CategoryDiscourse

Discourse publishes shorter articles that are timely, interdisciplinary, and novel. Discourse strives to serve as a platform for scholars, ideas, and discussions that have often been overlooked in traditional law review settings. Because we seek to publish pieces that are accessible to legal and non-legal audiences alike, Discourse articles are generally between 3,000 and 10,000 words. Like our print journal, Discourse articles are published on Westlaw, Lexis, and in other legal databases, as well as our own website. Beginning with Volume 68, Discourse began publishing special issues of Law Meets World.

The Pseudo-Elimination of Best Mode: Worst Possible Choice?

Even as it is hailed as the most significant legislative change to patent law in a half-century, some of the changes the U.S. Congress made in the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act are surprisingly equivocal. One provision captures this aspect of the Act particularly well: the pseudo-elimination of the best mode requirement. In this Essay, we develop the concern that by equivocating on the best...

To Show Virtue Her Own Feature

Each year, the UCLA School of Law presents the Rutter Award for Excellence in Teaching to an outstanding law professor. On April 3, 2012, this honor was given to Professor Pavel Wonsowicz. UCLA Law Review Discourse is proud to continue its tradition of publishing a modified version of the ceremony speech delivered by the award recipient.

test

Without much fanfare, at least two federal agencies—the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)—have recently made changes to their cost–benefit analysis procedures.  The changes are technical and may not seem especially exciting, even to those predisposed to read regulatory impact analyses.  But they have the potential to affect substantive regulations...

Lies, Honor, and the Government’s Good Name: Seditious Libel and the Stolen Valor Act

Later this term the Supreme Court will decide the constitutionality of the Stolen Valor Act, which punishes anyone who falsely represents themselves to have been awarded certain military medals. Although the Court declared the crime of seditious libel inconsistent with the First Amendment long ago, the Act revives something very like that crime. The connection between the two crimes is not...

Tinkering With the Machinery of Life

Recent adjustments by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) to their cost–benefit analysis procedures could cause tremendous changes to federal regulation. For decades, federal agencies have calculated the value of a statistical life (VSL) and have used that number when evaluating the costs and benefits of proposed regulations. If a regulation was...

Putting Down: Expressive Subordination and Equal Protection

William M. Carter, Jr., divides race-conscious policies into those that concretely disadvantage minorities and those that do not subordinate them at all, but merely express the policymaker’s race-consciousness. The main aim of this Article is to introduce a third category that his dichotomy excludes: race-conscious policies that amount to expressive subordination. To subordinate people...

Professionalism and Matthew Shardlake

This Essay/Book Review examines the Matthew Shardlake series by C.J. Sansom. In particular, it examines the question of whether the sixteenth-century fictional lawyer Shardlake can serve as a role model for twenty-first-century lawyers, both in terms of his ethics and his professionalism. An examination of the Shardlake series as a whole yields some uncertain answers, both as to Shardlake and as...

Heaven: What Sense Can It Make to Say That Something Is Absolutely Wrong?

Democratic legal systems and international human rights norms hold generally that torture can never be justified, however urgent the need. Many, but not all, thinkers about morality agree with this consensus. But the certainty breaks down in the face of catastrophic, “ticking bomb” hypotheticals, and lawyers and moralists retreat to arguments about the unreality of such hypotheticals and about...

Transcendence: Conservative Wealth and Intergenerational Succession

This Article investigates a hitherto unexplored connection between money and politics. It posits a psychological explanation for why certain extremely wealthy and powerful tycoons back ultraconservative causes and oppose social spending, even on education, though these measures would benefit the economy as a whole. Employing the concept of transcendence, it shows how wealthy parents are often...

Applying Rules of Discovery to Information Uncovered About Jurors

Once reserved for high profile cases or clients with “deep pockets,” juror investigations have become increasingly common in the digital age. With a couple of keystrokes, attorneys can now uncover a wealth of information about jurors online. This Article examines the positive impact of technology on juror investigations in criminal trials, such as improving the use of peremptory challenges...

Footloose: How to Tame the Tucker Act Shuffle After United States v. Tohono O’odham Nation

The purpose of 28 U.S.C. § 1500, “Pendency of claims in other courts,” is to force upon plaintiffs suing the federal government a mutually exclusive election between either the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (CFC) or other courts, so as to minimize jurisdictional conflict and to preclude duplicative claims. Under current precedent, the statute strips the CFC of jurisdiction if the claim before the...

A Journey of Faith, Love, and Teaching

Each year, the UCLA School of Law presents the Rutter Award for Excellence in Teaching to an outstanding law professor. On April 7, 2010, this honor was given to Professor Thomas Holm, the director of UCLA Law’s Lawyering Skills Clinical Program. UCLA Law Review Discourse is proud to continue its tradition of publishing a modified version of the ceremony speech delivered by the award recipient...

Unraveling the Exclusionary Rule: From Leon to Herring to Robinson—And Back?

The Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule began to unravel in United States v. Leon. The facts were compelling. Why exclude reliable physical evidence from trial when it was not the constable who blundered, but “a detached and neutral magistrate” who misjudged whether probable cause was present and issued a search warrant? Later cases applied the exception for “good faith” mistakes to a police...

Damages, Injunctions, and Climate Justice: A Reply to Jonathan Zasloff

This Essay responds to an article by Jonathan Zasloff previously published in the UCLA Law Review in which he suggests that plaintiffs filing nuisance actions to address climate change should seek damages rather than injunctive relief and calculate damages based on a carbon tax. This Essay argues that, because a carbon tax is an estimate of the global damages resulting from greenhouse gas...