Download Free Harvard Law Review Volume 130 Number 4 February 2017 Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Harvard Law Review Volume 130 Number 4 February 2017 and write the review.

An “intriguing plan” addressing shadow banking, regulation, and the continuing quest for financial stability (Financial Times). Years have passed since the world experienced one of the worst financial crises in history, and while countless experts have analyzed it, many central questions remain unanswered. Should money creation be considered a “public” or “private” activity—or both? What do we mean by, and want from, financial stability? What role should regulation play? How would we design our monetary institutions if we could start from scratch? In The Money Problem, Morgan Ricks addresses these questions and more, offering a practical yet elegant blueprint for a modernized system of money and banking—one that, crucially, can be accomplished through incremental changes to the United States’ current system. He brings a critical, missing dimension to the ongoing debates over financial stability policy, arguing that the issue is primarily one of monetary system design. The Money Problem offers a way to mitigate the risk of catastrophic panic in the future, and it will expand the financial reform conversation in the United States and abroad. “Highly recommended.” —Choice
The Harvard Law Review is offered as an ebook, featuring active Contents, linked notes, and proper formatting. The contents of Issue 4 (Feb. 2013) include: • Article, “The Limits of Unbundled Legal Assistance: A Randomized Study in a Massachusetts District Court and Prospects for the Future,” by D. James Greiner, Cassandra Wolos Pattanayak, and Jonathan Hennessy • Book Review, “Stochastic Constraint,” by Neal Kumar Katyal • Note, “Counteracting the Bias: The Department of Labor’s Unique Opportunity to Combat Human Trafficking” • Note, “Tilling the Vast Wasteland: The Case for Reviving Localism in Public Interest Obligations for Cable Television” • Note, “Preemption as Purposivism’s Last Refuge” • Note, “The Meaning(s) of ‘The People’ in the Constitution • Note, “Indian Canon Originalism” The issue includes In Memoriam contributions about the life, scholarship, and teaching of Roger Fisher. Contributors include Martha Minow, Robert Mnookin, and Bruce Patton.
Contents of Harvard Law Review: Volume 130, Number 8 - June 2017 include: * Article, "The Judicial Presumption of Police Expertise," by Anna Lvovsky * Essay, "The Debate That Never Was," by Nicos Stavropoulos * Essay, "Hart's Posthumous Reply," by Ronald Dworkin * Book Review, "Cooperative and Uncooperative Foreign Affairs Federalism," by Jean Galbraith * Note, "Rethinking Actual Causation in Tort Law" * Note, "The Justiciability of Servicemember Suits" * Note, "The Substantive Waiver Doctrine in Employment Arbitration Law" Furthermore, student commentary analyzes Recent Cases on: requiring proof of administrative feasibility to satisfy class action Rule 23; whether prison gerrymandering violates the Equal Protection Clause; justiciability of suit against the government for military sexual assaults; whether criminal procedure requires retroactive application of Hurst v. Florida to pre-Ring cases; whether statutory interpretation's rule of lenity requires fixing cocaine possession penalties by total drug weight; and, in international law, the UN's Security Council asserting Israel's settlement activities to be illegal. Finally, the issue includes several summaries of Recent Publications. The Harvard Law Review is offered in a quality digital edition, featuring active Contents, linked footnotes, active URLs, legible tables, and proper ebook and Bluebook formatting. The Review is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship. It comes out monthly from November through June and has roughly 2300 pages per volume. Student editors make all editorial and organizational decisions. This is the final issue of academic year 2016-2017.
Who controls how one’s identity is used by others? This legal question, centuries old, demands greater scrutiny in the Internet age. Jennifer Rothman uses the right of publicity—a little-known law, often wielded by celebrities—to answer that question, not just for the famous but for everyone. In challenging the conventional story of the right of publicity’s emergence, development, and justifications, Rothman shows how it transformed people into intellectual property, leading to a bizarre world in which you can lose ownership of your own identity. This shift and the right’s subsequent expansion undermine individual liberty and privacy, restrict free speech, and suppress artistic works. The Right of Publicity traces the right’s origins back to the emergence of the right of privacy in the late 1800s. The central impetus for the adoption of privacy laws was to protect people from “wrongful publicity.” This privacy-based protection was not limited to anonymous private citizens but applied to famous actors, athletes, and politicians. Beginning in the 1950s, the right transformed into a fully transferable intellectual property right, generating a host of legal disputes, from control of dead celebrities like Prince, to the use of student athletes’ images by the NCAA, to lawsuits by users of Facebook and victims of revenge porn. The right of publicity has lost its way. Rothman proposes returning the right to its origins and in the process reclaiming privacy for a public world.
The February 2016 issue, Number 4, features these contents: • Article, "Constitutional Bad Faith," by David E. Pozen • Book Review, "No Immunity: Race, Class, and Civil Liberties in Times of Health Crisis," by Michele Goodwin & Erwin Chemerinsky • Book Review, "How Much Does Speech Matter?," by Leslie Kendrick • Note, "State Bans on Debtors' Prisons and Criminal Justice Debt" • Note, "Digital Duplications and the Fourth Amendment" • Note, "Reconciling State Sovereign Immunity with the Fourteenth Amendment" • Note, "Suspended Justice: The Case Against 28 U.S.C. § 2255's Statute of Limitations" In addition, student commentary analyzes Recent Cases on the exclusionary rule in knock-and-announce violations; FTC regulation of data security; voting rights, disparate impact, and the Texas voter ID law; and fair labor, 'primary beneficiary,' and unpaid interns. The issue includes analysis of Recent Regulations on Dodd-Frank and mandatory pay disclosure; and on Clean Air Act regulation of carbon emissions from existing power plants. Also included are a Recent Event comment on the killing of a non-university-affiliate by campus police and a Recent Book comment on Richard McAdams' 2015 book The Expressive Powers of Law. Finally, the issue includes several brief comments on Recent Publications. The Harvard Law Review is offered in a quality digital edition, featuring active Contents, linked footnotes, active URLs, legible tables, and proper ebook and Bluebook formatting. The Review is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship. It comes out monthly from November through June and has roughly 2500 pages per volume. Student editors make all editorial and organizational decisions. This is the fourth issue of academic year 2015-2016.