Professor Novak's article' is a much-needed breath of fresh air, because of both its historical approach and its rejection of a paradigm of pure individualism. Professor Novak eloquently reminds us that constitutional ...

A very strange thing is happening in legal academia. The left and the right have joined forces, and the center is under attack. What makes this so unusual is that law has traditionally been a field of centrists. The common ...

This Article tells the story of how fundamental shifts in state sentencing policy collided with fundamental shifts in federal habeas policy to produce a tangled and costly doctrinal wreck. The conventional assumption is ...

Professors Heald and Sherry argue that the language of Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, the Intellectual Property Clause, absolutely constrains Congress's legislative power under certain circumstances. Their analysis begins ...

Professor Waldron and Professor Michelman have presented us with two interesting, but very different, views on what procedural components might contribute to the integrity of lawmaking. I will focus on a different aspect ...

The Supreme Court's recent decision in Romer v. Evans' has caused both joy and consternation. Among legal scholars, however, it has mostly engendered puzzlement. The Court explicitly avoided the most doctrinally plausible ...

For more than two decades, the Supreme Court's Establishment Clause jurisprudence was "at war with" its Free Exercise jurisprudence. In recent years, however, two major decisions--"Employment Division v. Smith" and "Lee ...

As all the Roundtable essays note, DaimlerChrysler asks the Supreme Court to decide whether and when the in-­forum activities of a corporate subsidiary should give rise to general personal jurisdiction over the corporate ...

Every time a new technology creates legal problems, we face in a particular context the general question of relative institutional competence. Do we turn first to the judiciary, allowing time for a gradual solution derived ...

This essay was presented as the 2006 William Howard Taft lecture at the University of Cincinnati College of Law. It suggests that the conflation of politics and law - the view that judges are not legal experts but rather ...