120 Yale L.J. 1898 (2011).Do the Erie Doctrine and its “reverse-Erie” mirror require state and federal courts to apply one another’s statutory interpretation methodologies when they interpret one another’s statutes? Surprisingly, the courts have no consistent answer to this question—even though state and federal courts constantly interpret one another’s laws. What’s more, exploring this application of Erie reveals that one of the most important jurisprudential questions about statutory interpretation also remains entirely unresolved: namely, are the rules of statutory interpretation “law,” individual judicial philosophy, or something in between?
120 Yale L.J. 1999 (2011).
120 Yale L.J. 2028 (2011).Today, many Americans blame polarizing conflict over abortion on the Supreme Court. If only the Court had stayed its hand or decided Roe v. Wade on narrower grounds, they argue, the nation would have reached a political settlement and avoided backlash. We question this court-centered backlash narrative. Where others have deplored the abortion conflict as resulting from courts “shutting down” politics, we approach the abortion conflict as an expression of politics—a conflict in which the Supreme Court was not the only or even the most important actor.
120 Yale L.J. 2088 (2011).Across the globe, countries are promoting strategic or expedited passport grants, whereby membership is invested in exceptionally talented individuals with the expectation of receiving a return: for Olympic recruits, this means medals. The spread of the talent-for-citizenship exchange, with “Olympic citizenship” as its apex, is one of the most significant innovations in citizenship practice in the past few decades. In this emerging competitive environment, countries have come to realize that their exclusive control over the assignment of membership goods is a major draw. This realization has turned citizenship itself into an important recruiting tool. The Olympic citizenship dynamic highlights the growing influence of the economic language of human capital accretion in shaping targeted recruitment policies that are designed to attract top performers, whether in the sciences, arts, or athletics. In the process, it is our very understanding of citizenship that is undergoing a radical alteration. This Feature explores the analytical, normative, and comparative dimensions of Olympic citizenship, identifying the major players and interests at stake, assessing the national and international implications of such profound transformations, and highlighting the dark underbelly to the rise in Olympic citizenship grants. It concludes by developing possible new ways to address the challenges that Olympic citizenship creates, including proposed transnational responses to ameliorate concerns about exploitation and the unearned advantages that attach to the unregulated practice of cross-border talent poaching in pursuit of national glory.
120 Yale L.J. 2140 (2011).This Note argues that signatures on petitions intended for use in direct democracy processes such as ballot initiatives should be subject to public scrutiny and disclosure. They should not benefit from free speech protections allowing for anonymity. Signatures used in these proceedings should not be considered petitions or speech at all, but rather lawmaking. Through historical, doctrinal, and prudential analysis, this Note distinguishes between core First Amendment rights, which might include signatures on a general petition with no legislative implications or minority associational rights, and speech-like activity that forms part of the regulated lawmaking process.