Vol. 132 No. 7 Debates about how to educate law students have long rotated around a familiar axis — the theory/practice divide. Commentators and bar associations routinely rebuke...
Vol. 131 No. 8 Editors' Note: Since publication of this In Memoriam, the editors of the Harvard Law Review have published additional pieces — unassociated with this In...
Vol. 128 No. 1 There are three tales told about federalism, but only one of them is true. The first is the nationalist’s tale. It depicts federalism doctrine...
Vol. 124 No. 1 In this Foreword, Professor Gerken argues that constitutional theories of federalism remain rooted in a sovereignty account, and they remain disconnected from the many parts of “Our Federalism” where sovereignty is not to be had. In these areas, she notes, institutional arrangements promote voice, not exit; integration, not autonomy; interdependence, not independence. Minorities do not rule separate and apart from the national system, and the power they wield is not their own. Minorities are instead part of a complex amalgam of state and local actors who administer national policy. And the power minorities wield is that of the servant, not the sovereign; the insider, not the outsider. They enjoy a muscular form of voice – the power not just to complain about national policy, but to help set it.
Vol. 121 No. 1 Many have noticed that Justice Kennedy softened his stance on race in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1. To...