Harvard Law Review最新文献

{"title":"Statutory interpretation--federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act--Third Circuit holds that the FDA can obtain restitution on behalf of consumers--United States v. Lane Labs-USA Inc., 427 F.3d 219 (3d Cir. 2005).","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48320,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Law Review","volume":"119 8","pages":"2636-43"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2006-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"26138058","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"After Ayotte: the need to defend abortion rights with renewed \"purpose.\".","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48320,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Law Review","volume":"119 8","pages":"2552-73"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2006-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"26133025","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cooking up solutions to a cooked up menace: responses to methamphetamine in a federal system.","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48320,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Law Review","volume":"119 8","pages":"2508-29"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2006-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"26133026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The plaintiff as person: cause lawyering, human subject research, and the secret agent problem.","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48320,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Law Review","volume":"119 5","pages":"1510-31"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2006-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25966456","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Due process--right to medical access--Supreme Court of Canada holds that ban on private health insurance violates Quebec charter of human rights and freedoms--Chaoulli v. Quebec (Attorney General), 2005 S.C.C. 35, 29272, [2005] S.C.J. No. 33 QUICKLAW (June 9, 2005).","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48320,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Law Review","volume":"119 2","pages":"677-84"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2005-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25866111","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Political Constitution of Criminal Justice","authors":"William J. Stuntz","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.783565","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.783565","url":null,"abstract":"The politics of crime is widely seen as punitive, racist, and inattentive to the interests of criminal suspects and defendants. Constitutional law is widely seen as a (partial) remedy for those ills. But the cure may be causing the disease. At the margin, constitutional law pushes legislative attention - and budget dollars - away from policing and criminal adjudication and toward punishment. The law also widens the gap between the cost of investigating and prosecuting poor defendants and the cost of pursuing rich ones. Overcriminalization, overpunishment, discriminatory policing and prosecution, overfunding of prison construction and underfunding of everything else - these familiar political problems are more the consequences of constitutional regulation than justifications for it. Solving these problems requires radical constitutional reform. The article explains why, and then offers brief sketches of what that reform might look like in five areas: policing, crime definition, adjudication, punishment, and federalism. It closes by explaining how reform could happen, and why it probably won't.","PeriodicalId":48320,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Law Review","volume":"119 1","pages":"780"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2005-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.783565","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67827288","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Constitutional law--abortion rights--fourth circuit declares Virginia partial birth infanticide statute unconstitutional per se.--Richmond Medical Center for Women v. Hicks, 409 F.3d 619 (4th Cir.), reh'g and reh'g en banc denied, 422 F.3d 160 (4th Cir. 2005).","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48320,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Law Review","volume":"119 2","pages":"685-92"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2005-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25866112","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Foreign Law and the Modern Ius Gentium","authors":"Jeremy Waldron","doi":"10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198735335.003.0028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198735335.003.0028","url":null,"abstract":"I. INTRODUCTION Is it ever appropriate for American courts to cite or defer to foreign law? The question arose last Term in a bitter dispute among the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court in Roper v. Simmons, (1) the juvenile death penalty case. (2) One of the frustrating things about Roper, however, is that no one on the Court bothered to articulate a general theory of the citation and authority of foreign law. (3) Writing for the Court, Justice Kennedy said that it was \"proper\" to take foreign law into account and that referring to the laws of other countries could be \"instructive\" for the Court's interpretation of the Eighth Amendment. (4) But he did not explain the jurisprudence behind this view. (5) Nor did the Roper dissenters articulate a theory of citation to foreign law that they could squarely refute; they simply denounced the practice. The theory that is called for is not necessarily a complete jurisprudence. But it has to be complicated enough to answer a host of questions raised by the practice: about the authority accorded foreign law (persuasive versus conclusive), about the areas in which foreign law should and should not be cited (private law, for example, compared to constitutional law), and about which foreign legal systems should be cited (only democracies, for example, or tyrannies as well). The theory has to be broad enough to explain the use of foreign law in all appropriate cases: too many scholars call for a theory that will explain the citation of foreign law only in constitutional cases. (6) The theory has to be persuasive enough to dispel the serious misgivings that many Americans have about this practice: why should American courts cite anything other than American law? Above all, it has to be a theory of law. The argument cannot just be that good diplomacy requires us to ingratiate ourselves with the Europeans. (7) It must explain why American courts are legally permitted (or obliged) to cite to non-American sources and how that practice connects with the status of courts as legal institutions. An example may help get at the sort of theory I have in mind. When courts cite their own precedents, they do so on the basis of the theory of stare decisis, which provides a platform on which judges can articulate and defend their deference to precedent. It explains why deference is appropriate even for cases in which justice or policy seems to require a different result. It explains why precedent is more important in some cases than in others. And it explains its relation to various sources of law (the difference between stare decisis in common law and in constitutional interpretation, for instance). No doubt the details of stare decisis are controversial. (8) But even if one disagrees with a judge's conception, it is surely better that he should articulate such a theory than that he simply give the impression that he thinks deferring to precedent is a good idea. We should require nothing less for the citation of foreign law. I","PeriodicalId":48320,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Law Review","volume":"119 1","pages":"129"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2005-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60646000","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Regulating preimplantation genetic diagnosis: the pathologization problem.","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48320,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Law Review","volume":"118 8","pages":"2770-91"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2005-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25164326","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Assessing the viability of a substantive due process right to in vitro fertilization.","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48320,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Law Review","volume":"118 8","pages":"2792-813"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2005-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25164327","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}