{"id":4006,"date":"2026-03-16T09:41:20","date_gmt":"2026-03-16T13:41:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/?page_id=4006"},"modified":"2026-03-22T17:13:16","modified_gmt":"2026-03-22T21:13:16","slug":"volume-16","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/volume-16\/","title":{"rendered":"Volume 16"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Issue 3<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Symposium on Legal Formalism, 1992<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Annual Institute for Humane Studies Law and Philosophy Issue<\/td><\/tr>
579<\/td>Foreword: The Challenge of Legal Formalism<\/a><\/td>Dennis M. Patteron<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
583<\/td>The Jurisprudence of Legal Formalism<\/a><\/td>Ernest J. Weinrib<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
597<\/td>Professor Weinrib\u2019s Formalism\u201d The Not-So-Empty Sepulchre<\/a><\/td>Stephen R. Perry<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
627<\/td>Legal Formalism from the Perspective of a Reasonable Law Professor<\/a><\/td>Jean C. Love<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
639<\/td>Coherence and Formalism<\/a><\/td>Ken Kress<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
683<\/td>Formalism and Practical Reason, or How to Avoid Seeing Ghosts in the Empty Sepulchre<\/a><\/td>Ernest J. Weinrib<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Notes<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
701<\/td>The Constitutionality of the False Claims Act\u2019s Qui Tam Provision<\/a><\/td>James T. Blanch<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
769<\/td>Encouraging Product Safety Testing by Applying the Privilege of Self-Critical Analysis When Punitive Damages are Sought<\/a><\/td>Paul B. Taylor<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Recent Developments<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
809<\/td>Judicial Review of Impeachment Proceedings: Nixon v. United States<\/em>, 113 S. Ct. 732 (1993)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
820<\/td>Reapportionment and the Dilution of Minority Voting Strength: Growe v. Emison<\/em>, 113 S. Ct. 1075 (1993), and Voinovich v. Quilter<\/em>, 113 S. Ct. 1149 (1993)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
835<\/td>Civil Forfeiture and the Innocent Owner Defense: United States v. 92 Buena Vista Ave.<\/em>, 113 S. Ct. 1126 (1993)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
848<\/td>Habeas Corpus and \u201cActual Innocence\u201d: Herrera v. Collins<\/em>, 113 S. Ct. 853 (1993)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Issue 2<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Articles<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
303<\/td>\u201cThirty Pieces of Silver\u201d for the Rights of Your People: Irresistible Offers Reconsidered as a Matter of State Constitutional Law<\/a><\/td>William Van Alstyne<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
327<\/td>Private Interbank Discipline<\/a><\/td>David G. Oedel<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
411<\/td>Recent Misinterpretations of the Avoidable Consequences Rule: The \u201cDuty\u201d to Mitigate and Other Fictions<\/a><\/td>Jeffrey K. Riffer & Elizabeth Barrowman<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
445<\/td>De-Federalizing American Indian Commerce: Toward a New Political Economy for Indian Country<\/a><\/td>Raymond Cross<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
493<\/td>The Supreme Court and Coerced Confessions: Arizona v. Fulminate<\/em> in Perspective<\/a><\/td>William Gangi<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Essay<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
529<\/td>Manners Makyth Man: The Prose Style of Justice Scalia<\/a><\/td>Charles Fried<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Note<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
537<\/td>The American Bar Association: An Appearance of Propriety<\/a><\/td>David M. Leonard<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Book Review<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
565<\/td>Morton J. Horowitz, The Transformation of American Law, 1870-1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy<\/a><\/em><\/td>Steven C. Papkin<\/em><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Issue 1<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Symposium: The Legacy of the Federalist Papers<\/a><\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
1<\/td>Foreword: Two Visions of the Nature of Man<\/a><\/td>Steven G. Calabresi & Gary Lawson<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel I: Philosophical Foundations of The Federalist: The Nature of Law and the Nature of Man<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
7<\/td>The Federalist Papers: The Framers Construct an Orrery<\/a><\/td>Harold H. Bruff<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
13<\/td>The Federalist Papers: From Practical Politics to High Principle<\/a><\/td>Richard A. Epstein<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
23<\/td>Philosophical Foundations of The Federalist Papers: Nature of Man and Nature of Law<\/a><\/td>Mary Ann Glendon<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel II: To Govern and Be Governed: The Federalist\u2019s Vision of Representative Democracy<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
33<\/td>The Federalist Vision of a Representative Democracy<\/a><\/td>James L. Ryan<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
35<\/td>Thoughts on the Federalist Vision of Representative Democracy as Viewed at the End of the Twentieth Century: How Have We Used the Legacy of The Federalist Papers?<\/a><\/td>Jesse H. Choper<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
43<\/td>Remarks on The Federalist Number 10<\/a><\/td>David Epstein<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
49<\/td>Representative Democracy<\/a><\/td>Jonathan R. Macey<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel III: Liberty and Constitutional Architecture<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
55<\/td>Liberty and Constitutional Architecture<\/a><\/td>James L. Buckley<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
59<\/td>Constitutional Architecture<\/a><\/td>John S. Baker, Jr.<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
75<\/td>Individual Liberty and Constitutional Architecture: The Founders\u2019 Prompt Correction of Their Own Mistake<\/a><\/td>Douglas Laycock<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
87<\/td>Liberty and Constitutional Architecture: The Rights-Structure Paradigm<\/a><\/td>Geoffrey P. Miller<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Debate<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
The Federalist and the Contemporary Debate on Term Limits<\/td><\/tr>
95<\/td>Term Limitations: Breaking Up the Iron Triangle<\/a><\/td>William Kristol<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
101<\/td>Some Arguments Against Congressional Term Limitations<\/a><\/td>Nelso W. Polsby<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Panel IV: The Anti-Federalists after 200 Years: Pundits or Prophets?<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
109<\/td>Introduction<\/a><\/td>Edwin Meese III<\/em><\/em><\/td><\/tr>
111<\/td>Anti-Federalists, The Federalist Papers, and the Big Argument for Union<\/a><\/td>Akhil Reed Amar<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
119<\/td>\u201cIndependent of Heaven Itself\u201d: Differing Federalist and Anti-Federalist Perspectives on the Centralizing Tendency of the Federal Judiciary<\/a><\/td>Charles J. Cooper<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
129<\/td>From Federal Union to National Monolith: Mileposts in the Demise of American Federalism<\/a><\/td>Lino A. Graglia<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Epilogue<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
137<\/td>Federalism in the Twenty-First Century: Will States Exist?<\/a><\/td>Pete du Pont<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Articles<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
149<\/td>Easing the Pressure on Pressure Groups: Toward a Constitutional Right to Lobby<\/a><\/td>Andrew P. Thomas<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
195<\/td>A Multidisciplinary Analysis of the Structure of Persuasive Arguments<\/a><\/td>Paul T. Wanergin<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
241<\/td>The Economic Analysis of the Effect of No-Fault Divorce Law on the Divorce Rate<\/a><\/td>Martin Zelder<\/em><\/td><\/tr>
Recent Developments<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
269<\/td>Revealing the Inadequacy of the Public Forum Doctrine: International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Lee<\/em>, 112 S. Ct. 2701 (1992)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
279<\/td>Establishment of Religion and High School Graduation Ceremonies: Lee v. Weisman<\/em>, 112 S. Ct. 2649 (1992)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
287<\/td>The Beginning of the End of Peremptory Challenges: Georgia v. McCollum<\/em>, 112 S. Ct. 2348 (1992)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr>
294<\/td>The Dormant Commerce Clause and the Interstate Shipmen of Waste: Fort Gratiot Sanitary Landfill v. Michigan Department of Natural Resources<\/em>, 112 S. Ct. 2019 (1992)<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Issue 3 Symposium on Legal Formalism, 1992 Annual Institute for Humane Studies Law and Philosophy Issue 579 Foreword: The Challenge of Legal Formalism Dennis M. Patteron 583 The Jurisprudence of Legal Formalism Ernest J. Weinrib 597 Professor Weinrib\u2019s Formalism\u201d The Not-So-Empty Sepulchre Stephen R. Perry 627 Legal Formalism from the Perspective of a Reasonable Law Professor Jean C. Love 639 Coherence and Formalism Ken Kress 683 Formalism and Practical Reason, or How to Avoid Seeing […]<\/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":""}},"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-4006","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/PeZSiL-12C","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4006","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=4006"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4006\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4006"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}