Academic Round-Up

For today’s academic round-up, I want to draw attention to just a single journal that was recently released by the CATO Institute. Each year, CATO has released its annual CATO Supreme Court Review, which I think has become progressively better and more interesting in each year it has been in existence. The 2006-2007 issue of the journal, which is available here, contains a number of interesting articles about the October 2006 Term, too many to discuss here, but a few deserve special mention:

Danny J. Boggs, “Challenges to the Rule of Law: Or Quod Licet Jovi Non Licet Bovi” (available here).

Laurence H. Tribe, “Death by a Thousand Cuts: Constitutional Wrongs Without Remedies After Wilkie v. Robbins” (available here).

Lillian BeVier, “First Amendment Basics Redux: Buckley v. Valeo to FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life” (available here).

Brannon P. Denning, “Gonzales v. Carhart: An Alternate Opinion” (available here).

Samuel Estreicher, “The Non-Preferment Principle and the Racial Tiebreaker Cases” (available here).

Glenn Harlan Reynolds, “Looking Ahead: October Term 2007” (available here).

For those looking for a comprehensive round-up of the 2006 Term, I highly recommend the CATO Supreme Court Review. I was very impressed by the issue and learned quite a bit in reading it. (Hat Tip: Arthur Hellman)

Next week, we will have an “ask the author” exchange with Cass Sunstein and Tom Miles of the University of Chicago Law School regarding their paper entitled “Do Judges Make Regulatory Policy?: An Empirical Investigation of Chevron,” see here, which has justifiably generated quite a bit of interest in the blogosphere over recent months.