JLPP: Per Curiam—The Past Year and the Year Ahead – Ari Spitzer & Mario Fiandeiro

Posted by arispitzer on Oct 4, 2022 in Per Curiam

JLPP: Per Curiam—The Past Year and the Year Ahead

Ari Spitzer* & Mario Fiandeiro**

Last year, the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy kicked off its forty-fifth volume by launching JLPP: Per Curiam, an online counterpart to complement the three print editions that JLPP produces annually. Per Curiam was designed to fill a gap in the world of legal academia by creating a forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship to be published contemporaneously with developments in the legal and political spheres. Without the time-consuming processes inherent in publishing a print journal, Per Curiam’s online format allows JLPP to engage with hot button issues in legal academia and political discourse as they arise, rather than months later.

Under the stewardship of Eli Nachmany, the Editor-in-Chief of JLPP Volume 45, and Alexander Khan, Per Curiam’s inaugural Director, the platform’s first year was a resounding success. Per Curiam published articles covering a variety of areas of interest, including contemporary debates in constitutional law,[1] legal analysis of current political issues,[2] and emerging schools of legal theory.[3] Per Curiam published prominent voices from across the legal world, including illustrious federal judges,[4] renowned academics,[5] decorated practitioners,[6] and talented students.[7] Per Curiam launched with the publication of a symposium celebrating Justice Clarence Thomas’s thirty years on the Supreme Court[8] and was bookended by a symposium on regulatory budgeting,[9] both showcasing a wide array of authors.

In the year ahead, we plan to build on the excellent work of Eli Nachmany and Alexander Khan to grow and refine Per Curiam. In particular, we intend to sharpen the platform’s focus by targeting short-form scholarly articles spanning approximately 1,500 to 3,000 words. We think Per Curiam will provide an excellent home for this heretofore underserved range of legal scholarship: works that are longer and more meticulous than legal blog posts but shorter than full-fledged law review articles; works that are rich in substantial, nuanced legal content but short enough that they can be published quickly in reaction to developing issues. Additionally, we are excited to announce the launch of our “Obiter Dicta” series, where we will publish speeches written and delivered by prominent judges from across the country. And thanks to the great work of our predecessors, publications in JLPP: Per Curiam will be catalogued in Westlaw and Lexis for posterity.[10]

During the transition to new leadership at Per Curiam, we have fully embraced our new focus. We published short, timely reactions to Supreme Court cases as they were handed down,[11] covered other notable federal appellate decisions,[12] and hosted in-time contributions to ongoing debates about constitutional law and legal theory.[13]

JLPP is dedicating considerable resources to Per Curiam to support the platform’s continued growth and success. Per Curiam’s editing team is more than triple the size it was during the inaugural year. Our dedicated team has already been hard at work this summer editing and publishing many pieces, and our increased capacity will allow us to continue to develop this platform into the go-to source for cutting-edge and contemporaneous conservative and libertarian legal scholarship in the country.

The launch of JLPP: Per Curiam was undoubtedly one of the highlights of JLPP’s Volume 45. As we now transition to Volume 46, we expect the continued development of Per Curiam to be a highlight of the forthcoming year as well.

With that, we extend an invitation to judges, professors, practitioners, law students, or other prospective authors to submit articles for our consideration. Authors can submit pieces on the JLPP website or via email to JLPP.PerCuriam@gmail.com or aspitzer@jd23.law.harvard.edu.

* Director, JLPP: Per Curiam Volume 46.

** Editor-in-Chief, Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy Volume 46.

[2] See, e.g., Derek T. Muller, Twenty-Third Amendment Problems Confronting District of Columbia Statehood, 2021 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 11 (2021); Kermit Roosevelt III, Court Reform and the Biden Commission, 2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 5 (2022).

[3] See, e.g., Conor Casey & Adrian Vermeule, Argument by Slogan, 2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 10 (2022).

[4] See, e.g., Hon. Neomi Rao, Saying What the Law Is, Justice Thomas Style, 2021 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 6 (2021).

[5] See, e.g., Charles Fried, Lies and the Father of Lies, 2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 4 (2022).

[6] See, e.g., Lawrence A. Friedman, Corporate Bankruptcy Gets A Shakedown From Mass Tort Trial Lawyers, 2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 7 (2022).

[7] See, e.g., Jamie G. McWilliam, The Unconstitutionality of Unfinished Receiver Bans, 2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 9 (2022).

[8] See Symposium, Celebrating Justice Clarence Thomas’s 30^th Anniversary on the Supreme Court, 2021 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 1–7 (2021), available at https://www.harvard-jlpp.com/justice-thomas-symposium/.

[9] A Symposium on Regulatory Budgeting, 2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 25 (2022).

[10] See generally, Eli Nachmany & Alexander Khan, An Introduction to JLPP: Per Curiam, 2021 Harv. J.L . & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 8 (2021).

[11] See, e.g., Daniel D. Benson, Lemon on the Chopping Block: The Establishment Clause Implications of Shurtleff v. City of Boston, 2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 15 (2022).

[12] See, e.g., Zachary Grouev, Jarkesy v. SEC Rapid Reaction: Do SEC Commissioners Really Have For-Cause Removal Protection?, 2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 14 (2022).

[13] See, e.g., Sherif Girgis, Why the Equal-Protection Case for Abortion Rights Rises of Falls with Roe’s Rationale, 2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 13 (2022); Timon Cline, Originalist Cherry-Picking, 2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 12 (2022).