The February 2016 issue, Number 4, features these contents: • Article, "Constitutional Bad Faith," by David E. Pozen • Book Review, "No Immunity: Race, Class, and Civil Liberties in Times of Health Crisis," by Michele Goodwin & Erwin Chemerinsky • Book Review, "How Much Does Speech Matter?," by Leslie Kendrick • Note, "State Bans on Debtors' Prisons and Criminal Justice Debt" • Note, "Digital Duplications and the Fourth Amendment" • Note, "Reconciling State Sovereign Immunity with the Fourteenth Amendment" • Note, "Suspended Justice: The Case Against 28 U.S.C. § 2255's Statute of Limitations" In addition, student commentary analyzes Recent Cases on the exclusionary rule in knock-and-announce violations; FTC regulation of data security; voting rights, disparate impact, and the Texas voter ID law; and fair labor, 'primary beneficiary,' and unpaid interns. The issue includes analysis of Recent Regulations on Dodd-Frank and mandatory pay disclosure; and on Clean Air Act regulation of carbon emissions from existing power plants. Also included are a Recent Event comment on the killing of a non-university-affiliate by campus police and a Recent Book comment on Richard McAdams' 2015 book The Expressive Powers of Law. Finally, the issue includes several brief comments on 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. The Review is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship. It comes out monthly from November through June and has roughly 2500 pages per volume. Student editors make all editorial and organizational decisions. This is the fourth issue of academic year 2015-2016.

The April 2016 issue, Number 6, is the annual Developments in the Law special issue. The topic of this extensive contribution is "Indian Law," including specific focus on tribal executive branches, tribal authority to follow fresh pursuit onto nontribal land, reconsidering ICRA and rights, securing Indian voting rights, and indigenous people and extractive industries. In addition, the issue features these contents: • Article, "Reconstructivism: The Place of Criminal Law in Ethical Life," by Joshua Kleinfeld • Essay, "Rule of Law Tropes in National Security," by Shirin Sinnar • Book Review, "Coming into the Anthropocene," by Jedediah Purdy Furthermore, student commentary analyzes Recent Cases on excessive force and SWAT raids after "perfunctory" investigation; prior restraints and injunctions under copyright law; individual liability of FBI agents for detention of citizens abroad; religious establishment and display of the Ten Commandments; and charter schools as violations of state constitutional law. Finally, the issue includes four brief comments on 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. The Review is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship. It comes out monthly from November through June and has roughly 2500 pages per volume. Student editors make all editorial and organizational decisions. This is the sixth issue of academic year 2015-2016.

To understand one another as individuals and to fulfill the moral duties that require such understanding, we must communicate with each other. We must also maintain protected channels that render reliable communication possible, a demand that, Seana Shiffrin argues, yields a prohibition against lying and requires protection for free speech. This book makes a distinctive philosophical argument for the wrong of the lie and provides an original account of its difference from the wrong of deception. Drawing on legal as well as philosophical arguments, the book defends a series of notable claims—that you may not lie about everything to the "murderer at the door," that you have reasons to keep promises offered under duress, that lies are not protected by free speech, that police subvert their mission when they lie to suspects, and that scholars undermine their goals when they lie to research subjects. Many philosophers start to craft moral exceptions to demands for sincerity and fidelity when they confront wrongdoers, the pressures of non-ideal circumstances, or the achievement of morally substantial ends. But Shiffrin consistently resists this sort of exceptionalism, arguing that maintaining a strong basis for trust and reliable communication through practices of sincerity, fidelity, and respecting free speech is an essential aspect of ensuring the conditions for moral progress, including our rehabilitation of and moral reconciliation with wrongdoers.

The January 2016 issue, Number 3, features these contents: • Article, "Presidential Intelligence," by Samuel J. Rascoff • Book Review, "The Struggle for Administrative Legitimacy," by Jeremy K. Kessler (on Daniel Ernst's book about the administrative state) • Note, "Existence-Value Standing" • Note, "Rethinking Closely Regulated Industries" In addition, student commentary analyzes Recent Cases on compelled disclosures in commercial speech; due process notice of procedures to challenge a local ordinance; standing after liquidation actions taken under Dodd-Frank; exaction and takings by acquiring equity shares in AIG; religious liberty after Hobby Lobby; bias-intimidation laws and mens rea; and whether document production is the 'practice of law' under labor law. The issue includes analysis of a Recent Court Filing by the DOJ supporting a meaningful juvenile right to counsel. Finally, the issue includes comments on 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. The Review is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship. It comes out monthly from November through June and has roughly 2500 pages per volume. Student editors make all editorial and organizational decisions. This is the third issue of academic year 2015-2016.

In 2009, Harvey A. Silverglate, a prominent criminal defense and civil liberties lawyer, published his landmark critique of the federal criminal justice system, Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent. In 2014, Sidney Powell, a former federal prosecutor in three districts under nine United States Attorneys from both political parties and who has been lead counsel in 500 federal appeals, published her landmark indictment of the system, Licensed To Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice, after she witnessed appalling abuses by prosecutors—more than a decade after she entered private practice. Now these two leading authorities have combined their knowledge, experiences, and talents to produce a much-needed and long-awaited blueprint for reforming the way business is conducted within the Department of Justice and in the federal criminal courts. Both Powell and Silverglate decided to join forces to write this essential and long-awaited book in order to answer the questions and the challenges that each of them has faced over the past several years: “OK,” they’ve been told. “We understand your criticisms. Now how about telling us what has to be done to restore justice to federal criminal justice.” This collaboration is their response.

The May 2016 issue, Number 7, features these contents: • Article, "The Positive Law Model of the Fourth Amendment," by William Baude and James Y. Stern • Essay, "Deference and Due Process," by Adrian Vermeule • Book Review, "How to Explain Things with Force," by Mark Greenberg • Note, "Free Speech Doctrine After Reed v. Town of Gilbert" Furthermore, student commentary analyzes Recent Cases on the Affordable Care Act and the origination clause; statutory interpretation and the Video Privacy Protection Act; and commercial speech doctrine and the FDA's power to prosecute non-misleading statements after modifying text. Other commentary examines South Carolina's legislative effort to to disqualify companies who support BDS from receiving state contracts; and the NLRB's adjudicative ruling to classify canvassers as employees, not independent contractors. Finally, the issue includes several brief comments on 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. The Review is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship. It comes out monthly from November through June and has roughly 2500 pages per volume. Student editors make all editorial and organizational decisions. This is the seventh issue of academic year 2015-2016.