Cover Story

| Issue 85

Your Privacy At Risk

Phone-hacking scandals at News of The World. One lawsuit after 
another alleging privacy breaches by major companies. A backlash over body-scanning machines in airport 
security lines. It’s been a busy year for those who work at the intersection of privacy law and technology.
“2011 is the year that changed privacy,” says [...]

| Issue 84

Getting to Green

When Dan Reicher was 21 years old, he and three friends from Dartmouth College set out on an audacious adventure. They kayaked the entire 1,888-mile length of the Rio Grande River, paddling from Colorado to the Gulf of Mexico.
“There were long stretches where we had to drag our kayaks through [...]

| Issue 83

The Wrongful Convictions Seminar

Most Americans likely believe that the combined weight of “beyond a shadow of a doubt” and DNA testing would prevent innocent people from being sent to jail.
But don’t be too sure.
That’s the lesson students taking Lawrence C. Marshall’s Wrongful Convictions seminar have learned. Yes, it’s true, Virginia, innocent people still [...]

| Issue 83

Saving the Criminal Justice System

When the wheels came off the U.S. economy in late 2007, it was no wonder law enforcement leaders feared that a spike in crime would be close behind. Unemployment and home foreclosures shot up, while tax revenues to support education, substance abuse and mental health services, job training, recreation programs, [...]

| Issue 82

The Empiricists

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s proposed court-packing plan of 1937 sparked decades of debate about judicial susceptibility to outside influences. After the Supreme Court struck down crucial parts of the New Deal, the president unveiled a plan to expand the size of the bench to as many as 15 justices to gain control of the Court. Yet soon after, Justice Owen J. Roberts, a center “swing” voter, aligned his vote with liberal colleagues in a pivotal case—the so-called “switch in time that saved nine.”

| Issue 81

Neurolaw

Will advances in neuroscience make the justice system more accurate and unbiased? Or could brain-based testing wrongly condemn some and trample the civil liberties of others? The new field of neurolaw is cross-examining for answers.