The #MeToo movement has prompted a national dialogue about sexual harassment. This Companion Collection, launched in collaboration with the Stanford Law Review, aims to draw lessons from the #MeToo movement for activists, scholars, policymakers, lawyers, and judges. Across the two journals, the Collection offers twelve scholars’ insights on the
There is no antitrust law without antitrust law enforcement. Unlocking Antitrust Enforcement contends that existing tools to advance antitrust enforcement are well-suited to confront today’s U.S. antitrust challenges. Primarily focused on efforts by the federal antitrust agencies, these Features lay the foundation for an overarching enforcement agenda.
Lina Khan, Sandeep Vaheesan, and Aaron Edlin respond to Unlocking Antitrust Enforcement.
Consultation rules allow nonstate actors to gain special access to international institutions. While consultation once was understood as a means of democratizing international institutions, today, many consultants are industry and trade associations. This Article reframes these rules as a body of lobbying regulations, introducing a theory of international lobbying law.
Using a unique dataset, this Note studies the impact of limited-scope representation and finds that unbundling legal services is an effective way to combat the civil-litigation justice gap. Based on those results, the Note recommends solutions that will both serve those who lack counsel and respect lawyers’ ethical duties.
Rogue states are sometimes charged with massive default judgments for state-sponsored terrorism. Frequently, those judgements apportion responsibility to states that were not involved in terrorism and frustrate diplomatic progress. This Comment proposes a novel administrative solution to make claims against foreign states for supporting terrorism more just and effective.
The #MeToo movement has prompted a national dialogue about sexual harassment. This Companion Collection, launched in collaboration with the Stanford Law Review, aims to draw lessons from the #MeToo movement for activists, scholars, policymakers, lawyers, and judges. Across the two journals, the Collection offers twelve scholars’ insights on the
Lina Khan, Sandeep Vaheesan, and Aaron Edlin respond to Unlocking Antitrust Enforcement.
There is no antitrust law without antitrust law enforcement. Unlocking Antitrust Enforcement contends that existing tools to advance antitrust enforcement are well-suited to confront today’s U.S. antitrust challenges. Primarily focused on efforts by the federal antitrust agencies, these Features lay the foundation for an overarching enforcement agenda.
Cheryl Bratt and Martin Guggenheim respond to The New Law of the Child.
This Article sets forth a new paradigm for describing, understanding, and shaping children’s relationship to law. The authors show how the existing legal regime focuses narrowly on state and parental control over children, and they propose a new framework that promotes a broader range of children’s present and future interests.
This Article traces the roots of the modern administrative state to the petition process, drawing on an original database of over 500,000 petitions submitted to Congress from the Founding until 1950. This institutional history provides a deeper functional and textual understanding of the administrative state within our constitutional framework.
The #MeToo movement has prompted a national dialogue about sexual harassment. This Companion Collection, launched in collaboration with the Stanford Law Review, aims to draw lessons from the #MeToo movement for activists, scholars, policymakers, lawyers, and judges. Across the two journals, the Collection offers twelve scholars’ insights on the
In 1980, Stephen Reinhardt, a graduate of Yale Law School, joined the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Thirty years later, The Yale Law Journal asked five distinguished contributors to reflect on the unique legacy that Judge Reinhardt crafted in his first thirty years on the bench.
On May 24, the D.C. Circuit sitting en banc will hear oral argument on whether Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) administrative law judges (ALJs) count as inferior officers rather than employees for purposes of the Appointments Clause. This Essay attempts to articulate a coherent employee-officer distinction that suits the Constitution’s text