{"id":4003,"date":"2026-03-15T23:53:19","date_gmt":"2026-03-16T03:53:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/?page_id=4003"},"modified":"2026-03-21T16:21:09","modified_gmt":"2026-03-21T20:21:09","slug":"volume-19","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/volume-19\/","title":{"rendered":"Volume 19"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Issue 3<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The Eighth Annual Federalist Society Lawyers Convention Symposium: Group Rights, Victim Status, and the Law<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Opening Address<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
645<\/td>How Should Society Handle Injustice?<\/a><\/td>Alan L. Keyes<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel I: Victimology, Regulation, and the Transformation of the Common Law<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
651<\/td>Using Common Law Principles in Regulatory Schemes (With a Note on Victimology)<\/a><\/td>Cass R. Sunstein<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
657<\/td>Regulatory Rent-Seekers in the Media, Bar, and Bureaucracy<\/a><\/td>C. Boyden Gray<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
661<\/td>Self-Correction Mechanisms in the Regulatory System<\/a><\/td>David C. Vladeck<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
667<\/td>Hope for the Tort System: Congressional Proposals for Reform<\/a><\/td>Christopher Cox<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Addresses<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
671<\/td>Victims and Heroes in the Benevolent State<\/a><\/td>Hon. Clarence Thomas<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
685<\/td>Welfare As a Moral Problem<\/a><\/td>Gertrude Himmelfarb<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel II: Accused as Victim\u2014the Case of Criminal Law<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
695<\/td>Victims and the Exclusionary Rule<\/a><\/td>Daniel E. Lungren<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
703<\/td>Demystifying the Abuse Excuse: Is There One?<\/a><\/td>Peter Arenella<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
711<\/td>Criminal Procedure: Moving from the Accused As Victim to the Accused<\/a><\/td>Joseph D. Grano<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
719<\/td>Conservatives’ Selective Use of Race in the Law<\/a><\/td>Randall L. Kennedy<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Address<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
723<\/td>Individualism before Multiculturalism<\/a><\/td>Glenn C. Loury<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel III: Feminism, Multiculturalism, and the Law<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
733<\/td>Women: An Uncertain Fit for the Multicultural Movement?<\/a><\/td>Walter Berns<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
739<\/td>\u201cI Want You:\u201d Uncle Sam As Mr. Right<\/a><\/td>Linda Chavez<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
743<\/td>From \u201cColorblind\u201d White Supremacy to American Multiculturalism<\/a><\/td>Jamin B. Raskin<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
753<\/td>Restructuring Work and Family Entitlements around Family Values<\/a><\/td>Joan C. Williams<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Address<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
759<\/td>The D.C. Circuit Task Force on Gender, Race, and Ethnic Bias: Political Correctness Rebuffed<\/a><\/td>Laurence H. Silberman<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel IV: Affirmative Action\u2014Moral Obligation and Practical Necessity, or the Road to Hell?<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
767<\/td>The Real Problem<\/a><\/td>Abigail Thernstrom<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
773<\/td>Affirmative Action Is No Civil Right<\/a><\/td>Robert Woodson<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
779<\/td>Three Models of Affirmative Action Beneficiaries<\/a><\/td>Thomas W. Merrill<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Closing Address<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
785<\/td>Improving Culture to End Racism: Closing Address<\/a><\/td>Dinesh D’Souza<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Article<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
795<\/td>How Do the Courts Really<\/em> Discover Unenumerated Fundamental Rights? Cataloguing the Methods of Judicial Alchemy<\/a><\/td>David Crump<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Book Review<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
917<\/td>Utopia\u2019s Law, Politics\u2019 Constitution<\/a><\/td>John C. Harrison<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Recent Case<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
941<\/td>The Scope and Constitutionality of Judicial Review Under the Tunney Act: United States v. Microsoft Corp.<\/em><\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Issue 2<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The Fourteenth Annual National Student Federalist Society Symposium: Originalism, Democracy, and the Constitution<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Introductory Remarks<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
237<\/td>Welcoming Remarks<\/a><\/td>Robert W. Bennett<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
239<\/td>Introductory Remarks<\/a><\/td>Steven G.<\/em> Calabresi<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel I: Originalism and the Dead Hand<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
243<\/td>Introduction<\/a><\/td>Daniel D. Polsby<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
245<\/td>Dead Hand of the Architect<\/a><\/td>Daniel A. Farber<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
251<\/td>The Original Constitution and Our Origins<\/a><\/td>John O. McGinnis<\/em><\/em><\/td><\/tr>
263<\/td>The Dead Hand of Constitutional Tradition<\/a><\/td>Michael S. Moore<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
275<\/td>The Dead Hand and Constitutional Amendment<\/a><\/td>Lawrence G. Sager<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel II: Constitutionalism and Originalism<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Introduction<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
281<\/td>Introduction<\/a><\/td>Stephen Chapman<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
283<\/td>Integrity and Impersonality of Originalism<\/a><\/td>Lillian R. BeVier<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
293<\/td>It’s Not Constitutionalism, It’s Judicial Activism<\/a><\/td>Lino A. Graglia<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
301<\/td>Originalism As an “Ism”<\/a><\/td>Jonathan R. Macey<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
311<\/td>Five Theses on Originalism<\/a><\/td>Cass R. Sunstein<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel III: What Is Originalism?<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
317<\/td>Introduction: A View for the Legislative Branch<\/a><\/td>David M. McIntosh<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
321<\/td>Originalism, Or Who Is Fred?<\/a><\/td>Larry Alexander<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
327<\/td>A Text Is Just a Text<\/a><\/td>Paul F. Campos<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
335<\/td>\u201cOriginalist\u201d Values and Constitutional Interpretation<\/a><\/td>Richard S. Kay<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
343<\/td>Defining Originalism<\/a><\/td>Frederick Schauer<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel IV: Is Originalism Possible? Normative Indeterminacy and the Judicial Role<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
347<\/td>Introduction<\/a><\/td>Edwin Meese III<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
351<\/td>Nonoriginalist Perspective on the Lessons of History<\/a><\/td>Michael C. Dorf<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
363<\/td>Some Doubts on Constitutional Indeterminacy<\/a><\/td>Richard A. Epstein<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
375<\/td>Normative Indeterminacy and the Problem of Judicial Role<\/a><\/td>Michael J. Perry<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
391<\/td>Writing of the Constitution and the Writing on the Wall<\/a><\/td>Steven D. Smith<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel V: Is Originalism Possible? Historical Indeterminacy<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
401<\/td>Introduction<\/a><\/td>Stephen B. Presser<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
403<\/td>The Relevance of the Framers’ Intent<\/a><\/td>Randy E. Barnett<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
411<\/td>Legal Indeterminacy: Its Cause and Cure<\/a><\/td>Gary Lawson<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
429<\/td>Originalism and Indeterminacy<\/a><\/td>Thomas B. McCaffee<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
437<\/td>The Indeterminacy of Historical Evidence<\/a><\/td>Suzanna Sherry<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel VI: The Original Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
443<\/td>Did the Fourteenth Amendment Incorporate the Bill of Rights Against States?<\/a><\/td>Akhil Reed Amar<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
451<\/td>A Minimalist Approach to the Fourteenth Amendment<\/a><\/td>Earl M. Maltz<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
457<\/td>The Originalist Case for Brown v. Board of Education<\/em><\/a><\/td>Michael W. McConnell<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
465<\/td>Conservatives v. Originalism<\/a><\/td>Jeffrey Rosen<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel VII: Alternatives to Originalism<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
475<\/td>Introduction<\/a><\/td>John Fund<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
479<\/td>Alternatives to Originalism?<\/a><\/td>Frank H. Easterbrook<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
487<\/td>The Political Function of Originalist Ambiguity<\/a><\/td>Richard H. Fallon Jr.<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
495<\/td>The Limited Relevance of Originalism in the Actual Performance of Legal Roles<\/a><\/td>Sanford Levinson<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
509<\/td>Bork v. Burke<\/a><\/td>Thomas W. Merrill<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
525<\/td>Interpretivism and the Judicial Role in a Constitutional Democracy: Seeking an Alternative to Originalism<\/a><\/td>Martin H. Redish<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Article<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
533<\/td>Truman, Korea, and the Constitution: Debunking the Imperial President Myth<\/a><\/td>Robert F. Turner<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Recent Developments: The Supreme Court of the United States, 1994 Term<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
587<\/td>Tearing Down the Wall: Rosenberger v. Rector of the University of Virginia<\/em>, 115 S. Ct. 2510 (1995)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
602<\/td>Protecting Private Religious Speech in the Public Forum: Capitol Square Review & Advisory Board v. Pinette<\/em>, 115 S. Ct. 2440 (1995)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
612<\/td>The Precarious Position of Commercial Speech: Rubin v. Coors Brewing Co.<\/em>, 115 S. Ct. 1585 (1995)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
Recent Cases: The United States Court of Appeals, 1995<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
627<\/td>Good Friday Vacation as an Establishment of Religion: Metzl v. Leininger<\/em>, 57 F.3d 618 (7th Cir. 1995)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
634<\/td>Speaking in Tongues: Whose Rights at Stake? Yniguez v. Arizonans for Official English<\/em>, 69 F.3d 920 (9th Cir. 1995) (en banc)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Issue 1<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Volume Introduction<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
1<\/td>Introduction to Volume Nineteen<\/a><\/td>The Hon. Alex Kozinski<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Articles<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
9<\/td>Interpreting the Constitution: Is the Intent of the Framers Controlling? If Not, What Is?<\/a><\/td>Boris I. Bittker<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
55<\/td>Construction Union Use of Environmental Regulation to Win Jobs: Cases, Impact, and Legal Challenges<\/a><\/td>Herbert R. Northrup & Augustus T. White<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
121<\/td>The Impact of the Constitutional Revolution of 1937 on the Dormant Commerce Clause: A Case Study in the Decline of State Autonomy<\/a><\/td>Earl M. Maltz<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
147<\/td>At Last, the Supreme Court Solves the Takings Puzzle<\/a><\/td>Douglas W. Kmiec<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Recent Developments: The Supreme Court of the United States, 1994 Term<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
161<\/td>The Reemergence of the Commerce Clause as a Limit of Federal Power: United States v. Lopez<\/em>, 115 S. Ct. 1624 (1995)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
174<\/td>Federal Preculsion of State-Imposed Congressional Term Limits: U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton<\/em>, 115 S. Ct. 1842 (1995)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
188<\/td>Constitutional Limits on Racial Redistricting: Miller v. Johnson<\/em>, 115 S. Ct. 2475 (1995)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
200<\/td>Government Regulation of Federal Employee Speech: United States v. National Treasury Employees Union<\/em>, 115 S. Ct. 1003 (1995)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
209<\/td>Suspicionless Drug Testing and the Fourth Amendment: Vermonia School District 47J v. Acton<\/em>, 115 S. Ct. 2386 (1995)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
Recent Cases: The United States Court of Appeals, 1994-95<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
217<\/td>Bank Holding Companies and \u201cThe Business of Insurance:\u201d Interpretations of McCarran-Ferguson in Owensboro National Bank v. Stephens<\/em>, 44 F.3d 388 (6th Cir. 1994), and Barnett Bank v. Gallagher<\/em>, 43 F.3d 631 (11th Cir. 1995)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
228<\/td>Tilting the Table: Collective Bargaining After National Basketball Ass\u2019n v. Williams<\/em>, 45 F.3d 684 (2d Cir. 1995)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

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

Issue 3 The Eighth Annual Federalist Society Lawyers Convention Symposium: Group Rights, Victim Status, and the Law Opening Address 645 How Should Society Handle Injustice? Alan L. Keyes Panel I: Victimology, Regulation, and the Transformation of the Common Law 651 Using Common Law Principles in Regulatory Schemes (With a Note on Victimology) Cass R. Sunstein 657 Regulatory Rent-Seekers in the Media, Bar, and Bureaucracy C. Boyden Gray 661 Self-Correction Mechanisms in the Regulatory System David […]<\/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-4003","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/PeZSiL-12z","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4003","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=4003"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4003\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4003"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}