The Harvard Law Review, June 2015, is offered in a digital edition. Contents include: • Article, “Active Avoidance: The Modern Supreme Court and Legal Change,” by Neal Kumar Katyal and Thomas P. Schmidt • Article, “The Invention of Low-Value Speech,” by Genevieve Lakier • Book Review, “Crown and Constitution,” by Tara Helfman • Note, “Causation in Environmental Law: Lessons from Toxic Torts” In addition, the issue features extensive student commentary on Recent Cases and policy positions, including such subjects as: corporate board of directors' duties in mergers under the Revlon doctrine; the propriety of a Delaware corporation's bylaws designating a non-Delaware exclusive forum; availability of habeas corpus review for sentencing error as to 'career offender' enhancement; whether remand orders can be vacated under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3); whether housing providers can delay review of reasonable accommodations under fair housing law by requesting extraneous information; and, as to immigration law, analysis of the opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel endorsing President Obama's Executive Order on deferred action for parental accountability. Finally, the issue features summaries of Recent Publications, as well as a detailed and cumulative Index for all eight issues of Volume 128. 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 2300 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 June 2015, the eighth and final issue of academic year 2014-2015 (Volume 128). This quality digital edition from Quid Pro Books features active Contents, linked notes, active URLs in notes, and proper ebook and Bluebook formatting.

The Harvard Law Review, January 2015, No. 3 of Volume 128, is offered in a digital edition. Contents include: • Article, “Uncovering Coordinated Interagency Adjudication,” by Bijal Shah • Note, “Deference and the Federal Arbitration Act: The NLRB’s Determination of Substantive Statutory Rights” • Note, “Education Policy Litigation as Devolution” • Note, “Physically Intrusive Abortion Restrictions as Fourth Amendment Searches and Seizures” • Note, “Copyright Reform and the Takings Clause” In addition, the issue features student commentary on Recent Cases and policy resolutions, including such subjects as constitutional protection for teacher tenure, suspicionless street stop of suspect’s companion, warrants to search foreign emails, confrontation clause in sentence selection phase of capital case, subject matter jurisdiction of tribal courts, physician inquiries into gun ownership and freedom of speech, reviewability of FDA inaction on pet drug products, and veto of a UN Security Council resolution on Syrian conflict. 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 January 2015, the third issue of academic year 2014-2015 (Volume 128). The digital edition features active Contents, linked notes, and proper ebook and Bluebook formatting.

The Harvard Law Review, March 2015, is offered in a digital edition. Contents include: • Article, "Creating Around Copyright," Joseph P. Fishman • Book Review, "Growing Up Outside the Law," Stephen Lee • Book Review, "Property Is the New Privacy: The Coming Constitutional Revolution," Suzanna Sherry • Note, "Working Together for an Independent Expenditure: Candidate Assistance with Super PAC Fundraising" In addition, the issue features student commentary on Recent Cases and policy positions, including such subjects as: defining 'government instrumentality' under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, invalidation of New York soda-portion cap, whether the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission lacks jurisdiction over rates for nonconsumption of energy, standard of review for compelled disclosures under commercial speech doctrine, Alien Tort Statute claims against an Abu Ghraib contractor, preemption of local zoning ordinances banning hydrofracking, and the Department of Justice's new presumption of electronically recording custodial interviews. 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 March 2015, the fifth issue of academic year 2014-2015 (Volume 128). The digital edition features active Contents, linked notes, and proper ebook and Bluebook formatting.

Winner of the Society of the Cincinnati History Prize, Society of the Cincinnati in the State of New Jersey Finalist, George Washington Prize A Choice Outstanding Academic Title of 2015 Generations of students have been taught that the American Revolution was a revolt against royal tyranny. In this revisionist account, Eric Nelson argues that a great many of our “founding fathers” saw themselves as rebels against the British Parliament, not the Crown. The Royalist Revolution interprets the patriot campaign of the 1770s as an insurrection in favor of royal power—driven by the conviction that the Lords and Commons had usurped the just prerogatives of the monarch. “The Royalist Revolution is a thought-provoking book, and Nelson is to be commended for reviving discussion of the complex ideology of the American Revolution. He reminds us that there was a spectrum of opinion even among the most ardent patriots and a deep British influence on the political institutions of the new country.” —Andrew O’Shaughnessy, Wall Street Journal “A scrupulous archaeology of American revolutionary thought.” —Thomas Meaney, The Nation “A powerful double-barrelled challenge to historiographical orthodoxy.” —Colin Kidd, London Review of Books “[A] brilliant and provocative analysis of the American Revolution.” —John Brewer, New York Review of Books

The Harvard Law Review is offered in a digital edition, featuring active Contents and URLs, linked notes, and proper ebook formatting. The contents of Issue 8 include: Article, "Racial Capitalism," by Nancy Leong Essay, "Shallow Signals," by Bert I. Huang Book Review, "All Unhappy Families: Tales of Old Age, Rational Actors, and the Disordered Life," by Ariela R. Dubler Book Review, "Lawyers, Law, and the New Civil Rights History," by Risa Goluboff Note, "Recasting the U.S. International Trade Commission’s Role in the Patent System" Note, "Juvenile Miranda Waiver and Parental Rights" Note, "The Province of the Jurist: Judicial Resistance to Expert Testimony on Eyewitnesses as Institutional Rivalry" Note, "Proposing a Locally Driven Entrepreneur Visa" In addition, the issue features student commentary on Recent Cases, including such subjects as Illinois’s ban on public carry of firearms, "bookmarking" of infringing material as a copyright violation, causation and criminals' statutory restitution, free movement rights in the EU, local bottling and the dormant commerce clause, and binding unnamed class members with a denial of class action certification. Finally, the issue includes notes on Recent Publications as well as a comprehensive Index to Volume 126 (2012-2013).

This is an open access book.The World Anthropology Congress 2023 intends to explore multiple avenues for global peace and harmony for sustainable development of humankind, particularly of the indigenous, Adivasi and tribal people of the world. It is now well understood that Anthropology as a discipline can lend a powerful voice to non-hegemonic and marginalized cultural perspectives on both Global Peace and Development for ensuring social justice to the tribal and autochthones people. Since Global Peace and Development are multi-layered processes and Anthropology promotes the tradition of multifaceted thinking that ranges from the local to the global and traverses the space in bet ween, the discipline can unveil new dimensions in promoting lasting peace and sustained human development. Further, accumulated scientific evidence proves that many non -violent societies co-existed peacefully as a norm throughout the prehistoric period of the human existence. This indicates that human co-existence and peace were not mere words, but concepts that are integral to the texts of Anthropology. Therefore, deliberations in this Congress will contribute to the processes of Peace and Development of human society at different levels. The proposed World Anthropology Congress 2023 will continue this line of enquiry by playing a crucial role in creating a more contemporary and relevant debate on indigeneity, social justice, and global peace.

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.