The Roundtable
Welcome to the Roundtable, JLPP’s online blog featuring student commentary on current cases and legal developments!
If you are interested in becoming a Staff Writer or Contributing Writer for the Roundtable, e-mail Notes Editors Kyle Reynolds (mreynolds@jd18.law.harvard.edu) or Chadwick Harper (charper@jd19.law.harvard.edu).
“If You Ain’t First, You’re Last”: How State “Sore-Loser” Laws Make It Impossible For Trump To Run A Successful Third-Party Campaign If He Loses The Republican Primary – Jason Torchinsky, Steve Roberts, Dennis Polio, and Andrew Pardue
Download PDF “If You Ain’t First, You’re Last”: How State “Sore-Loser” Laws Make It Impossible For Trump To Run A Successful Third-Party Campaign If He Loses The Republican Primary Jason Torchinsky,[*] Steve Roberts,[†] Dennis Polio,[‡] and Andrew Pardue.[§] Introduction In recent months, Donald Trump and his supporters have stoked rumors that he may run as a third-party candidate for president in 2024 if he fails to win the Republican nomination.[5] These rumors, sometimes bordering on outright threats,[6] have reinvigorated a discussion of...
read moreEngel Was Grievously Wrong and Should Be Overruled – Thomas H. Bickel
Download PDF Engel Was Grievously Wrong and Should Be Overruled Thomas H. Bickel* A jurisprudential shift is underway in the area of Establishment Clause law. The slow and painful death of the long derided “Lemon Test” is merely a symptom of the Supreme Court’s increasing adherence to text, history, and tradition.[1] Against that backdrop, this essay will briefly overview this recent shift as it pertains to Establishment Clause doctrine to suggest that there now exists a viable roadmap to chip away at and revisit Engel v. Vitale.[2] Then,...
read more303 Creative v. Elenis: Can Stand-Alone Dignitary Harm Create a Right to Endorsement and Duty to Endorse? – Emilie Kao
Download PDF 303 Creative v. Elenis: Can Stand-Alone Dignitary Harm Create a Right to Endorsement and Duty to Endorse? Emilie Kao* All people have inherent dignity and should be treated with respect. However, whether and how courts should address legal claims surrounding dignity are notoriously complicated.[1] Does the government have an interest in protecting citizens from “dignitary harm” – subjective feelings of emotional distress or stigma? If so, does the government’s interest require it to compel or silence the expression of certain...
read moreScalia the Legal Sociologist – Lawrence Lessig
Download PDF Scalia the Legal Sociologist Lawrence Lessig* What follows is a lightly footnoted version of a lecture delivered at Harvard Law School on October 19, 2022, as part of the Herbert W. Vaughan Academic Program. A video of the lecture is available online at https://youtu.be/ajftWFpSLzw and the complete written remarks can be accessed at https://www.harvard-jlpp.com/the-2022-herbert-w-vaughan-academic-program. * * * I want to talk about one of my favorite “original Scalia” opinions—one not mentioned by Professor Vermeule, either today...
read moreScalia’s Evolution: A Matter of Admiration – Hon. Andrew S. Oldham
Download PDF Scalia’s Evolution: A Matter of Admiration Hon. Andrew S. Oldham* What follows is a lightly footnoted version of a lecture delivered at Harvard Law School on October 19, 2022, as part of the Herbert W. Vaughan Academic Program. A video of the lecture is available online at https://youtu.be/ajftWFpSLzw and the complete written remarks can be accessed at https://www.harvard-jlpp.com/the-2022-herbert-w-vaughan-academic-program. * * * It’s always a joy to be back in Cambridge. I went to law school here during Justice Scalia’s...
read moreThe Original Scalia – Adrian Vermeule
Download PDF The Original Scalia Adrian Vermeule* What follows is a lightly footnoted version of a lecture delivered at Harvard Law School on October 19, 2022, as part of the Herbert W. Vaughan Academic Program. A video of the lecture is available online at https://youtu.be/ajftWFpSLzw and the complete written remarks can be accessed at https://www.harvard-jlpp.com/the-2022-herbert-w-vaughan-academic-program. Thanks to the organizers, to Professor Jack Goldsmith for moderating, and to Judge Andrew Oldham and Professor Lawrence Lessig for...
read moreThe 2022 Herbert W. Vaughan Academic Program
JLPP: Per Curiam is thrilled to publish the remarks delivered at the 2022 Herbert W. Vaughan Academic Program. The program featured a lecture by Professor Adrian Vermeule and responses by Judge Andrew S. Oldham and Professor Lawrence Lessig. A video of the program is available online at https://youtu.be/ajftWFpSLzw, and the written remarks can be accessed here: The Original Scalia – Adrian Vermeule Scalia’s Evolution: A Matter of Admiration – Hon. Andrew S. Oldham Scalia the Legal Sociologist – Lawrence Lessig Thanks to everyone involved in...
read moreEulogy for Holden Tanner – Justice Jimmy Blacklock
Download PDF Eulogy for Holden Tanner Justice Jimmy Blacklock* The following eulogy was delivered at Holden’s funeral on Sunday, March 20, 2022, at the First Baptist Church of Pearland, in Pearland, TX. Footage of the funeral service, including this eulogy, can be accessed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cakUzk3LRyk. * * * I need to begin by expressing my deepest gratitude to Holden’s dear wife Stephanie, and to his loving parents, Patty and John, for giving me this opportunity, this great privilege, to be able to share these words with...
read moreThe Ethics of “Succession Planning” on the Federal Judiciary – Robert Luther III
Download PDF The Ethics of “Succession Planning” on the Federal Judiciary Robert Luther III* Thomas Jefferson allegedly said that the problem with life tenure for federal judges is that “Few die, none resign.”[1] Given that quote, he’d surely be surprised at the volume of federal judicial retirements—and the level of public interest in them—over the last few years. This Essay identifies four of the main issues raised about the ethics of “succession planning” on the federal judiciary. But first, some background on judicial retirements. An...
read moreAttention Originalists: The Second Amendment was adopted in 1791, not 1868 – Mark Smith
Download PDF Attention Originalists: The Second Amendment was adopted in 1791, not 1868 Mark Smith* In June 2022, the Supreme Court decided New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen,[1] its most significant case interpreting the scope of the Second Amendment since the landmark decision in District of Columbia v. Heller.[2] In rejecting a two-part interest balancing test, the Supreme Court instead adopted a “text, history, and tradition” test to determine the Second Amendment’s meaning and scope.[3] Bruen requires...
read more