The Harvard Law Review, June 2015, is offered in a digital edition. Contents include: • Article, “Active Avoidance: The Modern Supreme Court and Legal Change,” by Neal Kumar Katyal and Thomas P. Schmidt • Article, “The Invention of Low-Value Speech,” by Genevieve Lakier • Book Review, “Crown and Constitution,” by Tara Helfman • Note, “Causation in Environmental Law: Lessons from Toxic Torts” In addition, the issue features extensive student commentary on Recent Cases and policy positions, including such subjects as: corporate board of directors' duties in mergers under the Revlon doctrine; the propriety of a Delaware corporation's bylaws designating a non-Delaware exclusive forum; availability of habeas corpus review for sentencing error as to 'career offender' enhancement; whether remand orders can be vacated under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3); whether housing providers can delay review of reasonable accommodations under fair housing law by requesting extraneous information; and, as to immigration law, analysis of the opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel endorsing President Obama's Executive Order on deferred action for parental accountability. Finally, the issue features summaries of Recent Publications, as well as a detailed and cumulative Index for all eight issues of Volume 128. 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 2300 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 June 2015, the eighth and final issue of academic year 2014-2015 (Volume 128). This quality digital edition from Quid Pro Books features active Contents, linked notes, active URLs in notes, and proper ebook and Bluebook formatting.

The Harvard Law Review, January 2015, No. 3 of Volume 128, is offered in a digital edition. Contents include: • Article, “Uncovering Coordinated Interagency Adjudication,” by Bijal Shah • Note, “Deference and the Federal Arbitration Act: The NLRB’s Determination of Substantive Statutory Rights” • Note, “Education Policy Litigation as Devolution” • Note, “Physically Intrusive Abortion Restrictions as Fourth Amendment Searches and Seizures” • Note, “Copyright Reform and the Takings Clause” In addition, the issue features student commentary on Recent Cases and policy resolutions, including such subjects as constitutional protection for teacher tenure, suspicionless street stop of suspect’s companion, warrants to search foreign emails, confrontation clause in sentence selection phase of capital case, subject matter jurisdiction of tribal courts, physician inquiries into gun ownership and freedom of speech, reviewability of FDA inaction on pet drug products, and veto of a UN Security Council resolution on Syrian conflict. 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 January 2015, the third issue of academic year 2014-2015 (Volume 128). The digital edition features active Contents, linked notes, and proper ebook and Bluebook formatting.

Winner of the Society of the Cincinnati History Prize, Society of the Cincinnati in the State of New Jersey Finalist, George Washington Prize A Choice Outstanding Academic Title of 2015 Generations of students have been taught that the American Revolution was a revolt against royal tyranny. In this revisionist account, Eric Nelson argues that a great many of our “founding fathers” saw themselves as rebels against the British Parliament, not the Crown. The Royalist Revolution interprets the patriot campaign of the 1770s as an insurrection in favor of royal power—driven by the conviction that the Lords and Commons had usurped the just prerogatives of the monarch. “The Royalist Revolution is a thought-provoking book, and Nelson is to be commended for reviving discussion of the complex ideology of the American Revolution. He reminds us that there was a spectrum of opinion even among the most ardent patriots and a deep British influence on the political institutions of the new country.” —Andrew O’Shaughnessy, Wall Street Journal “A scrupulous archaeology of American revolutionary thought.” —Thomas Meaney, The Nation “A powerful double-barrelled challenge to historiographical orthodoxy.” —Colin Kidd, London Review of Books “[A] brilliant and provocative analysis of the American Revolution.” —John Brewer, New York Review of Books

The Harvard Law Review is offered in a digital edition for ereaders, featuring active Contents, linked notes, and proper ebook formatting. The contents of Number 2 include: • Article, “The (Non)Finality of Supreme Court Opinions,” by Richard J. Lazarus • Book Review, “The Laws of Capitalism,” by David Singh Grewal • Note, “Citizens United at Work: How the Landmark Decision Legalized Political Coercion in the Workplace” • Note, “Data Mining, Dog Sniffs, and the Fourth Amendment” • Note, “Nonbinding Bondage” The issue includes In Memoriam contributions about the life, scholarship, and teaching of John H. Mansfield. The contributors are Anthony D'Amato, Robert W. Gordon, Martha Minow, Frederick Schauer, and James A. Sonne. In addition, the issue features student commentary on Recent Cases and policy papers, including such subjects as internet law and privacy, Fourth Amendment right to deletion, state action and credit card fees, antitrust law and foreign trade, applicability of Seventh Amendment to states and commonwealths, free speech and tour guide licensing in D.C., labor law and sexual harassment claims, and gender crimes in international criminal law. Finally, the issue includes 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. The organization is formally independent of the Harvard Law School. Student editors make all editorial and organizational decisions. This issue of the Review is December 2014, the second issue of academic year 2014-2015 (Volume 128).

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.

The November issue of the Harvard Law Review is the special annual review of the U.S. Supreme Court's previous Term. Each year, the issue is introduced by noteworthy and extensive contributions from recognized scholars. In this issue, for the 2014 Term, articles include: • Foreword: “Does the Constitution Mean What It Says?," by David A. Strauss • Comment: “Imperfect Statutes, Imperfect Courts: Understanding Congress’s Plan in the Era of Unorthodox Lawmaking,” by Abbe R. Gluck • Comment: “Zivotofsky II as Precedent in the Executive Branch,” by Jack Goldsmith • Comment: “A New Birth of Freedom?: Obergefell v. Hodges,” by Kenji Yoshino In addition, the first issue of each new volume provides an extensive summary of the important cases of the previous Supreme Court docket, covering a wide range of legal, political, and constitutional subjects. Student commentary on Leading Cases of the 2014 Term includes recent cases on: private rights of action and Medicaid; government speech under the First Amendment; judicial campaign speech; Fourth Amendment standing; reasonable mistakes of law for searches and seizure; regulatory takings under the Fifth Amendment; preliminary injunctions in death penalty cases; separation of powers in bankruptcy jurisdiction; legislative control of redistricting; racial gerrymandering under the Fourteenth Amendment; dormant commerce clause and personal income tax; changing interpretive rules in administrative law; residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act; cost-benefit analysis under the Clean Air Act; mens rea for violating federal threats law; disparate impact and racial equality in fair housing law; nondelegation doctrine in the context of railroad-passenger law; religious liberty and land use; Sherman Act state action immunity; and destruction of evidence under Sarbanes-Oxley. Complete statistical graphs and tables of the Court's actions and results during the Term are included; these summaries and statistics, including voting patterns of individual justices, have been considered very useful to scholars of the Court in law and political science. The issue includes a linked Table of Cases and citations for the opinions. Finally, the issue features two 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. This current issue of the Review is November 2015, the first issue of academic year 2015-2016 (Volume 129).

The November issue is the special annual review of the U.S. Supreme Court's previous Term. Each year, the issue is introduced by noteworthy and extensive contributions from recognized scholars. In this issue, for the 2013 Term, articles include: • Foreword: "The Means of Constitutional Power," by John F. Manning • Comment: "Slipping the Bonds of Federalism," by Heather K. Gerken • Comment: "The Supreme Court as a Constitutional Court," by Jamal Greene • Comment: "The Hobby Lobby Moment," by Paul Horwitz In addition, the first issue of each new volume provides an extensive summary of the important cases of the previous Supreme Court docket, covering a wide range of legal, political and constitutional subjects. Student commentary on Leading Cases of the 2013 Term includes recent cases on: content neutrality under the First Amendment; compelled subsidized speech; free speech and contribution limits; legislative prayer and the establishment of religion; search and seizure law as to anonymous tips, cellphones, and cotenant consent; equal protection and political process; right to counsel; Eighth Amendment issues for intellectually impaired defendants; standing and jurisdiction; class actions; tribal immunity; the Clean Air Act; immigration of children; misrepresentation of buyer and gun control law; and copyright law's Transmit Clause. Complete statistical graphs and tables of the Court's actions and results during the Term are included. Finally, the issue features several summaries of Recent Publications. The issue also features essays on substantive and procedural law, and judicial method, honoring Justice Stephen G. Breyer and his notable contributions to law and the Supreme Court. The essays are written by scholars Martha Minow, Martha Field, Cass Sunstein, Richard Fallon, Michael Klarman, Todd Rakoff, Joseph Singer, John Manning, Laurence Tribe, I. Glenn Cohen, and Mark Tushnet. 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. This current issue of the Review is November 2014, the first issue of academic year 2014-2015 (Volume 128).