CMLawLibraryBlog

If you use an older version of Netscape or another older kind of Web Browser software to access the Web, you may not be able to see everything on all Web sites. Law Library staff have recently noticed this problem with LexisNexis displays. In particular, scroll bars disappear when one attempts to display full documents. LexisNexis is working to resolve this browser-display issue, and we'll notify you via another blog article when this issue is resolved. Until then, we recommend that you use the Internet Explorer browser to access LexisNexis.

Internet Explorer is included with Microsoft software packages, so if you use Microsoft at home, you'll have Internet Explorer. Cleveland-Marshall College of Law faculty can launch Internet Explorer from their office computers by clicking on "Start," then, within the pop-up menus, "Programs," then "Internet Explorer." Cleveland-Marshall College of Law students can launch a restricted version of Internet Explorer from Law Library computer lab workstations by clicking on "Start," then, within the pop-up menus, "Programs," then "IE (Restricted)." This restricted version of Internet Explorer is simply restricted in its access to only LexisNexis and Westlaw services. It is not restricted in functionality or features.

Many Web site designers are involved in the Viewable With Any Browser campaign, advocating for non-browser specific Web sites. The VWAB Web site includes interesting information on Web site design and graphics, as well as sponsors a discussion forum. Browser compatibility is a critical issue in Web site design, highlighting information access and monopoly issues. These issues are well noted by Tim Berners-Lee, the creator of HTTP and HTML. "Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web, when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another computer, another word processor, or another network. And once a browser vendor has established such a monopoly, it has an incentive to continue to make arbitrary changes to the defacto standard, forcing potential competitors to play an endless game of catch-up. All the other bright ideas at all the other software companies are stifled because they have to be compatible with a "standard" that changes at one company's whim." Technology Review, vol. 99 (5), July 1996, page 32 et seq.

Columbia University and the University of Colorado recently created AltLaw, a free full-text searchable source for federal appellate and Supreme Court cases. Supreme Court cases go back to 1991 and appellate cases go back 8-15 years, depending on the jurisdiction.

How does Altlaw compare to other free case databases? Altlaw has a more sophisticated search mechanism than Findlaw or LII . Altlaw can sort by relevance and can also search by date and key terms at once. Unlike Findlaw, Altlaw allows for searching some or all of the federal appellate courts at once. LexisOne has sophisticated searching and contains U.S. Supreme Court cases back to 1781, but only has federal appellate decisions for the past five years.

The Altlaw site is still in the development phase. Eventually, the site will be updated daily. Older cases may be added in the future, as well as district court cases. Altlaw will add West Reporter citations (S.Ct., F.3d etc.), a unique feature among free case law databases.

Source: Library Laws are Meant to be Broken blog.

Recent enhancements to LexisNexis include Fifty State Surveys, Cases in Brief, enhanced linking and searchable noise words.

1. Cases in Brief: Starting Jan. 1, 2008, Lexis will no longer contain ALRs. Lexis created Cases in Brief as a substitute. For selected current significant cases, Cases in Brief provides in-depth analysis of the case, subsequent developments and links to secondary sources and news. To look at an example of a Case in Brief, go to LexisNexis® 2006 us dist lexis 43146 Underneath the “disposition” section of this case, you will see a link for a Case in Brief. You may notice a dollar sign by the Case in Brief link, but law school Lexis accounts are not charged for this service. See Julie Webster-Matthews, LexisNexis Case in Brief: A Research Tool for Today and Beyond, LexisNexis Information Professional Update, Sept. 2007.

2. Fifty State Surveys: This new feature is a great time saver when researching the law in all or multiple states. The Fifty State Surveys provide charts of relevant statutes and regulations for each state on various issues. Go to Legal>States Legal-U.S.>Combined States>Find Statutes & Legislative Materials>LexisNexis 50 State Surveys, Legislation & Regulation. You will see a list of topics. There are dollar signs by the topics, but law school Lexis accounts will not be charged.

Another product, called JurisCharts, lists the answers (not just citations) to tax and insurance questions for the fifty states. JurisCharts are available via:

 (More)

Library Elf is a free service that can help you keep track of your library loans and holds. It's easy to register with Library Elf using your CSU Viking Card number and library PIN.

Once registered, you can receive email or RSS alerts before your library materials are due.

Library Elf also lets you register with more than one library -- this option is great for families or individuals with several library cards. For example, if you regularly check out materials from the C-M Law Library and from your local public library, Library Elf will help you keep track of all of your library materials in one convenient email or RSS alert. There's even an option for cellphone text message alerts for your library holds.

Give it a try for free.

In “Making Unpublished Opinions Precedential: A Recipe for Ethical Problems & Legal Malpractice?” (Mississippi College Law Review, Forthcoming Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1001952 ), Andrew T. Solomon posits that the trend of courts to accord unpublished opinions precedential value raises serious issues when they are not as readily available or comprehensively searchable as published opinions. The article discusses recently enacted Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1, which requires that federal courts allow the citation of unpublished opinions issued after Jan. 1, 2007. FRAP 32.1 does not say whether courts must considered unpublished opinions as controlling authority. The author is particularly concerned with the Fifth Circuit's requirement that unreported opinions older than 1996 are binding, as these older cases are difficult to find. See Fifth Circuit Local Appellate Rules 47.5.3 and 47.5.4.

Contrast the Fifth Circuit's rule with the Ohio rule. Unreported opinions issued after May, 2002 may be cited, and the court will determine whether the unreported decision is binding or not. The Ohio Supreme Court amended its Rules for the Reporting of Opinions in May, 2002, specifically abolishing distinctions between “persuasive” and “ controlling” opinions of the courts of appeals based on status as published or not in Rule 4 , stating:

“ (B) All court of appeals opinions issued after the effective date of these rules may be cited as legal authority and weighted as deemed appropriate by the courts…”

The Committee commentary rationale for the court’s rule states in part “The "controlling" nomenclature is primarily the historical result of an inability to physically print all court of appeals opinions, and that distinction is no longer necessary or useful (a) because many appellate judges give equal weight to published and unpublished opinions, and (b) because technology now permits all appellate opinions to be easily and readily obtained electronically.”

Thus, Ohio does not mandate that any unreported opinions be deemed controlling. It is up to the court to decide whether the unreported decision is controlling or not. Furthermore, the Ohio rule refers to cases decided after May, 2002, which are,for the most part, are available from the Ohio Supreme Court's Opinions and Announcements Search.

If you missed Prof. Forte's Constitution Day presentation "Homer Plessy and the Living Constitution" on Sept. 17th, you can view his talk through the University Library's Mediasite presentation catalog.

Temple University law professor and blogger for the international law blog Opinio Juris, Duncan Hollis, recently posted [here] his recommendation to students starting their notes: check out the new book "Effective Lawyering: A Checklist Approach to Legal Writing & Oral Argument." Professor Hollis points out that the book is a "succinct and easy-to-read distillation of the various writing projects lawyers encounter, including a chapter on academic writing."

C-M Law students can find a circulating copy of the book in the Library in room AO66.

The Ohio Supreme Court announced that, in conjunction with the Ohio Legal Assistance Foundation, a system for voluntary reporting of pro bono work will be created. The Court rejected a recommendation by the Supreme Court Task Force on Pro Se and Indigent Litigants that pro bono reporting be mandatory. The Court also considered the Task Force recommendation that Ohio adopt a rule proposed by the American Bar Association, known as Model Rule 6.1. See Supreme Court Supports Pro Bono Legal Services by Ohio Lawyers, Ohio Supreme Court News, Sept 20, 2007.

The Judicial Conference of the United States voted to restrict federal judges to one career law clerk. The recent trend has been for judges to have more than one career clerk. Now, one clerk must be a "term clerk" who stays on for four years or less. Existing career clerks will not necessarily lose their status. If a judge has more than one career clerk, the career clerks will be able retain their career clerk status with the judge's consent. Additionally, if a judge leaves the bench, another federal judge can hire the departing judge's career clerk, and they will not lose their career clerk status. The Judicial Conference hopes to save money by hiring clerks out of law school at a lower salary. See U.S. Courts Press Release. Source: Pamela A. MacLean, Judicial Conference Votes to Curb Career Clerks, National Law Journal, Sept. 24, 2007 (from the email preview).

The Judicial Conference of the United States recently voted to make transcripts of federal district and bankruptcy court cases available on PACER (the Public Access to Court Electronic Records system). Ninety days after they are delivered to the clerk, transcripts can be viewed, downloaded, or printed from PACER for eight cents per page. See U.S. Courts Press Release. Source: WisBlawg.

The Library subscribes to Pacer. Cleveland-Marshall faculty, staff and students who need Pacer documents should contact a reference librarian. Otherwise, to access PACER, you must register and provide credit card information. PACER charges 8 cents a page for search results and documents retrieved, but opinions are free. There is a per document cap of $2.40 (30 pages). No fee is owed until an account holder accrues charges of more than $10 in a calendar year. PACER charges money because Congress provided no funds for electronic public access.

PACER was created about a decade ago to provide electronic access to court dockets. Around 2001, courts started to make pdf copies of the documents filed in a case accessible too. Today, most federal appellate courts, district courts and bankruptcy courts have dockets and filings accessible through PACER. The U.S. Supreme Court docket is not on PACER.

For more information on finding court dockets, see the library's guide: Resources for Finding Court Dockets.

Third year students committed to civil rights and interested in complex corporate litigation are encouraged to apply for the Fried Frank/NAACP Legal Defense Fund Fellowship. The Fellowship is a four year program, consisting of an initial two years as a litigation association at Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson in New York City. During the two years at Fried Frank, 20% of the time will be devoted to public interest work. During the remaining two years, Fellows will work on the NAACP Legal Defense Fund staff. At the end of the four-year commitment, Fellows may be asked to return to work at Fried Frank or asked to continue working at the Legal Defense Fund.

The application deadline is November 2, 2007. For more information and an application form, go to Fried Frank Fellowship Programs.

Thanks to Jayne Geneva, Director of Career Planning, for providing this information.

In honor of Constitution Day, here are three constitutional law cases to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court (Cases where certiorari has been granted can be easily located by logging on to U.S. Law Week , clicking on "Supreme Court Today" and selecting "Cases Granted Review") :

United States v. Williams, Docket No. 06-694, Oral Argument on 10/30/07: Whether the anti-pandering provision of the federal child pornography law, 8 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(3)(B), is unconstitutionally vague, overbroad and/or violates the First Amendment.

Boudemeine v. Bush, Docket No. 06-1195 and Al Odah v. United States, Docket No. 06-1169, (oral argument date not set): Whether the detainees at Guantánamo have a constitutional right to habeas corpus. See Questions Presented in the Detainee Cases, Scotus Blog, June 29, 2007

Medellin v. Texas, Docket No. 06-984, Oral Argument 10/10/2007. Whether the President of the United States acted within his constitutional authority when he determined on Feb. 28, 2005, that the states must give effect to the Avena judgment of the International Court of Justice in the cases of the 51 Mexican nationals named in that March 2004 judgment, and whether the state courts are bound by the Constitution to honor the International Court of Justice's Avena judgment.

New Skills, New Learning: Legal Education & the Promise of Tomorrow, a study of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, is the latest gauntlet dropped at our feet (well, dropped in many of our mailboxes recently, as well as published on the web) claiming that law schools are not teaching many technologies and critical practice skills that beginning lawyers find essential. The study identifies new skills in the areas of knowledge generation, techno-social skills, and meta-practice.

"Knowledge generation" means sorting through information to find something useful, and then applying the information. Of particular concern to us in the library, as we support the research skills education of our students, is the assertion that “avoiding ‘information obesity’ in a world oversaturated with data may be one of the greatest challenges facing lawyers today.” (p.3) The problem for legal researchers, Professor Bob Berring used to say, is that there is “too much stuff.” Now we are recognizing that all that “stuff” will make you fat, unless you acquire and hone the skills to select wisely, and use the tools technology provides to winnow rather than amass. The article makes no specific recommendations on improving students' knowledge generation skills.

The article does recommend, in regard to techno-social skills, to assign more group projects for law students involving technologies such as wikis. Another recommendation, in regards to "meta-practice" is to use more technology in clinical programs, such as case management software and repositories of forms.

To commemorate CSU Constitution Day 2007, Prof. David Forte will speak at the University Library, 1^st Fl. Rhodes Tower, on Mon. Sept. 17^th from 12 Noon – 1 p.m. His topic is: “Homer Plessy and the Living Constitution” Dean Geoffrey S. Mearns will introduce Prof. Forte. There will also be light refreshments. We would like to encourage the entire CSU Community to attend this lecture by one of our renowned faculty members.

Prof. Forte was the Senior Editor of the Heritage Guide to the Constitution, a title available at both the Law and University Libraries at CSU. To become more acquainted with his numerous books and journal articles, please consult the Law Library’s Faculty Publications Database.

In addition to having taught at Cleveland-Marshall College of Law since 1976, Prof. Forte has also served as chief counsel to the U.S. delegation to the United Nations, received a Fulbright and taught in Italy. His career has included speaking engagements throughout the U.S. and in several other countries. See his Biographical information page for additional information.

The U.S. Supreme Court decision Plessy v. Ferguson can be found at 163 U.S. 537, 16 S. Ct. 1138, 41 L. Ed. 256 (1896).

C-M students and faculty now have online access to many BNA publications, both on campus and off site. The library has purchased the BNA core plus package, which includes:

1. Extensive libraries with detailed subject analysis and annotations, primary source materials and current reports: Labor Relations Reporter/Labor and Employment Law Library (includes Americans with Disabilities Act Manual and Collective Bargaining Negotiations and Contracts ); ABA/BNA Lawyers' Manual on Professional Conduct ; U.S. Patents Quarterly/Intellectual Property Library

2. Current Reports, apprising readers of new cases, regulations, statutes and other developments: Antitrust and Trade Regulation Report, Bankruptcy Law Reporter, Criminal Law Reporter, Electronic Commerce & Law Report, Employment Discrimination Report, Environment Reporter - Current Reports, Family Law Reporter, Health Law Reporter, International Trade Reporter, Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal , Securities Regulation and Law Reporter, U.S. Law Week, White Collar Crime Report . These databases usually contain issues dating back to 1996.

For remote access: Use the links in 1 & 2 above, link from Scholar, or use the Electronic Resources page. You will be asked for a CSU Id and PIN.

All of the above databases have email current awareness services you can sign up to receive. To sign up for e-mail delivery:

 (More)

Ms. JD is a blog geared toward females throughout the legal community, law students and professionals alike, to share their thoughts/concerns on issues ranging from family/work balance to going solo and everything in between. It also provides an opportunity to network with others across the country. Ms. JD was launched in 2006 by a group of female law students looking to create a community to share their experiences and work toward resolving issues. For information on posting entries or becoming an editior for Ms. JD, check out What is Ms. JD .

Do you want to quickly access secondary sources explaining a particular Internal Revenue Code Section? Would you like to search primary and secondary federal tax source simultaneously? Maybe you want to find materials on sales tax exemptions for nonprofit organizations in several different states. Perhaps you just want to quickly retrieve a tax code section or tax case by citation. RIA Checkpoint can help you accomplish all those tasks and more!

Cleveland Marshall College of Law faculty and students have access to RIA Checkpoint, both on and off campus. For remote access, you will need a CSU ID and PIN.

*How to access: From the Library's Home Page , click on Electronic Resources, and scroll down to "RIA Checkpoint" OR from SCHOLAR do a title search for "RIA Checkpoint"

In a refreshingly innovative use of virtual reality by a law school, Seton Hall School of Law is hosting a Constitution Day Program on Sept. 17 on Second Life. The program, entitled "Interrogation and Intelligence Gathering," will be webcast in a virtual Guantanamo Bay detention center on Second Life. For more details, including how to find the locale "Gone Gitmo" on Second Life, read the press release.

Seton Hall Law plans to offer monthly programming on Second Life - this Constitution Day event is their first venture into virtual reality.

If you're new to Second Life, this extensive backgrounder [Wikipedia] will bring you up to speed.

Want to be more active in following future conferences, workshops and calls for papers? If so, there's a new blog for you from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law and the University of Washington School of Law.

Here's the introductory message from the bloggers...

We would like to announce the creation of a new blog, Legal Scholarship Blog: http://legalscholarshipblog.com.

This blog is a collaborative service from faculty and staff at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law and the Gallagher Law Library at the University of Washington School of Law. The blog features law-related calls for papers, conferences, and workshops -- with links to relevant websites and papers as well as an event calendar -- along with scholarly resources for Research Deans and current and prospective law professors.

The Law Library is pleased to announce the debut of its Research Certificate Seminars for Cleveland-Marshall College of Law students. Attendees of each Seminar will earn 25 points toward a Law Library Research Certificate. Certificates will be awarded to students with 100 Seminar points.

Certificate Seminars will discuss research materials and resources critical to successful legal practice and scholarly writing, as well as focus on research skills law firms and courts are seeking when hiring associates and clerks. Presented by our team of research librarians, the Seminars will offer a unique forum for students to learn more about specific research topics.

Certificate Seminars will be held 5pm-6pm on Thursdays, in the Law Library Conference Room (Room LL212, on the 2nd floor of the Law Library), and light refreshments will be provided. Seminar attendance will be limited to 18 students, so we encourage you to register as soon as possible.

Fall Semester 2007 Seminar Dates and Topics are:

• October 11th - Ohio Law Research (register by Oct 9th)
• October 18th - Search Strategies, Avoiding Plagiarism, and Scholarly Writing (register by Oct 16th)
• November 1st - Administrative Law Research (register by Oct 30th)
• November 8th - Foreign and International Law Research (register by Nov 6th)

Additional Certificate Seminars will be offered during Spring Semester 2008, and the Seminars will be one of our continuous educational services to the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law.

To register for a Law Library Research Certificate Seminar, please contact Laura Ray, Educational Programming Librarian, at 216-687-6880 or laura.ray@law.csuohio.edu.

In his recent article “Who Are Those Guys?:” The Results of a Survey Studying the Information Literacy of Incoming Law Students , Syracuse University College of Law Professor Ian Gallacher reports the results of a 2006 survey of incoming law students as to their perception of their reading, writing and research skills.

With particular respect to research skills, Gallicher characterizes the majority of student responses as overconfident and cautions that such certainty might lead to “ a closing of minds during the research portion of a first year writing and research course. Students feel themselves to be capable, even skilled, researchers, and therefore are likely disinclined to believe that legal research will pose any substantial difficulties for them.” (p. 30)

The research habits reported in the survey included a majority reliance on the internet for all research needs, and a strong reliance on Google as the student’s favorite search engine, resulting in a “passive rather than active” approach to acquiring information (p. 31). It is the active component that leads to the assimilating and associating necessary for legal analysis.

Without characterizing a set of research skills as “literate” or not, we recognize that the legal research process is something different than most students have encountered before, and that the refinement of one’s approach to identifying issues and sources is an on-going process. Your Law Library staff is positioned to help you hone those skills throughout your law school career and as you enter legal practice.

2Ls and 3Ls can volunteer to work on the new edition of Tort Law by Christopher M. Ernst, the only published practice book on Ohio tort law. The students will research an area of Ohio tort law, and with direction from the author, help turn the research product into a rough draft of the book.

For more information, and instructions on how to apply, go to:

http://www.law.csuohio.edu/public/announcements/studentopportunity.doc

Ernst's Tort Law book can be viewed at the law library, KFO195 .E78 2005 or on Westlaw.com (OHPRAC-TORT). For a product description, see Westlaw's product information page.

Thanks to Jane Geneva of the Office of Career Planning for the information.

Casemaker is an affordable legal database used by many small firms. It is also used by larger firms as a starting point before going on more expensive services, such as LexisNexis and Westlaw. Casemaker is free to members of the Ohio State Bar Association. Students can join the Ohio State Bar Association for free and receive access to Casemaker at no cost. See OSBA - Law Student Membership.

Casemaker is now available at the two public access terminals located near the information services desk. There are two ways to access Casemaker: (1) Type in the url http://ohiobar.org/ and click on "Casemaker", or (2) Look for links on the Electronic Legal Research Resources Page (the homepage on the public access terminals) under Ohio or Federal statutes or caselaw.

Casemaker contains searchable case law databases for all fifty states and federal court. The federal appellate, district court and bankruptcy cases include only recent case law. For the 26 Casemaker Consortium states, including Ohio, Casemaker contains unannotated statutes, administrative codes, court rules, Attorney General opinions, jury instructions and ethics opinions. For more details see Casemaker Product Information. Some databases contain unique content, such as the Ohio Verdict Reporter and the Ohio State Bar Association Jury Instructions.

Attorneys commonly borrow language from complaints and briefs filed by other attorneys in other court cases. This practice has become even more common with the rise of (1) brief databases on LexisNexis and Westlaw, and (2) web dockets with accessible copies of filings. According to a recent article, copying of legal documents may constitute a copyright violation. Thomas J. Stueber, Due Diligence in Drafting: Copyrights in Legal Documents, 24 The Computer & Internet Lawyer 21-25 (August 2007) (Available via the Ohiolink Legal Collection)

Stueber's article further states that even a lawyer using his or her own previous work may be committing a copyright violation. This is true if the attorney prepared the document while working for a prior employer. The prior employer owns the copyright in the document.

Stueber discusses several factors which may determine whether copyright infringement has occurred, including:

-Whether the legal document is "original" and possesses some minimal degree of creativity.

-Whether the language of the document is copied, or the ideas presented in the document are copied. Copyright extends to the words used in the pleading or brief, not the theories or ideas.

-How much of the brief or pleading is "borrowed": a sentence, a paragraph, a page or more.

There have been several instances where attorneys have threatened to sue other attorneys for copyright infringement. See Davida H. Isaacs, The Highest Form of Flattery? Application of the Fair Use Defense against Copyright Claims for Unauthorized Appropriation of Litigation Documents, LexisNexis® 71 mo. l.rev. 391-446 (Spring 2006). Isaacs asserts that in most cases, the fair use defense should be applied to allow litigation attorneys to adapt documents written by other attorneys.

Attention Faculty & Staff...SmartCILP allows you to customize your CILP selections to fit your research and teaching needs. To create a profile, connect to SmartCILP and fill in user information. Each week you will receive an email, listing newly published articles in the subjects you've selected. Be on the lookout for a brochure detailing this new service. If you have any questions, please contact Faculty Services at 687-2250 or faculty.services@law.csuohio.edu.

The latest issue of the C-M Faculty Current Awareness Bulletin is now available. It features selected announcements for symposia, conferences and publishing opportunities, as well as useful databases and websites for research. The Bulletin is published six times a year.

• Main
• Archives
• Folders
• Dashboard
• Links

«	September 2007					»
Su	Mo	Tu	We	Th	Fr	Sa
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29
30

Search This Blog:

• RSS 2.0

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

• It's October, and Time for the Supremes!
• New Treaty Bans Use of Cluster Munitions
• MP3's of Your Assigned Class Readings. Audio Case Files is Here.
• Government Bailout History
• Friedman & Gilbert Criminal Justice Forum: Jonathan Turley, Thurs. Oct 2, 5 p.m.
• Finding Study Aids in the Library
• Ouch! Tougher to Pierce the Corporate Veil
• You Oughta Be In Pictures
• Review Outlines...Already?
• Make Mine a Latte

• Career Information [31]
• Community Events [15]
• Faculty Teaching and Scholarship [49]
• From The Director [4]
• Government Information and News [23]
• International [31]
• Law Library News and Events [58]
• Law Student News [23]
• Law-Zarro [19]
• Legal Research & Writing [108]
• Library Resources and Databases [67]
• National [81]
• Ohio and Local [68]
• Speakers and Visiting Scholars [15]
• Study and Exam Tips [19]

• Blog Directories
  • Law Professor Blogs
  • Law X.0: A Taxonomy of Legal Blogs
  • Justia Blog Search
  • Blawg Republic
• Blogs by C-M Professors
  • Comparative Racism and the Law - Canada/U.S.
  • Before the Law
• Blogs for Law Faculty
  • Legal Scholarship Blog
• Blogs for Law Students
  • The Frugal Law Student
  • JD2B
  • WishIWouldHaveKnown
• Blogs of General Legal Interest
  • SCOTUS Blog
  • Ohio Supreme Court Opinion Summaries
  • Ohio State Supreme Court News
  • Wall Street Journal.com Law Blog
  • Above the Law
  • Law School Innovation
  • Supreme Dicta
  • The Volokh Conspiracy