AAAAAA
Results: 1-25/242
Authors:
SCHACTER JS
Citation: Js. Schacter, THE CONFOUNDING COMMON-LAW ORIGINALISM IN RECENT SUPREME-COURT STATUTORY INTERPRETATION - IMPLICATIONS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY DEBATE AND BEYOND, Stanford law review, 51(1), 1998, pp. 1-71
Authors:
LESTER G
Citation: G. Lester, CAREERS AND CONTINGENCY, Stanford law review, 51(1), 1998, pp. 73-145
Authors:
LOPUCKI LM
Citation: Lm. Lopucki, THE ESSENTIAL STRUCTURE OF JUDGMENT PROOFING, Stanford law review, 51(1), 1998, pp. 147-160
Authors:
EPSTEIN LB
Citation: Lb. Epstein, WHAT IS A GENDER NORM AND WHY SHOULD WE CARE - IMPLEMENTING A NEW THEORY IN SEXUAL HARASSMENT LAW, Stanford law review, 51(1), 1998, pp. 161-182
Authors:
WEIS A
Citation: A. Weis, JUMPING THE QUEUE - AN INQUIRY INTO THE LEGAL TREATMENT OF STUDENTS WITH LEARNING-DISABILITIES - KELMAN,M, LESTER,G, Stanford law review, 51(1), 1998, pp. 183-219
Authors:
KATYAL NK
Citation: Nk. Katyal, JUDGES AS ADVICEGIVERS, Stanford law review, 50(6), 1998, pp. 1709-1824
Authors:
MIKVA AJ
Citation: Aj. Mikva, WHY JUDGES SHOULD NOT BE ADVICEGIVERS - A RESPONSE TO PROFESSOR KATYAL,NEAL, Stanford law review, 50(6), 1998, pp. 1825-1832
Authors:
VERMEULE A
Citation: A. Vermeule, LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND THE LIMITS OF JUDICIAL COMPETENCE - THE UNTOLD STORY OF HOLY-TRINITY-CHURCH, Stanford law review, 50(6), 1998, pp. 1833-1896
Authors:
CHANDLER C
Citation: C. Chandler, VOLUNTARY EXECUTIONS, Stanford law review, 50(6), 1998, pp. 1897-1927
Authors:
DELGADO R
Citation: R. Delgado, THE BELL-CURVE - INTELLIGENCE AND CLASS-STRUCTURE IN AMERICAN LIFE - HERRNSTEIN,RJ, MURRAY,C, Stanford law review, 50(6), 1998, pp. 1929-1957
Authors:
DELGADO R
Citation: R. Delgado, SLOUCHING TOWARD GOMORRAH - MODERN LIBERALISM AND AMERICAN DECLINE - BORK,RH, Stanford law review, 50(6), 1998, pp. 1929-1957
Authors:
DELGADO R
Citation: R. Delgado, ALIEN NATION - COMMON-SENSE ABOUT AMERICA IMMIGRATION DISASTER - BRIMELOW,P, Stanford law review, 50(6), 1998, pp. 1929-1957
Authors:
DELGADO R
Citation: R. Delgado, THE END OF RACISM - PRINCIPLES FOR A MULTIRACIAL SOCIETY - DSOUZA,D, Stanford law review, 50(6), 1998, pp. 1929-1957
Authors:
JOLLS C
SUNSTEIN CR
THALER R
Citation: C. Jolls et al., A BEHAVIORAL-APPROACH TO LAW AND ECONOMICS, Stanford law review, 50(5), 1998, pp. 1471-1550
Authors:
POSNER RA
Citation: Ra. Posner, RATIONAL CHOICE, BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS, AND THE LAW, Stanford law review, 50(5), 1998, pp. 1551-1575
Authors:
KELMAN M
Citation: M. Kelman, BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS AS PART OF A RHETORICAL DUET - A RESPONSE TO JOLLS, SUNSTEIN, AND THALER, Stanford law review, 50(5), 1998, pp. 1577-1591
Authors:
JOLLS C
SUNSTEIN CR
THALER R
Citation: C. Jolls et al., THEORIES AND TROPES - A REPLY TO POSNER AND KELMAN, Stanford law review, 50(5), 1998, pp. 1593-1608
Authors:
DROBAC JA
Citation: Ja. Drobac, FOR THE SAKE OF THE CHILDREN - COURT CONSIDERATION OF RELIGION IN CHILD-CUSTODY CASES, Stanford law review, 50(5), 1998, pp. 1609-1670
Authors:
GIMBEL M
Citation: M. Gimbel, SOME THOUGHTS ON THE IMPLICATIONS OF TRUSTED SYSTEMS FOR INTELLECTUALPROPERTY LAW, Stanford law review, 50(5), 1998, pp. 1671-1687
Authors:
BABCOCK BA
Citation: Ba. Babcock, SISTERS-IN-LAW - WOMEN LAWYERS IN MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY - DRACHMAN,V, Stanford law review, 50(5), 1998, pp. 1689-1708
Authors:
CASSELL PG
FOWLES R
Citation: Pg. Cassell et R. Fowles, HANDCUFFING THE COPS - A 30-YEAR PERSPECTIVE ON MIRANDAS HARMFUL EFFECTS ON LAW-ENFORCEMENT, Stanford law review, 50(4), 1998, pp. 1055-1145
Authors:
DONOHUE JJ
Citation: Jj. Donohue, DID MIRANDA DIMINISH POLICE EFFECTIVENESS, Stanford law review, 50(4), 1998, pp. 1147-1180
Authors:
CASSELL PG
FOWLES R
Citation: Pg. Cassell et R. Fowles, FALLING CLEARANCE RATES AFTER MIRANDA - COINCIDENCE OR CONSEQUENCE, Stanford law review, 50(4), 1998, pp. 1181-1191
Authors:
KANG J
Citation: J. Kang, INFORMATION PRIVACY IN CYBERSPACE TRANSACTIONS, Stanford law review, 50(4), 1998, pp. 1193-1294
Authors:
HARMERDIONNE E
Citation: E. Harmerdionne, ONCE A PECULIAR PEOPLE - COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE AND THE SUPPRESSION OF MORMON POLYGAMY AS A CASE-STUDY NEGATING THE BELIEF-ACTION DISTINCTION, Stanford law review, 50(4), 1998, pp. 1295-1347