For fifty years, The Supreme Court Review has been lauded for providing authoritative discussion of the court's most significant decisions. The Review is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, keeping up on the forefront of the origins, reforms, and interpretations of American law. Recent volumes have considered such issues as post-9/11 security, the 2000 presidential election, cross-burning, federalism and state sovereignty, failed Supreme Court nominations, and numerous First- and Fourth-Amendment cases.

The Supreme Court Compendium provides historical and statistical information on the Supreme Court: its institutional development; caseload; decision trends; the background, nomination, and voting behavior of its justices; its relationship with public, governmental, and other judicial bodies; and its impact. With over 180 tables and figures, this new edition is intended to capture the full retrospective picture through the 2013-2014 term of the Roberts Court and the momentous decisions handed down within the last four years, including United States v. Windsor, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, and Shelby County v. Holder.

Complete with headnotes, summaries of decisions, statements of cases, points and authorities of counsel, annotations, tables, and parallel references.

An annual peer-reviewed law journal covering the legal implications of decisions by the Supreme Court of the United States. Since it first appeared in 1960, the Supreme Court Review (SCR) has won acclaim for providing a sustained and authoritative survey of the implications of the Court’s most significant decisions. SCR is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, analyzing the origins, reforms, and modern interpretations of American law. SCR is written by and for legal academics, judges, political scientists, journalists, historians, economists, policy planners, and sociologists.

This is a book of supreme court rulings in the year 1983.

The Supreme Court and the Philosopher illustrates how the modern US Supreme Court has increasingly adopted a view of the constitutional right to the freedom of expression that is classically liberal in nature, reflecting John Stuart Mill's reasoning in On Liberty. A landmark treatise outlining the merits of limiting governmental and social power over the individual, On Liberty advocates for a maximum protection of human freedom. Proceeding case by case and covering a wide array of issues, such as campaign finance, offensive speech, symbolic speech, commercial speech, online expression, and false statements, Eric T. Kasper and Troy A. Kozma show how the Supreme Court justices have struck down numerous laws for infringing on the freedom of expression. Kasper and Kozma demonstrate how the adoption of Mill's version of free speech began with Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. more than a century ago and expanded over time to become the prevailing position of the Court today. The authors argue that this embrace of Mill's rationale has led to an unmistakable reorientation in the Court's understanding of free expression jurisprudence. The Supreme Court and the Philosopher is the first book to comprehensively explore how the political philosophy of Mill has influenced the highest court in the land. In targeting the underlying philosophical reasons that explain why the modern Supreme Court renders its First Amendment decisions, this book is particularly timely, as the issues of censorship and freedom of expression are debated in the public square today.

The Harvard Law Review, March 2015, is offered in a digital edition. Contents include: • Article, "Creating Around Copyright," Joseph P. Fishman • Book Review, "Growing Up Outside the Law," Stephen Lee • Book Review, "Property Is the New Privacy: The Coming Constitutional Revolution," Suzanna Sherry • Note, "Working Together for an Independent Expenditure: Candidate Assistance with Super PAC Fundraising" In addition, the issue features student commentary on Recent Cases and policy positions, including such subjects as: defining 'government instrumentality' under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, invalidation of New York soda-portion cap, whether the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission lacks jurisdiction over rates for nonconsumption of energy, standard of review for compelled disclosures under commercial speech doctrine, Alien Tort Statute claims against an Abu Ghraib contractor, preemption of local zoning ordinances banning hydrofracking, and the Department of Justice's new presumption of electronically recording custodial interviews. Finally, the issue features several summaries of Recent Publications. The Harvard Law Review is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship. The Review comes out monthly from November through June and has roughly 2500 pages per volume. The organization is formally independent of the Harvard Law School. Student editors make all editorial and organizational decisions. This issue of the Review is March 2015, the fifth issue of academic year 2014-2015 (Volume 128). The digital edition features active Contents, linked notes, and proper ebook and Bluebook formatting.

As Felix Frankfurter and James Landis write in their preface to The Business of the Supreme Court, "To an extraordinary degree legal thinking dominates the United States. Every act of government, every law passed by Congress, every treaty ratified by the Senate, every executive order issued by the President is tested by legal considerations and may be subjected to the hazards of litigation. Other Nations, too, have a written Constitution. But no other country in the world leaves to the judiciary the powers which it exercises over us." This classic volume, first published in 1928, originated in a series of articles written by Frankfurter, then a professor of law at Harvard University, and his student, Landis, for the Harvard Law Review. These articles chronicled and analyzed the many judiciary acts that were passed between 1789 and 1925, and illuminated the intimate connection between form and substance in the life of American law. For instance: When a community first decided to enact zoning laws--the Supreme Court had to approve. When the United States made a treaty with Germany following World War I--the Supreme Court had to define the limits and meaning of the treaty. Newly reissued with an introduction by constitutional expert Richard G. Stevens, The Business of the Supreme Court is still as fresh and relevant today as it was when first published. It is a work that will aid the student of the law to both love the law and remain true to its purposes.