{"id":3926,"date":"2026-03-12T16:53:07","date_gmt":"2026-03-12T20:53:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/?page_id=3926"},"modified":"2026-03-12T16:53:07","modified_gmt":"2026-03-12T20:53:07","slug":"volume-36","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/volume-36\/","title":{"rendered":"Volume 36"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Issue 3<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The Federalist Society National Lawyers Convention\u20142012<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
925<\/td>The Wages of Crying Judicial Restraint<\/a><\/td>Randy E. Barnett<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
935<\/td>Federalism And Commerce<\/a><\/td>Frank H. Easterbrook<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
941<\/td>The Federalis(M) Society<\/a><\/td>Heather K. Gerken<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
949<\/td>Rethinking Legal Conservatism<\/a><\/td>Neal K. Katyal<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
955<\/td>The Article V Convention Process And The Restoration of Federalism<\/a><\/td>Robert G. Natelson<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Fifth Annual Rosenkranz Debate<\/strong>
Resolved: Natural Law Should Inform Constitutional Law<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
961<\/td>The Natural Law Challenge<\/a><\/td>Hadley Arkes<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
977<\/td>Natural Law Jurisprudence: A Skeptical Perspective<\/a><\/td>Alex Kozinski<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Articles<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
983<\/td>Monopolies and the Constitution: A History of Crony Capitalism<\/a><\/td>Steven G. Calabresi & Larissa C. Leibowitz<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
1099<\/td>Elections Across the Pond: Comparing Campaign Finance Regimes in the United States And United Kingdom<\/a><\/td>Kathleen Hunker<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
1139<\/td>Understanding \u201cThe Loop\u201d: Regulating the Next Generation of War Machines<\/a><\/td>William C. Marra & Sonia K. McNeil<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
1187<\/td>Stockholder Adoption of Mandatory Individual Arbitration for Stockholder Disputes<\/a><\/td>Hal S. Scott & Leslie N. Silverman<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
In Memoriam<\/strong>: Robert H. Bork<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
1233<\/td>Antonin Scalia<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
1235<\/td>Steven G. Calabresi<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
1245<\/td>John Harrison<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
1253<\/td>William Bradford Reynolds<\/a><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Issue 2<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Privacy, Security, and Human Dignity in the Digital Age<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
403<\/td>Foreword: Accounting for Technological Change<\/a><\/td>Orin S. Kerr<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
409<\/td>The Pursuit of Privacy in a World Where Information Control is Failing<\/a><\/td>Adam Thierer<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
457<\/td>Observations from Above: Unmanned Aircraft Systems and Privacy<\/a><\/td>John Villasenor<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
519<\/td>Compulsory Process in Cyberspace: How to Increase Privacy in the Social Networking Age<\/a><\/td>Robert D. Richards<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
549<\/td>Ending the Zero-Sum Game: How to Increase the Productivity of the Fourth Amendment<\/a><\/td>Ric Simmons<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
605<\/td>Updating the Law of Information Privacy: The New Framework of the European Union<\/a><\/td>Marc Rotenberg & David Jacobs<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
653<\/td>Neuroscience, Mental Privacy, and the Law<\/a><\/td>Francis X. Shen<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Articles<\/strong>

<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

715<\/td>Public Choice Theory and Overcriminalization<\/a><\/td>Paul Larkin, Jr.<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
795<\/td>Should We Make Crime Impossible?<\/a><\/td>Michael L. Rich<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Notes<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
849<\/td>Seminole Rock<\/em> and the Separation of Powers<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
873<\/td>Cleaning Up \u201cThe Mess\u201d: The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and the Burden of Proof in the Guantanamo Habeas Cases<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Recent Development<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
915<\/td>Balancing the Separation of Powers and Right-Remedy Principles in Minneci v. Pollard<\/em>, 132 S. Ct. 617 (2012)<\/a><\/td> <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

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

Issue 1<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
I. The Rule of Law and the Administrative State<\/strong>

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

5<\/td>The Perilous Position of the Rule of Law and the Administrative State<\/a><\/td>Richard A. Epstein<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
21<\/td>The Rule of Law and the Inevitability of Discretion<\/a><\/td>Peter M. Shane<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
II. Congress vs. Agencies:
Balancing Checks and Efficiency: Gridlock, Organized Interests, and Regulatory Capture<\/strong><\/span><\/td><\/tr>
31<\/td>Corralling Capture<\/a><\/td>David Freeman Engstrom<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
41<\/td>Congressional Abdication: Delegation Without Detail and Without Waiver<\/a><\/td>C. Boyden Gray<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
III. Perspectives on Executive Power:
Czars, Libya, and Recent Development<\/strong><\/span><\/td><\/tr>
53<\/td>American Executive Power in Historical Perspective<\/a><\/td>Mariano-Florentino Cu\u00e9llar<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
63<\/td>Reconsidering the Modern Hanoverian King<\/a><\/td>Sanford<\/em> Levinson<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
73<\/td>President Obama and the Framers\u2019 Presidency<\/a><\/td>John Yoo<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
IV. Technology and Regulation<\/strong><\/span><\/td><\/tr>
87<\/td>Can Technological Innovation Survive Government Regulation?<\/a><\/td>Richard A. Epstein<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
105<\/td>Regulation and Technology<\/a><\/td>Anthony Falzone<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
109<\/td>The Regulatory Turn in IP<\/a><\/td>Mark. A. Lemley<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Essays<\/strong><\/span><\/td><\/tr>
117<\/td>On the Majesty of the Law<\/a><\/td>Harvey C. Mansfield<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Articles<\/strong><\/span><\/td><\/tr>
131<\/td>Incorporation by Reference in an Open Government Age<\/a><\/td>Emily S. Bremer<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
211<\/td>\u201cPride Ignorance and Knavery\u201d: James Madison\u2019s Formative Experiences with Religious Establishments<\/a><\/td>Andy G. Olree<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
277<\/td>Pre-\u201cOriginalism\u201d<\/a><\/td>Lorianne Updike Toler & J. Carl Cecere with the assistance of Justice Don Willett<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Recent Developments<\/strong><\/span><\/td><\/tr>
355<\/td>The 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><\/tr>
375<\/td>Applying 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><\/tr>
391<\/td>Resurrecting Free Exercise in Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC<\/em>, 132 S. Ct. 694 (2012)<\/a><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Issue 3 The Federalist Society National Lawyers Convention\u20142012 925 The Wages of Crying Judicial Restraint Randy E. Barnett 935 Federalism And Commerce Frank H. Easterbrook 941 The Federalis(M) Society Heather K. Gerken 949 Rethinking Legal Conservatism Neal K. Katyal 955 The Article V Convention Process And The Restoration of Federalism Robert G. Natelson Fifth Annual Rosenkranz DebateResolved: Natural Law Should Inform Constitutional Law 961 The Natural Law Challenge Hadley Arkes 977 Natural Law Jurisprudence: A […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":209,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","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-3926","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/PeZSiL-11k","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3926","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\/209"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3926"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3926\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3926"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}