Washington College of Law


Congratulations to the Volume 65 Editorial Board!

Congratulations to the Volume 65 Junior Staff!

Federal Circuit Issue

Federal Circuit Issue

The American University Law Review is the only law review in the country to publish an issue exclusively dedicated to the Federal Circuit.  Each year, practitioners and academics provide a synopsis of the Federal Circuit's caseload from the previous year in five major areas of the court's jurisdiction:  patent law, trademark law, government contracts, international trade, and veterans' benefits.  Click here to learn more.

The 2015 Federal Circuit Symposium, "TRENDING IP TOPICS IN 2015:  A Table Talk with Chief Judge Sharon Prost (WCL '79) and Judge Arthur J. Gajarsa," will be held on February 12, 2015 at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit from 4:00 PM to 5:30 PM.  

Symposium Issue

Symposium Issue

This year's Annual Symposium is titled "Bordering on Legal Limits?  A Symposium Analyzing the President's Executive Action on immigration."  The keynote speaker will be Stephen Legomsky, the John S. Lehmann University Professor at Washington University Law School and former United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Chief Counsel.  It will be held from 9:15 AM to 4:00 PM on Friday, January 30, 2015, at the law offices of Mayer Brown LLP.  Click here for more information.

Current Issue, Volume 64.2


The editors of the American University Law Review respectfully dedicate this issue to Professor Andrew Taslitz.


In Memoriam

Reforming the Grand Jury to Protect Privacy in Third Party Records

By Andrew E. Taslitz & Stephen E. Henderson 64 Am. U. L. Rev. 195 (2014)

In late 2014, two grand juries returned controversial no bill decisions in police killings, one in Ferguson, Missouri, and one in New York City. These outcomes have renewed calls for grand jury reform, and whatever one thinks of these particular processes and outcomes, such reform is long overdue. One logical source of reform to better respect privacy in records, which would have incidental benefits beyond this privacy focus, would be the newly enacted American Bar Association Standards for Criminal Justice on Law Enforcement Access to Third Party Records (LEATPR).

Battered by Law: The Political Subordination of Immigrant Women

By Mariela Olivares | 64 Am. U. L. Rev. 231 (2014)

The Article explores the state of immigrant battered women in the United States, focusing on how their identity as a politically and culturally marginalized community impacts the measure of help that they receive. Specifically, the Article examines the 2012–2013 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) reauthorization debate as an example of how membership in a marginalized community affects legislative successes and failures.

COMMENT: They Could Be Back: The Possibility of Termination Rights for Session Musicians

By Alexandra El-Bayeh | 64 Am. U. L. Rev. 285 (2014)

Beginning in 2013, many musicians became eligible to regain rights they assigned to recording companies thirty-five years ago.  Through a provision of the Copyright Act, artists can “terminate” these rights and regain control of their work as long as the work was not a “work for hire.”  This Comment focuses on session musicians’ ability to claim termination rights in their creative contributions to sound recordings. Session musicians have been the focus of increased attention because many of them signed away their rights for little payment and control and without knowing the future possible uses of their works, particularly in digital sampling.

COMMENT: A Slow March Towards Thought Crime: How the Department of Homeland Security’s FAST Program Violates the Fourth Amendment

By Christopher A. Rogers | 64 Am. U. L. Rev. 337 (2014)

The United States Government is currently developing a system that can read minds—a situation that George Orwell envisioned when he wrote Nineteen Eighty-Four. The Future Attribute Screening Technology ("FAST"), currently being tested by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), employs a variety of sensor suites to scan a person's vital signs, and based on those readings, to determine whether the scanned person has "malintent"—the intent to commit a crime.

COMMENT: Litigation Finance in the Public Interest

By Jason M. Wilson | 64 Am. U. L. Rev. 385 (2014)

In the United States, public interest organizations play a vital role in promoting access to justice and private enforcement of the law. Nevertheless, these organizations face considerable financial constraints in litigating for their causes. While the non-profit sector and private bar provide commendable support through grants and pro bono assistance, this Comment suggests that this financing model does not adequately meet the needs of organizations that undertake expensive litigation efforts on behalf of their clients. In an effort to alleviate this burden, this Comment puts forth an alternative model of funding public interest litigation by merging social entrepreneurship with the newly revitalized practice of litigation finance. Specifically, it proposes that a litigation financing firm organize as a benefit corporation to provide funding for public interest litigation in exchange for a share of any monetary relief generated. This arrangement has the potential to pair a growing community of investors interested in making a social impact with plaintiffs of worthwhile causes, and in the process, ensure greater access to justice and private enforcement of the law. Additionally, it may invigorate a growing litigation finance sector to fund cases that it has thus far chosen not to support.

Click here to view this Comment



Thank you for visiting the American University Law Review website!  This site provides a central and convenient location to browse our volumes, preview forthcoming scholarship, and learn more about our publication.  Please send any questions or comments to lawrev@wcl.american.edu.

Founded in 1952, the Law Review is the oldest and largest student-run publication at the Washington College of Law and publishes six issues each year.  The Law Review is consistently ranked among the top fifty law journals in the nation and is the most-cited journal at WCL, according to the Washington and Lee University Law Library.

Rather than focus on a particular area of law, the Law Review publishes articles, essays, and student notes and comments on a broad range of issues.  Recent topics have included the Second Amendment right to bear arms; the Freedom of Information Act; electronic copyright infringement; attorney-client privilege; immigration law; international trade law; and many other timely legal issues.

The Law Review receives approximately 2,500 submissions annually and publishes articles from professors, judges, practicing lawyers, and renowned legal thinkers.  The Law Review has published articles or commentary by Supreme Court Chief Justices Warren Burger, William Rehnquist, and Earl Warren, as well as Associate Justices Hugo Black, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Arthur Goldberg.

Click here to learn more.

Forthcoming, Vol. 64.4

Jasmine E. Harris:  Processing Disability

Cheryl B. Preston:  "Please Note: You Have Waived Everything":  Can Notice Redeem Online Contracts?

Gabriela Baca:  COMMENT:  Visa Denied:  Why Courts Should Review a Consular Officer’s Denial of a U.S.-Citizen Family Member’s Visa

Leigh E. Colihan:  COMMENT:  Child’s Play:  The Case Against the Department of Labor for Its Failure to Protect Children Working on America’s Tobacco Farms

Shahrzad Noorbaloochi:  COMMENT:  The Limits of Executive Authority to Preempt Contrary State Laws in Foreign Affairs after Medellín v. Texas






Follow Us!

facebook twitter
linkedin Instagram Icon