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 19:19:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fordham Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Fordham)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=23034</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>




<p align="left">Volume 78</p>


<p align="center">December 2009</p>


<p align="right">Number 3</p>




<p align="center">SYMPOSIUM
AGAINST SETTLEMENT:  TWENTY-FIVE YEARS LATER</p>
<p>Foreword:  Reflections on the
Adjudication-Settlement Divide
Howard M. Erichson</p>
<p>Some Thoughts About the
Economics of Settlement
John Bronsteen</p>
<p>Revisiting Against Settlement:  Some
Reflections on Dispute Resolution
and Public Values
Amy J. Cohen</p>
<p>Reexamining the Arguments in
Owen M. Fiss, Against Settlement
Kenneth R. Feinberg</p>
<p>The Public Value of Settlement
Samuel Issacharoff &#38; Robert H. Klonoff</p>
<p>Three Things To Be Against
(“Settlement” Not Included)
Michael Moffitt</p>
<p>Mediation Exceptionality
Jacqueline Nolan-Haley</p>
<p>Comments on Owen M. Fiss,
Against Settlement (1984)
Hon. Jack B. Weinstein</p>
<p>The History of an Idea
Owen M. Fiss
</p>
<p align="center">ARTICLE
</p>
<p>What Owners Want and Governments Do:
Evidence from the Oregon Experiment
Bethany R. Berger
</p>
<p align="center">NOTES
</p>
<p></p>
<p>Love Thy Neighbor:  Should Religious
Accommodations That Negatively
Affect Coworkers&#8217; Shift Preferences
Constitute an Undue Hardship on the
Employer Under Title VII?
Rachel M. Birnbach</p>
<p>The Rights of Divorced Lesbians:
Interstate Recognition of Child
Custody Judgments in the Context
of Same-Sex Divorce
Kathryn [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/fordham-law-review/15862.htm"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-21298" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/fordhamlrev_header.jpg" border="0" alt="fordhamlrev_header" width="500" height="177" /></a></p>
<table style="width: 500px;" border="0" align="center">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="167">
<p align="left">Volume 78</p>
</td>
<td width="166">
<p align="center">December 2009</p>
</td>
<td width="167">
<p align="right">Number 3</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p align="center"><strong>SYMPOSIUM<br />
<em>AGAINST SETTLEMENT</em>:  TWENTY-FIVE YEARS LATER</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Erichson_December_2009.pdf">Foreword:  Reflections on the<br />
Adjudication-Settlement Divide</a><br />
Howard M. Erichson</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Bronsteen_December_2009.pdf">Some Thoughts About the<br />
Economics of Settlement</a><br />
John Bronsteen</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Cohen_December_2009.pdf">Revisiting <em>Against Settlement</em>:  Some<br />
Reflections on Dispute Resolution<br />
and Public Values</a><br />
Amy J. Cohen</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Feinberg_December_2009.pdf">Reexamining the Arguments in<br />
Owen M. Fiss, <em>Against Settlement</em></a><br />
Kenneth R. Feinberg</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Issacharoff__Klonoff_December_2009.pdf">The Public Value of Settlement</a><br />
Samuel Issacharoff &amp; Robert H. Klonoff</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Moffitt_December_2009.pdf">Three Things To Be Against<br />
(“Settlement” Not Included)</a><br />
Michael Moffitt</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Nolan-Haley_December_2009.pdf">Mediation Exceptionality</a><br />
Jacqueline Nolan-Haley</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Weinstein_December_2009.pdf">Comments on Owen M. Fiss,<br />
<em>Against Settlement</em> (1984)</a><br />
Hon. Jack B. Weinstein</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Fiss_December_2009.pdf">The History of an Idea</a><br />
Owen M. Fiss
</p>
<p align="center"><strong>ARTICLE<br />
</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Berger_December_2009.pdf">What Owners Want and Governments Do:<br />
Evidence from the Oregon Experiment</a><br />
Bethany R. Berger
</p>
<p align="center"><strong>NOTES<br />
</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Birnbach_December_2009.pdf"><span id="more-23034"></span></a></p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Birnbach_December_2009.pdf">Love Thy Neighbor:  Should Religious<br />
Accommodations That Negatively<br />
Affect Coworkers&#8217; Shift Preferences<br />
Constitute an Undue Hardship on the<br />
Employer Under Title VII?</a><br />
Rachel M. Birnbach</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Harvey_December_2009.pdf">The Rights of Divorced Lesbians:<br />
Interstate Recognition of Child<br />
Custody Judgments in the Context<br />
of Same-Sex Divorce</a><br />
Kathryn J. Harvey</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Mazzeo_December_2009.pdf">Securities Class Actions, CAFA, and<br />
a Countrywide Crisis:  A Call for<br />
Clarity and Consistency</a><br />
Denise Mazzeo</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Northrop_December_2009.pdf">The Attorney-Client Privilege and<br />
Information Disclosed to an Attorney<br />
with the Intention That the Attorney<br />
Draft a Document To Be Released to<br />
Third Parties:  Public Policy Calls for<br />
at Least the Strictest Application of the<br />
Attorney-Client Privilege</a><br />
Daniel Northrop</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Rabinovitz_December_2009.pdf">Toward Effective Implementation of<br />
11 U.S.C. § 522(d)(11)(E):  Invigorating a<br />
Powerful Bankruptcy Exemption</a><br />
Uriel Rabinovitz</p>
<p><a href="http://law.fordham.edu/assets/LawReview/Terenzi_December_2009.pdf">When Cows Fly:  Expanding Cognizable<br />
Injury-in-Fact and Interest Group Litigation</a><br />
Robert Terenzi, Jr.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/fordham-law-review-volume-78-number-3-december-2009.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Minnesota Law Review 94:1 (November 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/minnesota-law-review-941-november-2009.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/minnesota-law-review-941-november-2009.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 16:19:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Minnesota Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Minnesota)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=22889</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p>Volume 94, Issue 1 (November 2009):</p>
<p>Articles</p>
<p>Richard A. Epstein, Against Permititis: Why Voluntary Organizations Should Regulate the Use of Cancer Drugs, 94 Minn. L. Rev. 1 (2009) </p>
<p>John H. Martin, Reconfiguring Estate Settlement, 94 Minn. L. Rev. 42 (2009)</p>
<p>Gerard N. Magliocca, Why Did the Incorporation of the Bill of Rights Fail in the Late Nineteenth Century?, 94 Minn. L. Rev. 102 (2009) </p>
<p>Notes
</p>
<p>Theresa Nagy, Credit Rating Agencies and the First Amendment: Applying Constitutional Journalistic Protections to Subprime Mortgage Litigation, 94 Minn. L. Rev. 140 (2009)</p>
<p>Kristin K. Zinsmaster, In re the Welfare of Due Process, 94 Minn. L. Rev. 168 (2009)</p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style="border: 0px initial initial" src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/minnesota-logo2.bmp" alt="minnesota-logo2" width="183" height="124" /></p>
<p><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/epublish/1/29"><strong>Volume 94, Issue 1 (November 2009):</strong></a></p>
<p><strong>Articles</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/against-permititis-why-voluntary-organizations-should-regulate-use-cancer-drugs" target="_blank">Richard A. Epstein, </a><em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/against-permititis-why-voluntary-organizations-should-regulate-use-cancer-drugs" target="_blank">Against </a></em><em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/against-permititis-why-voluntary-organizations-should-regulate-use-cancer-drugs" target="_blank">Permititis: Why Voluntary Organizations Should Regulate the Use of Cancer Drugs</a></em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/against-permititis-why-voluntary-organizations-should-regulate-use-cancer-drugs" target="_blank">, 94 Minn. L. Rev. 1 (2009)</a><em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/against-permititis-why-voluntary-organizations-should-regulate-use-cancer-drugs" target="_blank"> </a></em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/reconfiguring-estate-settlement" target="_blank">John H. Martin, </a><em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/reconfiguring-estate-settlement" target="_blank">Reconfiguring Estate Settlement</a></em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/reconfiguring-estate-settlement" target="_blank">, 94 Minn. L. Rev. 42 (2009)</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/why-did-incorporation-bill-rights-fail-late-nineteenth-century" target="_blank">Gerard N. Magliocca, </a><em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/why-did-incorporation-bill-rights-fail-late-nineteenth-century" target="_blank">Why Did the Incorporation of the Bill of Rights Fail in the Late Nineteenth Century?</a></em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/why-did-incorporation-bill-rights-fail-late-nineteenth-century" target="_blank">, 94 Minn. L. Rev. 102 (2009)</a><em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/why-did-incorporation-bill-rights-fail-late-nineteenth-century" target="_blank"> </a></em></p>
<p><strong>Notes<br />
</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/credit-rating-agencies-and-first-amendment-applying-constitutional-journalistic-protections-" target="_blank">Theresa Nagy, </a><em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/credit-rating-agencies-and-first-amendment-applying-constitutional-journalistic-protections-" target="_blank">Credit Rating Agencies and the First Amendment: Applying Constitutional Journalistic Protections to Subprime Mortgage Litigation</a></em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/credit-rating-agencies-and-first-amendment-applying-constitutional-journalistic-protections-" target="_blank">, 94 Minn. L. Rev. 140 (2009)</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/re-welfare-due-process">Kristin K. Zinsmaster, </a><em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/re-welfare-due-process">In re the Welfare of </a></em><a href="http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/content/re-welfare-due-process">Due Process, 94 Minn. L. Rev. 168 (2009)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/minnesota-law-review-941-november-2009.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Yale Law Journal Vol. 119, Issue 2 (2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/22872.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/22872.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 15:29:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Yale Law Journal</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Administrative Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Feminism and Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International & Comparative Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Yale)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=22872</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
November 2009 &#124; Volume 119,  Issue 2

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



Article



Presidential Power over International  Law:
Restoring the Balance
</p>
<p>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 </p>
<p>Craig J. Konnoth
316


Comment



A Case for Varying Interpretive  Deference
at the State  Level
373



]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/"><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/cop_ylj.jpg" alt="The Yale Law Journal" width="530" height="102" /></a></p>
<div><span style="font-size: medium"><strong>November 2009 | Volume 119,  Issue 2<br />
</strong></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size: medium"><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p></span></div>
<table style="width: 600px;height: 456px" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" valign="top"><span style="font-size: medium"><strong>Article</strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=830">Presidential Power over International  Law:<br />
Restoring the Balance</a><br />
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: small">Oona A. Hathaway<br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top">140</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" valign="top"><span style="font-size: medium"><strong>Notes</strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=831">Disastrously Misunderstood: Judicial  Deference<br />
in the Japanese-American Cases </a><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/119/1/Mishra.html"><br />
</a></span><span style="font-size: small"><br />
Jonathan M. Justl<br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top">270</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=832">Created in Its Image: The Race  Analogy,<br />
Gay Identity, and Gay Litigation in the<br />
1950s-1970s </a></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: small">Craig J. Konnoth</span></td>
<td style="text-align: right" valign="top">316</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" valign="top"><span style="font-size: medium"><strong>Comment</strong></span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/119/1/Bhatnagar.html"></a><span style="font-size: small"><a href="http://yalelawjournal.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=833">A Case for Varying Interpretive  Deference<br />
at the State  Level</a></span></td>
<td align="right" valign="top">373</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/22872.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Boston College Law Review, Issue 50:5 (November 2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/boston-college-law-review-issue-505-november-2009.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/boston-college-law-review-issue-505-november-2009.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 21:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Boston College Law Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law Rev (Boston College)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law Rev Contents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=22709</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p></p>
<p>Boston College Law Review, Issue 50:5 (November 2009)
</p>
<p>Publicity, Privacy, and Intellectual Property Meet the First Amendment
</p>
<p>Forward
</p>
<p>Mary-Rose Papandrea, Where Intellectual Property and Free Speech Collide, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1307 (2009) [PDF]
</p>
<p>Symposium Articles
</p>
<p>Lauren Gelman, Privacy, Free Speech, and &#34;Blurry-Edged&#34; Social Networks, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1315 (2009) [PDF]
</p>
<p>Roberta Rosenthal Kwall, A Perspective on Human Dignity, the First Amendment, and the Right of Publicity, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1345 (2009) [PDF]
</p>
<p>Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky, Anonymity in Cyberspace: What Can We Learn from John Doe?, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1373 (2009) [PDF]
</p>
<p>David S. Olson, First Amendment Interests and Copyright Accommodations, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1393 (2009) [PDF]
</p>
<p>Elizabeth A. Rowe, Trade Secret Litigation and Free Speech: Is It Time to Restrain the Plaintiffs?, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1425 (2009) [PDF]
</p>
<p>Rebecca [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/BC-logo2.jpg" alt="Boston College Law Review Logo" /></p>
<p><b><i>Boston College Law Review</i>, Issue 50:5 (November 2009)</b>
</p>
<p><b>Publicity, Privacy, and Intellectual Property Meet the First Amendment</b>
</p>
<p><b>Forward</b>
</p>
<p>Mary-Rose Papandrea, <i>Where Intellectual Property and Free Speech Collide</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1307 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/01_foreword.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p><b>Symposium Articles</b>
</p>
<p>Lauren Gelman, <i>Privacy, Free Speech, and &quot;Blurry-Edged&quot; Social Networks</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1315 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/02_gelman.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>Roberta Rosenthal Kwall, <i>A Perspective on Human Dignity, the First Amendment, and the Right of Publicity</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1345 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/03_kwall.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky, <i>Anonymity in Cyberspace: What Can We Learn from John Doe?</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1373 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/04_lidsky.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>David S. Olson, <i>First Amendment Interests and Copyright Accommodations</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1393 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/05_olson.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>Elizabeth A. Rowe, <i>Trade Secret Litigation and Free Speech: Is It Time to Restrain the Plaintiffs?</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1425 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/06_rowe.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>Rebecca Tushnet, <i>Fighting Freestyle: The First Amendment, Fairness, and Corporate Reputation</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1457 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/07_tushnet.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>Alfred C. Yen, <i>A First Amendment Perspective on the Construction of Third-Party Copyright Liability</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1481 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/08_yen.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>Diane Leenheer Zimmerman, <i>Money as a Thumb on the Constitutional Scale: Weighing Speech Against Publicity Rights</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1503 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/09_zimmerman.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p><b>Notes</b>
</p>
<p>Igor Helman, <i>Spam-A-Lot: The States&#8217; Crusade Against Unsolicited Email in Light of the CAN-SPAM Act and the Overbreadth Doctrine</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1525 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/10_helman.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>Harriet A. Hoder, <i>Supervising Cyberspace: A Simple Threshold for Public School Jurisdiction over Students&#8217; Online Activities</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1563 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/11_hoder.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p>Leigh Tinmouth, <i>The Fairness of a Fair Trial: Not Guilty Pleas and the Right to Effective Assistance of Counsel</i>, 50 B.C. L. Rev. 1607 (2009) [<a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/meta-elements/pdf/50_5/12_tinmouth.pdf">PDF</a>]
</p>
<p><i>Contents of <a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview.html">current</a> and <a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/bclawreview/Past_Issues.html">past</a> issues are available at our website.</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/12/boston-college-law-review-issue-505-november-2009.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
