Washington College of Law
Volume 61, Issue 2

NOTE: The Federal Circuit's Decision in Myriad: Isolated DNA Molecules are Patentable Subject Matter

By Seth R. Ogden | 61 Am. U. L. Rev. 443 (2011)

Click here to view this Note.

NOTE: Section 1983 & the Age of Innocence: The Supreme Court Carves a Procedural Loophole for Post-Conviction DNA Testing in Skinner v. Switzer

By Gabriel A. Carrera | 61 Am. U. L. Rev. 431 (2011)

Click here to view this Note.

COMMENT: Human Health and the Environment Can't Wait for Reform: Current Opportunities for the Federal Government and States to Address Chemical Risks Under the Toxic Substances Control Act

By Lauren Trevisan | 61 Am. U. L. Rev. 385 (2011)

Expressing its concern about growing rates of cancer and other diseases, coupled with the lack of data about the effect of the thousands of chemicals used in U.S. society, in 1976 Congress enacted the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Congress intended for TSCA to shed new light on chemical risks and provide the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with a set of tools to address those risks and protect human health and the environment.

COMMENT: No Vacancy: Why Congress Can Regulate Senate Vacancy-Filling Elections Without Amending (or Offending) the Constitution

By Zachary M. Ista | 61 Am. U. L. Rev. 327 (2011)

There currently exists no uniform method for filling vacancies in the United States Senate, leaving the states to create and implement their own vacancy-filling procedures. As a result of recent problems under this system, such as ex-Governor Rod Blagojevich’s notorious scandal in Illinois, some in Congress have suggested a standardized method for filling Senate vacancies.

Funeral Protests, Privacy, and the Constitution: What Is Next After Phelps?

By Mark Strasser | 61 Am. U. L. Rev. 279 (2011)

In Snyder v. Phelps, the United States Supreme Court struck down a damages award against Reverend Fred Phelps Sr. and the Westboro Baptist Church for picketing a military funeral. Although the Court asserted that its holding was narrow and the legal issues involved were straightforward, this Article argues that Phelps ultimately raises more questions than it answers and almost guarantees increased confusion in First Amendment jurisprudence. 

<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>

Page 1 of 2