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 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.

The June 2016 issue, Number 8, features these contents: • Article, "Systemic Facts: Toward Institutional Awareness in Criminal Courts," by Andrew Manuel Crespo • Book Review, "Fixing Statutory Interpretation," by Brett M. Kavanaugh • Book Review, "Knowledge and Politics in International Law," by Samuel Moyn • Note, "Major Question Objections" • Note, "Chinese Common Law? Guiding Cases and Judicial Reform" • Note, "OSHA’s Feasibility Policy: The Implications of the ‘Infeasibility’ of Respirators" Furthermore, student commentary analyzes Recent Cases on sex-discrimination implications of gender-normed FBI fitness requirements; trademark law and the antidisparagement rule as a constitutional problem; practical elimination of the adverse-interest exception as a defense to fraud-on-the-market claims; deference to administrative agency’s amicus brief’s interpretation of student-loan regulations; parties' analysis of fair use before issuing copyright-violation takedown notice; causation standards for penalty enhancement in Controlled Substances Act cases; and admiralty jurisdiction and removal to federal court after a 2011 amendment to 28 USC § 1441. 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 graphics from the original, 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 eighth and final 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.

The March 2016 issue, No. 5, features these contents: • Article, "Marriage Equality and the New Parenthood," by Douglas NeJaime • Essay, "Horizontal Shareholding," by Einer Elhauge • Book Review, "Keeping Track: Surveillance, Control, and the Expansion of the Carceral State," by Kathryne M. Young and Joan Petersilia • Note, "Constitutional Courts and International Law: Revisiting the Transatlantic Divide" • Note, "Defining the Press Exemption from Campaign Finance Restrictions" • Note, "Let the End Be Legitimate: Questioning the Value of Heightened Scrutiny's Compelling- and Important-Interest Inquiries" In addition, student commentary analyzes Recent Cases on state abortion laws and precedent; expectation of privacy in pocket dial; tax deductions for medical marijuana dispensary; appointments clause test for executive branch reassignments; takings by residential inclusionary zoning; and statutory interpretation using corpus linguistics. A commentary focuses on the Recent Court Filing by the DOJ arguing that a city ordinance prohibiting camping and sleeping outdoors violates the Eighth Amendment. Finally, the issue includes two 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 fifth issue of academic year 2015-2016.

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.

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 November issue is the special annual review of the U.S. Supreme Court's previous Term. Each year, the Supreme Court issue is introduced by noteworthy and extensive contributions from recognized scholars. In this issue, for the 2016 Term, articles include: • Foreword: "1930s Redux: The Administrative State Under Siege," by Gillian E. Metzger • Essay: "Unprecedented? Judicial Confirmation Battles and the Search for a Usable Past," by Josh Chafetz • Comment: "Churches, Playgrounds, Government Dollars — and Schools?," by Douglas Laycock • Comment: "Equality, Sovereignty, and the Family in Morales-Santana," by Kristin A. Collins 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 is thus provided on eighteen of the Leading Cases of the 2016 Term, including such subjects as racial gerrymandering, freedom of speech, regulatory takings, right to effective counsel, equal protection, appellate jurisdiction, fair housing, immigration law, insider trading, venue in patent cases, and remedies for constitutional violations. 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 long been considered very useful to scholars of the Court in law and political science. Finally, the issue includes a linked Index of Cases and citations for the discussed opinions. 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 2017, the first issue of academic year 2017-2018 (Volume 131). 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.

The Harvard Law Review, April 2015, is offered in a digital edition. Contents include the annual Developments in the Law survey of a particular area of legal concern; this year's topic is Policing. Other contents include: • Article, "Consent Procedures and American Federalism," by Bridget Fahey • Essay, "Anticipatory Remedies for Takings," by Thomas W. Merrill • Book Review, "How a 'Lawless' China Made Modern America: An Epic Told in Orientalism," by Carol G.S. Tan Specific subjects studied in Developments in the Law—Policing are: Policing and Profit, Policing Students, Policing Immigrant Communities, and Considering Police Body Cameras. In addition, the issue features student commentary on Recent Cases, including such subjects as: the business judgment rule and mergers; whistleblowing under Dodd-Frank and extraterritoriality; senate redistricting in New York; postmortem rights of publicity; standing and overlap of various tests used; informing one who pleads No Contest of collateral consequences; exceptions to New York marriage license requirement for out-of-state marriages; exclusionary rule for violations of Posse Comitatus restrictions; and extending federal forced labor statute to conduct criminalized under state law. 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 Apr. 2015, the 6th issue of academic year 2014-2015 (Volume 128). The digital edition features active Contents, linked notes, and proper ebook and Bluebook formatting.

This book documents the intellectual property experiences of writing studies scholars and challenges naturalized ways of responding to intellectual property concerns. Analyzing results of a nationwide survey and semi-structured interviews to examine ways decisions about intellectual property (IP) during academic knowledge-making are mediated by histories of enculturation, ethical lenses, and IP sponsors, the book: Identifies and illustrates a range of ethical stances that academics might adopt in regard to IP and the range of human, institutional, and technological sponsors that can mediate IP decisions; Provides evidence that IP affects all of the processes of academic knowledge-making, not just the final product; Offers heuristic questions that academics can and should ask throughout their teaching, research, and editing to make proactive IP decisions. The book is an essential read for academics working in writing studies and the humanities as well as those interested in IP. This text could also be used in graduate student training in writing studies and related disciplines.