Print Issue Volume 90 - No. 2

Substantive Due Process as a Source of Constitutional Protection for Nonpolitical Speech

Present First Amendment doctrine presumptively protects anything within the descriptive category “expression” from government regulation, subject to balancing against countervailing government interests. As government actions during the present War on Terrorism have made all too clear, that doctrine allows intolerable suppression of political debate and dissent—the expressive activity most integral to our constitutional design. At […]

Read More :: View PDF

A Theory of Copyright’s Derivative Right and Related Doctrines

Although many copyrighted works are close substitutes for other copyrighted works, there would be many more close substitutes of certain works in the absence of the derivative right, the exclusive right to create adaptations of a copyrighted work. Yet even the derivative right’s defenders identify the suppression of new expression as a cost of the […]

Read More :: View PDF

Lawyers, Justice, and the Challenge of Moral Pluralism

Each year law students confront the same question in their professional responsibility classes: should lawyers represent clients who want to use the law to do something immoral? Legal scholars who have addressed this question fall into two main camps: traditionalists and social justice theorists. Traditionalists argue that lawyers should provide the public with morally neutral […]

Read More :: View PDF

Review Essay, Unsubsidizing Suburbia

Read More :: View PDF

Note, Meet Me at the (West Coast) Hotel: The Lochner Era and the Demise of Roe v. Wade

Long-standing constitutional precedents can be overturned when the original holdings have become “unworkable.” This principle, first articulated in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey and repeated by now-Chief Justice Roberts in his confirmation hearings, provides a creative means for overturning the most controversial precedent of all: Roe v. Wade. While it is unclear what […]

Read More :: View PDF

De Novo

  • Prison for the Innocent

    PRISON FOR THE INNOCENT: THE ‘NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE’ STANDARD THROUGH THE LENS OF NASH V. RUSSELL By: Alexa Ely, Volume 102 Staff Member Since 1989, there have been over 2,120 exonerations with nearly 18,450 years lost in prison by innocent men and women in the United States criminal justice system.[1] […]

  • “Transgender Need Not Apply”

    ‘TRANSGENDER NEED NOT APPLY’[1]: HOW THE SESSIONS MEMO THREATENS ESSENTIAL WORKPLACE PROTECTIONS FOR TRANSGENDER INDIVIDUALS By: Libby Bulinski, Volume 102 Staff Member On October 4th, 2017, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memorandum stating that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act does not prohibit discrimination based on […]

  • Scandal in the NCAA

    SCANDAL IN THE NCAA: A FIDUCIARY TALE By: Andrew Escher, Volume 102 Staff Member Common wisdom holds that sports bring people together. In circumstances as varied as a Texas high school at a Friday night football game or an entire country during the Olympics, athletics gives disparate groups of people […]


© 2011-2016 Minnesota Law Review. All Rights Reserved.