{"title":"可疑的球体,而非列举的权力:离开灯柱指南","authors":"Richard A. Primus, R. Hills,","doi":"10.36644/MLR.119.7.SUSPECT","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Note to Michigan Readers: Weighing in at over 28,000 words, this draft is excessively long. Richard and I are working on cutting it down to a sensible length. In the meantime, if you (quite understandably) do not have time to read the entire paper, I am most interested in your comments on the Introduction and Part I(A) (pages 1-12) and Parts II-III (pages 32 to 50). I should add that Richard has not yet commented on Part III(B)(1) and might not agree with my assessment of NFIB v Sebelius: We will iron out whatever differences we might have on this visit, I hope!","PeriodicalId":47790,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Law Review","volume":"119 1","pages":"1431-1502"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Suspect Spheres, Not Enumerated Powers: A Guide for Leaving the Lamppost\",\"authors\":\"Richard A. Primus, R. Hills,\",\"doi\":\"10.36644/MLR.119.7.SUSPECT\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Note to Michigan Readers: Weighing in at over 28,000 words, this draft is excessively long. Richard and I are working on cutting it down to a sensible length. In the meantime, if you (quite understandably) do not have time to read the entire paper, I am most interested in your comments on the Introduction and Part I(A) (pages 1-12) and Parts II-III (pages 32 to 50). I should add that Richard has not yet commented on Part III(B)(1) and might not agree with my assessment of NFIB v Sebelius: We will iron out whatever differences we might have on this visit, I hope!\",\"PeriodicalId\":47790,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Michigan Law Review\",\"volume\":\"119 1\",\"pages\":\"1431-1502\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Michigan Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36644/MLR.119.7.SUSPECT\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36644/MLR.119.7.SUSPECT","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Suspect Spheres, Not Enumerated Powers: A Guide for Leaving the Lamppost
Note to Michigan Readers: Weighing in at over 28,000 words, this draft is excessively long. Richard and I are working on cutting it down to a sensible length. In the meantime, if you (quite understandably) do not have time to read the entire paper, I am most interested in your comments on the Introduction and Part I(A) (pages 1-12) and Parts II-III (pages 32 to 50). I should add that Richard has not yet commented on Part III(B)(1) and might not agree with my assessment of NFIB v Sebelius: We will iron out whatever differences we might have on this visit, I hope!
期刊介绍:
The Michigan Law Review is a journal of legal scholarship. Eight issues are published annually. Seven of each volume"s eight issues ordinarily are composed of two major parts: Articles by legal scholars and practitioners, and Notes written by the student editors. One issue in each volume is devoted to book reviews. Occasionally, special issues are devoted to symposia or colloquia. First Impressions, the online companion to the Michigan Law Review, publishes op-ed length articles by academics, judges, and practitioners on current legal issues. This extension of the printed journal facilitates quick dissemination of the legal community’s initial impressions of important judicial decisions, legislative developments, and timely legal policy issues.