Harvard Law Review

"Recognizing Wrongs is about tort law, also commonly known as "personal injury law." The book's central thesis is that tort law fulfills a basic obligation that government owes to each of us: to provide law that defines and proscribes a special class of wrongs - wrongs that involve one person mistreating another - and to provide a means for victims of such wrongs to obtain redress from those who have wronged them. This book aims to recover the traditional understanding of tort law by helping readers to recognize what it is all about. It does so by offering a systematic statement of a theory now known in academic circles as "civil recourse theory." In providing a comprehensive statement of that theory, the book aims to unseat both the leading philosophical theory of tort law - corrective justice theory, as put forward by Jules Coleman, John Gardner, Arthur Ripstein, Ernest Weinrib, and others - as well as the economic approach favored by scholars such as Guido Calabresi and Richard Posner"--

Who controls how one’s identity is used by others? This legal question, centuries old, demands greater scrutiny in the Internet age. Jennifer Rothman uses the right of publicity—a little-known law, often wielded by celebrities—to answer that question, not just for the famous but for everyone. In challenging the conventional story of the right of publicity’s emergence, development, and justifications, Rothman shows how it transformed people into intellectual property, leading to a bizarre world in which you can lose ownership of your own identity. This shift and the right’s subsequent expansion undermine individual liberty and privacy, restrict free speech, and suppress artistic works. The Right of Publicity traces the right’s origins back to the emergence of the right of privacy in the late 1800s. The central impetus for the adoption of privacy laws was to protect people from “wrongful publicity.” This privacy-based protection was not limited to anonymous private citizens but applied to famous actors, athletes, and politicians. Beginning in the 1950s, the right transformed into a fully transferable intellectual property right, generating a host of legal disputes, from control of dead celebrities like Prince, to the use of student athletes’ images by the NCAA, to lawsuits by users of Facebook and victims of revenge porn. The right of publicity has lost its way. Rothman proposes returning the right to its origins and in the process reclaiming privacy for a public world.

In an ideal world, the laws of Congress--known as federal statutes--would always be clearly worded and easily understood by the judges tasked with interpreting them. But many laws feature ambiguous or even contradictory wording. How, then, should judges divine their meaning? Should they stick only to the text? To what degree, if any, should they consult aids beyond the statutes themselves? Are the purposes of lawmakers in writing law relevant? Some judges, such as Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, believe courts should look to the language of the statute and virtually nothing else. Chief Judge Robert A. Katzmann of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit respectfully disagrees. In Judging Statutes, Katzmann, who is a trained political scientist as well as a judge, argues that our constitutional system charges Congress with enacting laws; therefore, how Congress makes its purposes known through both the laws themselves and reliable accompanying materials should be respected. He looks at how the American government works, including how laws come to be and how various agencies construe legislation. He then explains the judicial process of interpreting and applying these laws through the demonstration of two interpretative approaches, purposivism (focusing on the purpose of a law) and textualism (focusing solely on the text of the written law). Katzmann draws from his experience to show how this process plays out in the real world, and concludes with some suggestions to promote understanding between the courts and Congress. When courts interpret the laws of Congress, they should be mindful of how Congress actually functions, how lawmakers signal the meaning of statutes, and what those legislators expect of courts construing their laws. The legislative record behind a law is in truth part of its foundation, and therefore merits consideration.

The Contents of issue number 8 (volume 124, June 2011) are: In Memoriam: William J. Stuntz Pamela S. Karlan Michael J. Klarman Martha Minow Daniel C. Richman Robert E. Scott David Skeel Carol Steiker ARTICLES: The Host’s Dilemma: Strategic Forfeiture in Platform Markets for Informational Goods, Jonathan M. Barnett Separation of Powers as Ordinary Interpretation, John F. Manning NOTES: Interpreting Silence: The Roles of the Courts and the Executive Branch in Head of State Immunity Cases Advisory Opinions and the Influence of the Supreme Court over American Policymaking RECENT CASES: Fourth Amendment — Qualified Immunity Criminal Law — Sentencing Guidelines Civil Procedure — Protective Orders Constitutional Law — First Amendment Criminal Law — Sentencing RECENT LEGISLATION: Administrative Law — Agency Design (Dodd-Frank/CFPB) RECENT PUBLICATIONS

This ebook issue of the Harvard Law Review is May 2011. Contents of Volume 124, Number 7 include: Article, "Article III and the Scottish Judiciary," by James E. Pfander and Daniel D. Birk Book Review, "Constitutional Alarmism," by Trevor W. Morrison Note, "A Justification for Allowing Fragmentation in Copyright" Note, "Taxing Partnership Profits Interests: The Carried Interest Problem" Recent Case, "Corporate Law — Principal’s Liability for Agent’s Conduct" Recent Case, "Administrative Law — Retroactive Rules" Recent Case, "Federal Preemption of State Law — Implied Preemption" Recent Case, "Labor Law — LMRA" Recent Legislation, "Corporate Law — Securities Regulation" Recent Publications

Contents of Harvard Law Review: Volume 130, Number 8 - June 2017 include: * Article, "The Judicial Presumption of Police Expertise," by Anna Lvovsky * Essay, "The Debate That Never Was," by Nicos Stavropoulos * Essay, "Hart's Posthumous Reply," by Ronald Dworkin * Book Review, "Cooperative and Uncooperative Foreign Affairs Federalism," by Jean Galbraith * Note, "Rethinking Actual Causation in Tort Law" * Note, "The Justiciability of Servicemember Suits" * Note, "The Substantive Waiver Doctrine in Employment Arbitration Law" Furthermore, student commentary analyzes Recent Cases on: requiring proof of administrative feasibility to satisfy class action Rule 23; whether prison gerrymandering violates the Equal Protection Clause; justiciability of suit against the government for military sexual assaults; whether criminal procedure requires retroactive application of Hurst v. Florida to pre-Ring cases; whether statutory interpretation's rule of lenity requires fixing cocaine possession penalties by total drug weight; and, in international law, the UN's Security Council asserting Israel's settlement activities to be illegal. Finally, the issue includes several summaries of Recent Publications. The Harvard Law Review is offered in a quality digital edition, featuring active Contents, linked footnotes, active URLs, legible tables, and proper ebook and Bluebook formatting. The Review is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship. It comes out monthly from November through June and has roughly 2300 pages per volume. Student editors make all editorial and organizational decisions. This is the final issue of academic year 2016-2017.