test mini panel | Yale Law and Policy Review

Forthcoming Articles
Preemption Conflation: Dividing the Local from the State in Congressional Decisionmaking
Annie Decker

test mini panel

YLPR Hosts Justice John Paul Stevens

YLPR was pleased to host Justice John Paul Stevens on April 24, 2012, for a conversation with Yale Law School Lecturer and Knight Distinguished Journalist in Residence Linda Greenhouse. The conversation focused on Justice Stevens' jurisprudence and experiences on the Court, as well as his recent memoir, Five Chiefs, and will be published in Vol. 30, Issue 2.

Inter Alia is a cutting-edge forum for shorter, more informal legal scholarship at the intersection of law and policy. Its online-exclusive content provides in-depth yet succinct perspectives on the policy implications of legal happenings at the federal, state, and local levels. Please read the Introduction to Inter Alia for a discussion of YLPR's goals for this new publication format.

Inter Alia

YLPR's Online Companion

Bullcoming and Cold Cases: Reconciling the Confrontation Clause with DNA Evidence

Dylan O. Keenan

In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court radically transformed Confrontation Clause doctrine. This Essay argues that the Court’s recent decision in Bullcoming v. New Mexico threatens the uneasy balance between prosecutorial needs and the Crawford line. Specifically, Bullcoming could be used to exclude DNA database evidence in prosecuting cold cases. DNA evidence has been used in criminal prosecutions for only a few decades, but it has revolutionized criminal justice during that time. DNA evidence has been particularly important for prosecuting rape cases, which historically have low conviction rates. Prosecutors should therefore be concerned that they might lose an essential tool for prosecuting rape cases and seeking justice for victims. Defense attorneys have a stake, too. When prosecutors lose access to DNA evidence, they are more likely to turn to less reliable eyewitness testimony and circumstantial evidence.

Ethical Aspects of Political Dilemmas Faced by Appointed Judges

Barry R. Schaller

Elected judges are not alone in having to deal with politics and politicians throughout their careers. This Essay discusses the ethical implications of judicial contacts with politics in states in which judges are appointed and reappointed for limited terms through the political process. A possible subtitle for this Essay might be: ‘Can appointed judges have a normal life while complying with the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct within the political universe where they work and live?’

Worse Than Lochner

Ian Millhiser

There is an alternate universe where everything violates the Tenth Amendment—and much of Congress lives in it. Senator Tom Coburn believes that all federal education programs, from Pell Grants to Title I to student loans, violate the Constitution. Senator Rand Paul thinks that the federal ban on whites-only lunch counters is forbidden. Senator Mike Lee believes that child labor laws, federal disaster relief, food stamps, the Food and Drug Administration, Medicaid, income assistance for the poor, and even Medicare and Social Security violate the Constitution. And, of course, half Congress thinks that health reform is unconstitutional.

Unilateralism, Defunding, and the Shrapnel of Health Reform

Michael Lee

In the shadow of a Presidential veto, it will be impossible to repeal health care reform completely—despite the overwhelming number of additional seats Republicans won in the 2010 election.

RSS feed

All Inter Alia Articles