Response

In The Role of Lawmakers, Lobbyists, and Scholars in the Normative Evaluation of Timing Rules, Frank Fagan and Michael Faure… Continue reading →

In Constitutional Challenges to the Health Care Mandate: Based in Politics, not Law, Professor David Orentlicher expands the arguments supporting… Continue reading →

Professor Linda Simard Sandstrom responds to both Professor Fitzpatrick and Professor Marcus on the topic of class action attorneys' fees.… Continue reading →

In Law and Humanity, Michael Serota argues that legal scholarship and the humanities can and should complement each other. His… Continue reading →

In Financial Industry Self‐Regulation: Aspiration and Reality, Professor Schwarcz responds to Professor Omarova's recent article by applying the framework he… Continue reading →

In Fateful Bankers, Professor Zaring describes the strengths of Professor Omarova's article, that it does not overly rely on heavy‐handed… Continue reading →

In Attorneys' Fees and the Social Legitimacy of Class Actions, Professor David Marcus responds to Brian Fitzpatrick's proposals in Do… Continue reading →

In Weak Solutions to an Illusory Problem, Professor Steven Kaplan argues that the Bebchuk-Fried analysis is fundamentally flawed because it… Continue reading →

In The Partner‐Manager, Professor Mitchell praises their suggested executive compensation reforms and seeks to place those reforms in the larger… Continue reading →

In Exploring Panel Effects, Professor Pauline Kim revisits the panel‐effects study she advanced in Deliberation and Strategy on the United… Continue reading →