{"id":1371,"date":"2013-10-08T08:14:08","date_gmt":"2013-10-08T15:14:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/?page_id=942"},"modified":"2017-03-24T20:44:47","modified_gmt":"2017-03-24T20:44:47","slug":"vols-35-39","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/vols-35-39\/","title":{"rendered":"Vols. 35-39"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

Volume 39 – Issue 3<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

In Memoriam: Justice Antonin Scalia
\n<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n

575<\/td>\nThe Unknown Achievements of Justice Scalia<\/a><\/td>\nSteven G. Calabresi<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
579<\/td>\nThe Anti-Casual Justice<\/a><\/td>\nChristopher Landau
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
581<\/td>\nJustice Scalia the Teacher<\/a><\/td>\nRoy W. McLeese III
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
\n

Articles<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n

583<\/td>\nLinguistic Relativism and the Decline of the Rule of Law<\/a><\/td>\nRichard A. Epstein
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
631<\/td>\nTechnology and the Role of Intent in Constitutionally Protected Expression<\/a><\/td>\nJohn Villasenor
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
675<\/td>\nThe FCC’s Transaction Reviews and First Amendment Risks<\/a><\/td>\nBrent Skorup & Christopher Koopman
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
703<\/td>\nHobby Lobby<\/em>, Corporate Law, and Unsustainable Liberalism: A Reply to Chief Justice Strine<\/a><\/td>\nHarry G. Hutchison
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
769<\/td>\nProspective Injunctive Relief and Class Settlements<\/a><\/td>\nErin L. Sheley & Theodore H. Frank
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
833<\/td>\nRevitalizing the Clemency Process<\/a><\/td>\nPaul J. Larkin, Jr.
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
\n

Notes<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

917<\/td>\nThe John M. Olin Fellowships and the Advancement of Conservatism in Legal Academia<\/a><\/td>\nErin Cady<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
963<\/td>\nThe Unscripted Evolution of Presidential Nominations: From Founding-Era Idealism to the Dominance of Party Primaries<\/a><\/td>\nZachary M. Bluestone<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Volume 39 – Issue 2<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Election Law: Rights, Remedies, and Recent Cases
\n<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n

333<\/td>\nForeword<\/a><\/td>\nCharles Fried<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
341<\/td>\nPeople \u2260 Legislature<\/a><\/td>\nSaikrishna Bangalore Prakash & John Yoo
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
371<\/td>\nPerpetuating \u201cOne Person, One Vote\u201d Errors<\/a><\/td>\nDerek T. Muller
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
397<\/td>\nImage is Everything: Politics, Umpiring, and the Judicial Myth<\/a><\/td>\nMichael R. Dimino, Sr.
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
415<\/td>\nThe Federalist Safeguards of Politics<\/a><\/td>\nAnthony Johnstone
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
487<\/td>\nDe Facto Class Actions? Plaintiff- and Defendant-Orientated Injunctions in Voting Rights, Election Law, and Other Constitutional Cases<\/a><\/td>\nMichael T. Morley
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
\n

Note<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

557<\/td>\nThe Outer Limits of Equity: A Proposal for Cautious Expansion<\/a><\/td>\nJames Fullmer<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Volume 39 – Issue 1<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

The Federalist Society National Student Symposium\u20132015<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n

1<\/td>\nInnovation and Inequality: The Separability Thesis<\/a><\/td>\nRichard A. Epstein<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
21<\/td>\nBiologics in the Practice of Law<\/a><\/td>\nLindsay Kelly
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
39<\/td>\nInnovation and Inequality: Conservative and Libertarian Perspectives<\/a><\/td>\nBeth Kregor
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
47<\/td>\nHow Innovation Makes Us More Equal<\/a><\/td>\nJohn McGinnis
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
59<\/td>\nOver-Rewarding Patenting: You Get What You Pay For<\/a><\/td>\nDouglas Melamed
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
71<\/td>\nCurrent Issues in Patent Law and Policy<\/a><\/td>\nMichael J. Meurer
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
79<\/td>\nLet’s Wait and See: A Perspective on Post-AIA Patent Reform<\/a><\/td>\nPhyllis Turner-Brim
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Articles<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

89<\/td>\nMeasuring Diversity: Law Faculties in 1997 and 2013<\/a><\/td>\nJames Lindgren
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
153<\/td>\nWhy Are There So Few Conservatives and Libertarians in Legal Academia? An Empirical Exploration of Three Hypotheses<\/a><\/td>\nJames C. Phillips
\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
209<\/td>\nPublic Choice Theory and Occupational Licensing<\/a><\/td>\nPaul J. Larkin, Jr.<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Volume 38 – Issue 3<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

The Federalist Society National Lawyer’s Convention–2014<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

781<\/td>\nWorking Backwards: How Employment Regulation Hurts Unemployed Millenials<\/a><\/td>\nGail Heriot<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
789<\/td>\nContractual Solutions for Employment Law Problems<\/a><\/td>\nRichard A. Epstein<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
803<\/td>\nEmployment Regulation and Youth Employment: A Critical Perspective<\/a><\/td>\nJ.H. Verkerke<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Articles<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

817<\/td>\nOriginalism as a Theory of Legal Change<\/a><\/td>\nStephen E. Sachs<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
889<\/td>\nWhy Non-Originalism Does Not Justify Departing From the Original Meaning of the Recess Appointments Clause<\/a><\/td>\nMichael B. Rappaport<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
973<\/td>\nBehavioral Public Choice: The Behavioral Paradox of Government Policy<\/a><\/td>\nW. Kip Viscusi & Ted Gayer<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1009<\/td>\nState “Competitor’s Veto” Laws and the Right to Earn a Living: Some Paths to Federal Reform<\/a><\/td>\nTimothy Sandefur<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Volume 38 – Issue 2<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

National Security and the Separation of Powers<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

451<\/td>\nAdvising the President: The Growing Scope of Executive Power to Protect America<\/a><\/td>\nAlberto R. Gonzales<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
509<\/td>\nThe Argument for a New and Flexible Authorization for the Use of Military Force<\/a><\/td>\nWilliam S. Castle<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
547<\/td>\nExploring U.S. Treaty Practice Through a Military Lens<\/a><\/td>\nGeoffrey S. Corn & Dru Brenner-Beck<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Article<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

629<\/td>\nThe Founders’ Origination Clause and Implications for the Affordable Care Act<\/a><\/td>\nRobert G. Natelson<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Notes<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

711<\/td>\nTextualism and the Presumption of Reasonable Drafting<\/a><\/td>\nCory R. Liu<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
729<\/td>\nLiberty Requires Accountability: Checking Delegations to Independent Agencies<\/a><\/td>\nDavid Casazza<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
729<\/td>\nLiberty Requires Accountability: Checking Delegations to Independent Agencies<\/a><\/td>\nDavid Casazza<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Recent Development<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

761<\/td>\n“Your Raisins or Your Life”: The Harrowing of the Takings Clause in Horne v. U.S. Department of Agriculture<\/em>, 750 F.3d 1128 (9th Cir. 2014)<\/a><\/td>\nWilliam K. Lane III<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Volume 38 – Issue 1<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Security vs. Freedom:
\nContemporary Controversies<\/strong><\/h4>\n

The Thirty-Third Annual Federalist Society
\nNational Student Symposium on
\nLaw and Public Policy – 2014<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

3<\/td>\nWhy the NSA Data Seizures are Unconstitutional<\/a><\/td>\nRandy Barnett<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21<\/td>\nThe Constitution Follows the Drone: Targeted Killings, Legal Constraints, and Judicial Safeguards<\/a><\/td>\nMartin S. Flaherty<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
43<\/td>\nDrone On: The Commander in Chief Power to Target and Kill Americans<\/a><\/td>\nMichael Stokes Paulsen<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Articles<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

63<\/td>\nThe Obama Administration’s Unprecedented Lawlessness<\/a><\/td>\nSenator Ted Cruz<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
117<\/td>\nSection 702 and the Collection of International Telephone and Internet Content<\/a><\/td>\nLaura K. Donohue<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
267<\/td>\nThe Paradox of Administrative Preemption<\/a><\/td>\nDavid S. Rubenstein<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
337<\/td>\nThe Dynamic Incorporation of Foreign Law and the Constitutional Regulation of Federal Lawmaking<\/a><\/td>\nPaul J. Larkin, Jr.<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Recent Development<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

437<\/td>\nWhose Religion Matters in Corporate RFRA Claims After Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores<\/em>?, 134 S. Ct. 2751 (2014)<\/a><\/td>\nSpencer Churchill<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Volume 37 – Issue 3<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

The Federalist Society National Lawyers’ Convention\u20142013<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

705<\/td>\nBeyond Textualism: Why Originalist Theory Must Apply Beyond General Principles of Interpretation to Constitutional Law<\/a><\/td>\nRichard A. Epstein<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
721<\/td>\nTextualism and the Bill of Rights<\/a><\/td>\nNadine Strossen<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
729<\/td>\nTextualism and District of Columbia v. Heller<\/em><\/a><\/td>\nEugene Volokh<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
737<\/td>\nThe Limits of Textualism in Interpreting the Confrontation Clause<\/a><\/td>\nStephanos Bibas<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Thirteenth Annual Barbara K. Olson Memorial Lecture<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

743<\/td>\nLaw’s Irony<\/a><\/td>\nHon. Neil M. Gorsuch<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Articles<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

757<\/td>\nBulk Metadata Collection: Statutory and Constitutional Considerations<\/a><\/td>\nLaura K. Donohue<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
901<\/td>\nThe Legality of the National Security Agency’s Bulk Data Surveillance Programs<\/a><\/td>\nJohn Yoo<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
931<\/td>\nThe New Private-Regulation Skepticism: Due Process, Non-Delegation, and Antitrust Challenges<\/a><\/td>\nAlexander Volokh<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1009<\/td>\nThe Empty Promise of Behavioral Antitrust<\/a><\/td>\nAlan Devlin & Michael Jacobs<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1065<\/td>\nStrict Liability Offenses, Incarceration, and the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause<\/a><\/td>\nPaul J. Larkin, Jr.<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1123<\/td>\nWhat’s the Point of Originalism?<\/a><\/td>\nDonald L. Drakeman<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Notes<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

1151<\/td>\nNeither “Ministerial” nor an “Exception”: The Ministerial Exception in Light of Hosanna-Tabor<\/em><\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1171<\/td>\nDuty or Dignity? Competing Approaches to the Free Exercise Rights of For-Profit Corporations<\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Volume 37 – Issue 2<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Executive Discretion and the Rule of Law<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

377<\/td>\nTake Care Now: Stare Decisis and the President\u2019s Duty to Defend Acts of Congress<\/a><\/td>\nCurt A. Levey & Kenneth A. Klukowski<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
425<\/td>\nRegulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Activity Without OMB and Cost-Benefit Review<\/a><\/td>\nJohn D. Graham & Cory R. Liu<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
447<\/td>\nResponding to Agency Avoidance of OIRA<\/a><\/td>\nNina A. Mendelson & Jonathan B. Wiener<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
523<\/td>\nAgency Discretion as \u201cWhac-a-Mole\u201d: The Challenge of Restricting Agency Use of Nonlegislative Rules<\/a><\/td>\nStuart Shapiro<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
553<\/td>\n\u201cAgency Threats\u201d and the Rule of Law: An Offer You Can\u2019t Refuse<\/a><\/td>\nJerry Brito<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
579<\/td>\nSue, Settle, and Shut Out the States: Destroying the Environmental Benefits of Cooperative Federalism<\/a><\/td>\nHenry N. Butler & Nathaniel J. Harris<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Speech<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

629<\/td>\nDon\u2019t Mess With Texas Judges: In Praise of the State Judiciary<\/a><\/td>\nHon. Jennifer Walker Elrod<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Notes<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

653<\/td>\nBuilding on Executive Order 13,636 to Encourage Information Sharing for Cybersecurity Purposes<\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
677<\/td>\nDetainment Power: The Limits of the President\u2019s Power to Suspend Habeas Corpus During Military Conflicts<\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Recent Developments<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

695<\/td>\nRules versus Standards in City of Arlington v. FCC<\/em>, 132 S. Ct. 1421 (2012)<\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Volume 37 – Issue 1<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
THE FEDERAL LEVIATHAN:<\/strong>
\n IS THERE ANY AREA OF MODERN LIFE TO WHICH<\/strong>
\n FEDERAL GOVERNMENT POWER DOES NOT<\/strong>
\n EXTEND?<\/strong>
\nTHE THIRTY-SECOND ANNUAL FEDERALIST SOCIETY
\nNATIONAL STUDENT SYMPOSIUM ON
\nLAW AND PUBLIC POLICY\u20142013<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

I. Crony Capitalism<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

5<\/td>\nCRONY CAPITALISM: RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW<\/a><\/td>\nJonathan R. Macey<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

II. Environmental and Property Laws<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

13<\/td>\nTHE LEGITIMATE REACH OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVOLUTION<\/a><\/td>\nLynn E. Blais<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
23<\/td>\nMODERN ENVIRONMENTALISTS OVERREACH: A PLEA FOR UNDERSTANDING BACKGROUND COMMON LAW PRINCIPLES<\/a><\/td>\nRichard A. Epstein<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
41<\/td>\nAGAINST THE EPA, ABSURDITY IS NO DEFENSE<\/a><\/td>\nJeremy A. Rabkin<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

III. Federalization of Criminal Law<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

51<\/td>\nINTENT-OPTIONAL CRIMINAL STATUTES: A PLEA FOR REFORM, AND A NOTE OF CAUTION TO REFORMERS<\/a><\/td>\nWilliam G. Otis<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
57<\/td>\nTHE FEDERAL CRIMINAL \u201cCODE\u201d: RETURN OF OVERFEDERALIZATION<\/a><\/td>\nJulie Rose O\u2019Sullivan<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

IV. Limitations Attached to Federal Money<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

71<\/td>\nTHE SPENDING POWER AFTER NFIB V. SEBELIUS<\/em><\/a><\/td>\nLynn A. Baker<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
83<\/td>\nCOERCION, CONDITIONS, AND COMMANDEERING: A BRIEF NOTE ON THE MEDICAID HOLDING OF NFIB V. SEBELIUS<\/em><\/a><\/td>\nMichael S. Greve<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
93<\/td>\nVIVA CONDITIONAL FEDERAL SPENDING!<\/a><\/td>\nSamuel R. Bagenstos<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

V. Civil Rights<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

103<\/td>\nTHE SUPREME COURT\u2019S PERVERSION OF THE 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT<\/a><\/td>\nLino A. Graglia<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
113<\/td>\nTHE ODD EVOLUTION OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS STATE<\/a><\/td>\nR. Shep Melnick<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY AND THE<\/strong>
\n LEGAL ACADEMY<\/strong>
\nA CONFERENCE BY THE HARVARD FEDERALIST SOCIETY<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
137<\/td>\nINTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY IN THE LEGAL ACADEMY<\/a><\/td>\nNicholas Quinn Rosenkranz<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
145<\/td>\nTHE UNEASY CASE FOR INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY<\/a><\/td>\nMichael Stokes Paulsen<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
165<\/td>\nTOWARD IMPROVED INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY IN LAW SCHOOLS<\/a><\/td>\nGeorge W. Dent, Jr.<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
179<\/td>\nLEGAL ACADEMIA AND THE BLINDNESS OF THE ELITES<\/a><\/td>\nPaul Campos<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
187<\/td>\nHOW THE LAW SCHOOL CAN SUCCEED\u2014AN INVITATION<\/a><\/td>\nSherif Girgis<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Articles<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

199<\/td>\nTHE ORIGINS AND MEANING OF \u201cVACANCIES THAT MAY HAPPEN DURING THE RECESS\u201d IN THE CONSTITUTION\u2019S RECESS APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE<\/a><\/td>\nRobert G. Natelson<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
241<\/td>\nCRACK COCAINE, CONGRESSIONAL INACTION, AND EQUAL PROTECTION<\/a><\/td>\nPaul J. Larkin, Jr.<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
295<\/td>\nCOMPLETE DIVERSITY AND THE CLOSING OF THE FEDERAL COURTS<\/a><\/td>\nCharles J. Cooper & Howard C. Nielson, Jr.<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Note<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

329<\/td>\nLOOKING BACK TO LOOK FORWARD: REEXAMINING THE APPLICATION OF THE THIRD-PARTY DOCTRINE TO CONVEYED PARTIES<\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Recent Developments<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

347<\/td>\nTHE RETURN OF CLASSICAL POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE IN ZIVOTOFSKY <\/em>EX REL. ZIVOTOFSKY V. CLINTON<\/em>, 132 S. CT. 1421 (2012)<\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
363<\/td>\nA \u201c[NON]ESSENTIAL LIMIT ON OUR POWER\u201d: STANDING DOCTRINE AND JUDICIAL RESTRAINT IN HOLLINGSWORTH V. PERRY<\/em>, 133 S. CT. 2652 (2013)<\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Volume 36, Number 3 – Summer 2013<\/strong><\/h2>\n

The Federalist Society National Lawyers Convention\u20142012<\/strong><\/h3>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

925<\/td>\nThe Wages of Crying Judicial Restraint<\/a><\/td>\nRandy E. Barnett<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
935<\/td>\nFederalism And Commerce<\/a><\/td>\nFrank H. Easterbrook<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
941<\/td>\nThe Federalis(M) Society<\/a><\/td>\nHeather K. Gerken<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
949<\/td>\nRethinking Legal Conservatism<\/a><\/td>\nNeal K. Katyal<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
955<\/td>\nThe Article V Convention Process And The Restoration of Federalism<\/a><\/td>\nRobert G. Natelson<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Fifth Annual Rosenkranz Debate<\/strong>
\nResolved: Natural Law Should Inform Constitutional Law<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

961<\/td>\nThe Natural Law Challenge<\/a><\/td>\nHadley Arkes<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
977<\/td>\nNatural Law Jurisprudence: A Skeptical Perspective<\/a><\/td>\nAlex Kozinski<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Articles<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

983<\/td>\nMonopolies and the Constitution: A History of Crony Capitalism<\/a><\/td>\nSteven G. Calabresi & Larissa C. Leibowitz<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1099<\/td>\nElections Across the Pond: Comparing Campaign Finance Regimes in the United States And United Kingdom<\/a><\/td>\nKathleen Hunker<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1139<\/td>\nUnderstanding \u201cThe Loop\u201d: Regulating the Next Generation of War Machines<\/a><\/td>\nWilliam C. Marra & Sonia K. McNeil<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1187<\/td>\nStockholder Adoption of Mandatory Individual Arbitration for Stockholder Disputes<\/a><\/td>\nHal S. Scott & Leslie N. Silverman<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

In Memoriam<\/strong>
\n Robert H. Bork<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

1233<\/td>\nAntonin Scalia<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1235<\/td>\nSteven G. Calabresi<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1245<\/td>\nJohn Harrison<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1253<\/td>\nWilliam Bradford Reynolds<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Volume 36, Number 2 \u2013 Spring 2013<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Privacy, Security, and Human Dignity in the Digital Age<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

403<\/td>\nForeword: Accounting for Technological Change<\/a><\/td>\nOrin S. Kerr<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
409<\/td>\nThe Pursuit of Privacy in a World Where Information Control is Failing<\/a><\/td>\nAdam Thierer<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
457<\/td>\nObservations from Above: Unmanned Aircraft Systems and Privacy<\/a><\/td>\nJohn Villasenor<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
519<\/td>\nCompulsory Process in Cyberspace: How to Increase Privacy in the Social Networking Age<\/a><\/td>\nRobert D. Richards<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
549<\/td>\nEnding the Zero-Sum Game: How to Increase the Productivity of the Fourth Amendment<\/a><\/td>\nRic Simmons<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
605<\/td>\nUpdating the Law of Information Privacy: The New Framework of the European Union<\/a><\/td>\nMarc Rotenberg & David Jacobs<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
653<\/td>\nNeuroscience, Mental Privacy, and the Law<\/a><\/td>\nFrancis X. Shen<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Articles<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

715<\/td>\nPublic Choice Theory and Overcriminalization<\/a><\/td>\nPaul Larkin, Jr.<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
795<\/td>\nShould We Make Crime Impossible?<\/a><\/td>\nMichael L. Rich<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Notes<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

849<\/td>\nSeminole Rock<\/em> and the Separation of Powers<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
873<\/td>\nCleaning Up \u201cThe Mess\u201d: The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and the Burden of Proof in the Guantanamo Habeas Cases<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Recent Development<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

915<\/td>\nBalancing the Separation of Powers and Right-Remedy Principles in Minneci v. Pollard<\/em>, 132 S. Ct. 617 (2012)<\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Volume 36, Number 1 – Winter 2012<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

I. The Rule of Law and the Administrative State<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

5<\/td>\nThe Perilous Position of the Rule of Law and the Administrative State<\/a><\/td>\nRichard A. Epstein<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21<\/td>\nThe Rule of Law and the Inevitability of Discretion<\/a><\/td>\nPeter M. Shane<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

II. Congress vs. Agencies:
\nBalancing Checks and Efficiency:
\nGridlock, Organized Interests, and Regulatory Capture<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

31<\/td>\nCorralling Capture<\/a><\/td>\nDavid Freeman Engstrom<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
41<\/td>\nCongressional Abdication: Delegation Without Detail and Without Waiver<\/a><\/td>\nC. Boyden Gray<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

III. Perspectives on Executive Power:
\nCzars, Libya, and Recent Development<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

53<\/td>\nAmerican Executive Power in Historical Perspective<\/a><\/td>\nMariano-Florentino Cu\u00e9llar<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
63<\/td>\nReconsidering the Modern Hanoverian King<\/a><\/td>\nSanford<\/em> Levinson<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
73<\/td>\nPresident Obama and the Framers\u2019 Presidency<\/a><\/td>\nJohn Yoo<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

IV. Technology and Regulation<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

87<\/td>\nCan Technological Innovation Survive Government Regulation?<\/a><\/td>\nRichard A. Epstein<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
105<\/td>\nRegulation and Technology<\/a><\/td>\nAnthony Falzone<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
109<\/td>\nThe Regulatory Turn in IP<\/a><\/td>\nMark. A. Lemley<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Essays<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

117<\/td>\nOn the Majesty of the Law<\/a><\/td>\nHarvey C. Mansfield<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Articles<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

131<\/td>\nIncorporation by Reference in an Open Government Age<\/a><\/td>\nEmily S. Bremer<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
211<\/td>\n\u201cPride Ignorance and Knavery\u201d: James Madison\u2019s Formative Experiences with Religious Establishments<\/a><\/td>\nAndy G. Olree<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
277<\/td>\nPre-\u201cOriginalism\u201d<\/a><\/td>\nLorianne Updike Toler & J. Carl Cecere with the assistance of Justice Don Willett<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Recent Developments<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

355<\/td>\nThe Case of the Missing Argument: The Mysterious Disappearance of International Law From Juvenile Sentencing in Miller v. Alabama<\/em>, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012)<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
375<\/td>\nApplying the Holder<\/em> Standard to Speech that Provides Material Support to Terrorism in United States<\/em> v. Mehanna<\/em>, No. 09-10017-GAO (D. Mass. 2012)<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
391<\/td>\nResurrecting Free Exercise in Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC<\/em>, 132 S. Ct. 694 (2012)<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n

Volume 35, Number 3 \u2013 Summer 2012<\/strong><\/h2>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
<\/td>\n
THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY NATIONAL LAWYERS CONVENTION\u20142011<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
821<\/td>\nREFLECTIONS ON HOSANNA-TABOR<\/em><\/a> Michael W. McConnell<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
839<\/td>\nHOSANNA-TABOR<\/em> AND THE MINISTERIAL EXCEPTION<\/a> Douglas Laycock<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
863<\/td>\nMEET THE NEW BOSS: CONTINUITY IN PRESIDENTIAL WAR POWERS?<\/a> Michael D. Ramsey<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
FOURTH ANNUAL ROSENKRANZ DEBATE<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
RESOLVED: CONGRESS ACTED WITHIN ITS AUTHORITY IN ENACTING THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
873<\/td>\n THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT: SWIMMING IN THE STREAM OF COMMERCE<\/a>Laurence H. Tribe<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
887<\/td>\n THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT AND THE BREADTH AND DEPTH OF FEDERAL POWER<\/a>Paul Clement<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
ARTICLES<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
897<\/td>\n THE AVAILABILITY OF COMMON LAW PRIVILEGES FOR WITNESSES IN CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATIONS<\/a>Michael D. Bopp & DeLisa Lay<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
933<\/td>\n THE ETHICS OF OPPOSING CERTIORARI BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT<\/a>Aaron Tang<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
NOTE<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
991<\/td>\n ARBITRATION, CLASS WAIVERS, AND STATUTORY RIGHTS<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n

Volume 35, Number 2 \u2013 Spring 2012<\/strong><\/h2>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
<\/td>\n
LAW IN AN AGE OF AUSTERITY<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
453<\/td>\n FISCAL POLICY IN AN ERA OF AUSTERITY<\/a>David M. Schizer<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
487<\/td>\n THE REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT TO INDEX CAPITAL GAINS FOR INFLATION: A SEQUAL<\/a>Charles J. Cooper & Vincent Colatriano<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
525<\/td>\n JUDICIAL COMPULSION AND THE PUBLIC FISC\u2014A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW<\/a>Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, E. Duncan Getchell Jr., & Wesley G. Russell Jr.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
543<\/td>\n REDUCING THE DRUG WAR’S DAMAGE TO GOVERNMENT BUDGETS<\/a>David B. Kopel & Trevor Burrus<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
569<\/td>\n PAPERS, PLEASE: DOES THE CONSTITUTION PERMIT THE STATES A ROLE IN IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT?<\/a>John C. Eastman<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
593<\/td>\n ITS HOUR COME ROUND AT LAST? STATE SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY AND THE GREAT STATE DEBT CRISIS OF THE EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY<\/a>Ernest A. Young<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE: HARVARD JOURNAL OF LAW & PUBLIC POLICY SYMPOSIUM<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
623<\/td>\n JUDICIAL SELECTION RECONSIDERED: A PLEA FOR RADICAL MODERATION<\/a>Charles Gardner Geyh<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
643<\/td>\n CONTESTING THE JUDICIAL POWER IN THE STATES<\/a>G. Alan Tarr<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
663<\/td>\n IF MEN WERE ANGELS<\/a>William R. Casto<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
671<\/td>\n CONCLUDING THOUGHTS FROM ADA, OHIO<\/a>Scott Douglas Gerber<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
ARTICLES<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
681<\/td>\n AGAINST LIABILITY FOR PRIVATE RISK-EXPOSURE<\/a>Sheila B. Scheuerman<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
743<\/td>\n A FAREWELL TO HARMS: AGAINST PRESUMING IRREPARABLE INJURY IN CONSTITUTIONAL LITIGATION<\/a>Anthony DiSarro<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
NOTE<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
797<\/td>\n35_2_797_Alicea<\/a> STARE DECISIS IN AN ORIGINALIST CONGRESS<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n
\n
\n

Volume 35, Number 1 \u2013 Winter 2012<\/strong><\/h2>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
<\/td>\n
CAPITALISM, MARKETS, AND THE CONSTITUTION:
\nTHE THIRTIETH ANNUAL FEDERALIST SOCIETY NATIONAL STUDENT SYMPOSIUM ON LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY \u2014 2011<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
I. ECONOMIC FREEDOMS AND THE CONSTITUTION<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5<\/td>\n DOES THE CONSTITUTION PROTECT ECONOMIC LIBERTY?<\/a>Randy E. Barnett<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
13<\/td>\n ECONOMIC FREEDOMS AND THE CONSTITUTION<\/a>Jeffrey Rosen<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
II. ECONOMIC THEORY, CIVIC VIRTUE, AND THE MEANING OF THE CONSTITUTION<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27<\/td>\n THE CONSTITUTION AND ECONOMIC LIBERTY<\/a>James W. Ely Jr.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
37<\/td>\n ENLIGHTENMENT ECONOMICS AND THE FRAMING OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION<\/a>Ren\u00e9e Lettow Lerner<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
47<\/td>\n JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE, JUDICIAL VIRTUE, AND THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF THE CONSTITUTION<\/a>Nelson Lund<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
61<\/td>\n THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION<\/a>G. Edward White<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
III. FEDERALISM AND INTERSTATE COMPETITION<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
89<\/td>\n INTERSTATE COMPETITION AND THE RACE TO THE TOP<\/a>Jonathan H. Adler<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
101<\/td>\n FISCAL FEDERALISM AS A CONSTRAINT ON STATES<\/a>Clayton P. Gillette<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
115<\/td>\n FEDERALISM AS A DISCOVERY PROCESS AND A CATALYST FOR HUMILITY <\/a>John O. McGinnis<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
121<\/td>\n DEPOLITICIZING FEDERALISM <\/a>Louis Michael Seidman<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
IV. THE WELFARE STATE AND AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
131<\/td>\n NATIONAL HEALTHCARE AND AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL CULTURE<\/a>William P. Marshall<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
153<\/td>\n AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM AND THE HEALTHCARE REFORM DEBATE<\/a>Jeremy Rabkin<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
171<\/td>\n AMERICAN DIGNITY AND HEALTHCARE REFORM<\/a>Neomi Rao<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
V. ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY AND THE ROLE OF THE COURTS<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
187<\/td>\n ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY AND THE ROLE OF THE COURTS<\/a>Paul G. Mahoney<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
195<\/td>\n ECONOMIC UNCERTAINY, THE COURTS, AND THE RULE OF LAW<\/a>Todd Zywicki<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
REFLECTIONS ON THE LAW OF SEPTEMBER 11: A TEN-YEAR RETROSPECTIVE<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
213<\/td>\n DEFERENCE TO THE EXECUTIVE IN THE UNITED STATES AFTER SEPTEMBER 11: CONGRESS, THE COURTS, AND THE OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL<\/a>Eric A. Posner<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
245<\/td>\n U.S. INTELLIGENCE IN THE WAKE OF SEPTEMBER 11: THE RISE OF THE SPY COMMANDO AND REORGANIZED OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIES<\/a>Frederick P. Hitz<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
ESSAY<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
259<\/td>\n WHAT WOULD HAMILTON DO?<\/a>Michael W. McConnell<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
ARTICLES<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
283<\/td>\n IN DEFENSE OF SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS, OR THE PROMISE OF LAWFUL RULE<\/a>Timothy Sandefur<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
351<\/td>\n IN PRAISE OF HOSTILITY: ANTIAUTHORITARIANISM AS FREE SPEECH PRINCIPLE<\/a>John M. Kang<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS<\/center><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
423<\/td>\n STATE LAW CLAIMS AND ARTICLE III IN Stern v. Marshall<\/em>, 131 S. Ct. 2594 (2011) <\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
439<\/td>\n MAINTAINING THE CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE STANDARD FOR PATENT INVALIDITY CHALLENGES IN Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership<\/em>, 131 S. Ct. 2238 (2011)<\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n
SPECIAL THANKS<\/center><\/td>\n
<\/td>\n SYMPOSIUM MASTHEAD<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Volume 39 – Issue 3 In Memoriam: Justice Antonin Scalia 575 The Unknown Achievements of Justice Scalia Steven G. Calabresi 579 The Anti-Casual Justice Christopher Landau 581 Justice Scalia the Teacher Roy W. McLeese III Articles 583 Linguistic Relativism and the Decline of the Rule of Law Richard A. Epstein 631 Technology and the Role of Intent in Constitutionally Protected Expression John Villasenor 675 The FCC’s Transaction Reviews and First Amendment Risks Brent Skorup & […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-1371","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/PeZSiL-m7","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1371","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1371"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1371\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1371"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}