Law Review

Boston University Law Review Online

· · 7 min read · 14 views

Boston University Law Review Online, formerly known as theBoston University Law Review Annex, isBoston University Law Review’s online publication featuring symposia and essays, including invited responses, perspectives and student notes.

ForOnline Essays(non-symposia) only, please visit thispage.

Serena MayeriOnline Symposium: Serena Mayeri’sMarital Privilege105 B.U. L. Rev. Online 87 (2025).

Katie EyerOnline Symposium: Serena Mayeri’sMarital Privilege105 B.U. L. Rev. Online 79 (2025).

Linda C. McClainOnline Symposium: Serena Mayeri’sMarital Privilege105 B.U. L. Rev. Online 69 (2025).

Deborah DinnerOnline Symposium: Serena Mayeri’sMarital Privilege105 B.U. L. Rev. Online 63 (2025).

Jessica Dixon WeaverOnline Symposium: Serena Mayeri’sMarital Privilege105 B.U. L. Rev. Online 59 (2025).

Cary FranklinOnline Symposium: Serena Mayeri’sMarital Privilege105 B.U. L. Rev. Online 51 (2025).

Albertina AntogniniOnline Symposium: Serena Mayeri’sMarital Privilege105 B.U. L. Rev. Online 43 (2025).

Laura Pedraza-FariñaInvited Response: Laura Pedraza-Fariña,Innovation and the Limits of Predictive Governance105 B.U. L. Rev. Online 27 (2025).

Matthew L. M. FletcherOnline Symposium: Carla D. Pratt’sIndianness as Property(2025).105 B.U. Law Review Online 17 (2025).

Andrea J. MartinOnline Symposium: Carla D. Pratt’sIndianness as Property(2025).105 B.U. Law Review Online 1 (2025).

Serena MayeriOnline Symposium: Reva Siegel and Mary Ziegler’sComstockery(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 275 (2024).

David S. Cohen&Rachel RebouchéOnline Symposium: Reva Siegel and Mary Ziegler’sComstockery(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 265 (2024).

Michael C. DorfOnline Symposium: Reva Siegel and Mary Ziegler’sComstockery(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 257 (2024).

Scott L. CummingsOnline Symposium: Reva Siegel and Mary Ziegler’sComstockery(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 249 (2024).

David S. Cohen&Rachel RebouchéOnline Symposium: Reva Siegel and Mary Ziegler’sComstockery(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 243 (2024).

Laura PortuondoOnline Symposium: Reva Siegel and Mary Ziegler’sComstockery(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 237 (2024).

Elizabeth MertzOnline Symposium: Asad Rahim’sThe Legitimacy Trap(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 233 (2024).

Patricia J. WilliamsOnline Symposium: Asad Rahim’sThe Legitimacy Trap(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 227 (2024).

William M. TreanorOnline Symposium: Asad Rahim’sThe Legitimacy Trap(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 217 (2024).

Susan SturmOnline Symposium: Asad Rahim’sThe Legitimacy Trap(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 211 (2024).

Martha F. DavisOnline Symposium:Advancing Pregnant Persons’ Right to Life(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 161 (2024).

Rebecca E. ZietlowOnline Symposium:Advancing Pregnant Persons’ Right to Life(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 143 (2024).

Jessie HillOnline Symposium:Advancing Pregnant Persons’ Right to Life(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 67 (2024).

Caroline Mala CorbinOnline Symposium:Advancing Pregnant Persons’ Right to Life(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 37 (2024).

David A. Carillo,Allison G. Macbeth&Daniel BogardOnline Symposium:Advancing Pregnant Persons’ Right to Life(2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 19 (2024).

India ThusiOnline Book Symposium: Devon Carbado’sUnreasonable(2023-2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 15 (2024).

Joel ModiriOnline Book Symposium: Devon Carbado’sUnreasonable(2023-2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 11 (2024).

Jasmine Gonzales RoseOnline Book Symposium: Devon Carbado’sUnreasonable(2023-2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 8 (2024).

Jonathan P. FeingoldOnline Book Symposium: Devon Carbado’sUnreasonable(2023-2024).104 B.U. Law Review Online 1 (2024).

Vinay HarpalaniOnline Symposium: Vinay Harpalani’sAsian Americans, Racial Stereotypes, and Elite University Admissions(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 151 (2023).

Shakira D. PleasantOnline Symposium: Vinay Harpalani’sAsian Americans, Racial Stereotypes, and Elite University Admissions(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 147 (2023).

Matthew Patrick ShawOnline Symposium: Vinay Harpalani’sAsian Americans, Racial Stereotypes, and Elite University Admissions(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 140 (2023).

Robert S. ChangOnline Symposium: Vinay Harpalani’sAsian Americans, Racial Stereotypes, and Elite University Admissions(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 136 (2023).

Stacy L. HawkinsOnline Symposium: Vinay Harpalani’sAsian Americans, Racial Stereotypes, and Elite University Admissions(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 131 (2023).

Naomi MannOnline Symposium:Title IX at 50: Learning from the Past & Looking to the Future(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 121 (2023).

Kelly Alison BehreOnline Symposium:Title IX at 50: Learning from the Past & Looking to the Future(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 109 (2023).

Lexi WeyrickOnline Symposium:Title IX at 50: Learning from the Past & Looking to the Future(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 103 (2023).

Kelsey ScarlettOnline Symposium:Title IX at 50: Learning from the Past & Looking to the Future(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 96 (2023).

Aliza Hochman Bloom103 B.U. Law Review Online 59 (2023).

Nancy Chi CantalupoOnline Symposium:Title IX at 50: Learning from the Past & Looking to the Future(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 53 (2023).

Kyle C. VelteOnline Symposium:Title IX at 50: Learning from the Past & Looking to the Future(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 44 (2023).

Phil CatanzanoOnline Symposium:Title IX at 50: Learning from the Past & Looking to the Future(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 35 (2023).

Shiwali PatelOnline Symposium:Title IX at 50: Learning from the Past & Looking to the Future(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 25 (2023).

Alexandra BrodskyOnline Symposium:Title IX at 50: Learning from the Past & Looking to the Future(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 19 (2023).

Katherine SilbaughOnline Symposium:Title IX at 50: Learning from the Past & Looking to the Future(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 12 (2023).

Linda C. McClainOnline Symposium:Title IX at 50: Learning from the Past & Looking to the Future(2023).103 B.U. Law Review Online 1 (2023).

Aderson B. FrancoisInvited Response:Aderson B. Francois,Building a New Constitutional Jerusalem: A Review ofThe Antiracist Constitution102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 98 (2022).

Bruce A. GreenInvited Response: Bruce A. Green,Can the Fourth Amendment Keep People “Secure in their Persons”?(2022).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 92 (2022).

Mark P. McKennaOnline Symposium: Jessica Silbey,Against Progress: Intellectual Property and Fundamental Values in the Internet Age(2022).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 87 (2022).

Orly LobelOnline Symposium: Jessica Silbey,Against Progress: Intellectual Property and Fundamental Values in the Internet Age(2022).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 82 (2022).

Laura A. HeymannOnline Symposium: Jessica Silbey,Against Progress: Intellectual Property and Fundamental Values in the Internet Age(2022).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 78 (2022).

Leah Chan GrinvaldOnline Symposium: Jessica Silbey,Against Progress: Intellectual Property and Fundamental Values in the Internet Age(2022).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 74 (2022).

Jorge L. ContrerasOnline Symposium: Jessica Silbey,Against Progress: Intellectual Property and Fundamental Values in the Internet Age(2022).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 69 (2022).

Margaret ChonOnline Symposium: Jessica Silbey,Against Progress: Intellectual Property and Fundamental Values in the Internet Age(2022).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 65 (2022).

Barton BeebeOnline Symposium: Jessica Silbey,Against Progress: Intellectual Property and Fundamental Values in the Internet Age(2022).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 61 (2022).

In the words of British Prime Minster Margaret Thatcher: “There is no such thing as society.” Beebe critiques the “progress is more” theory of intellectual property law, and supports Silbey’s idea of progress as concerned with the well-being of creative workers and the intrinsic human rewards of creative labor.

Paul EnríquezOnline Symposium: Paul Enríquez,Rewriting Nature: The Future of Genome Editing and How to Bridge the Gap Between Law and Science(2021).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 42 (2022).

One of Enríquez’s goals in writing the bookRewriting Naturewas to help spur robust dialogue and debate about the future of genome editing and the synergistic roles that law, science and public policy can play in promoting or hindering specific uses of the technology. Enríquez continues the conversation.

Allison M. Whelan&Michele GoodwinOnline Symposium: Paul Enríquez,Rewriting Nature: The Future of Genome Editing and How to Bridge the Gap Between Law and Science(2021).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 37 (2022).

Historically, presumptions about human genetics fueled racial stereotypes and weaponized law and medicine to inflict harm on vulnerable populations. To what extent does contemporary discourse on genetics reify the old or chart new and different pathways forward?

Sonia M. Suter&Naomi R. CahnOnline Symposium: Paul Enríquez,Rewriting Nature: The Future of Genome Editing and How to Bridge the Gap Between Law and Science(2021).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 29 (2022).

In this contribution, Suter and Cahn challenge Enríquez’s articulation of a constitutional right to use germline gene editing and question the appropriate means of regulation.

Jacob S. SherkowOnline Symposium: Paul Enríquez,Rewriting Nature: The Future of Genome Editing and How to Bridge the Gap Between Law and Science(2021).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 22 (2022).

Sherkow pushes back on Enríquez’s call for the “adoption of a (more) uniform definition of genome editing” using examples and lessons learned from FDA Law.

Henry T. GreelyOnline Symposium: Paul Enríquez,Rewriting Nature: The Future of Genome Editing and How to Bridge the Gap Between Law and Science(2021).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 16 (2022).

Walter Savage Landor once said, “There is nothing on earth divine besides humanity.” Greely, on the other hand, is tempted to consider humanity a metastatic tumor on the Earth’s biosphere. In this contribution, Greely discusses non-human genome editing in more depth.

Katherine DrabiakOnline Symposium: Paul Enríquez,Rewriting Nature: The Future of Genome Editing and How to Bridge the Gap Between Law and Science(2021).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 7 (2022).

This commentary focuses on the section of theRewriting Naturethat sets forth a framework describing how the law should classify germline modification of human embryos and offers an alternative analysis.

Dana CarrollOnline Symposium: Paul Enríquez,Rewriting Nature: The Future of Genome Editing and How to Bridge the Gap Between Law and Science(2021).102 B.U. L. Rev. Online 1 (2022).

Genome editing is a powerful technology that allows the modification of individual DNA sequences in essentially any organism. The advent of Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (“CRISPR”) has simplified the procedures of genome editing, extending its range in research, medicine, and agriculture. While scientists are busy modifying genomes, discussions of how societies can find a path to derive the benefits of the technology and avoid its misuses are welcome and timely.

Executive Summary

The Boston University Law Review Online features various symposia and essays on contemporary legal topics, including marital privilege, indigenous property rights, and reproductive rights. The online publication provides a platform for scholars to engage in discussions and debates on pressing legal issues. Recent symposia have focused on the work of notable scholars, such as Serena Mayeri and Carla D. Pratt, and have explored topics like predictive governance and the legitimacy trap.

Key Points

  • ▸ The Boston University Law Review Online publishes symposia and essays on a range of legal topics
  • ▸ Recent symposia have focused on marital privilege, indigenous property rights, and reproductive rights
  • ▸ The online publication provides a platform for scholars to engage in discussions and debates on contemporary legal issues

Merits

Interdisciplinary Approach

The publication's focus on various legal topics and inclusion of diverse scholarly perspectives enhances its interdisciplinary approach and relevance to contemporary legal discourse

Scholarly Engagement

The online symposia and essays facilitate engagement and debate among scholars, promoting a deeper understanding of complex legal issues

Demerits

Limited Accessibility

The online publication may not be readily accessible to all individuals, particularly those without institutional affiliations or access to academic databases

Variable Quality

The quality of the essays and symposia may vary, potentially impacting the publication's overall credibility and reputation

Expert Commentary

The Boston University Law Review Online provides a valuable platform for scholars to engage in nuanced discussions and debates on pressing legal issues. The publication's interdisciplinary approach and focus on contemporary topics enhance its relevance to legal academia and practice. However, the variable quality of the essays and symposia, as well as limited accessibility, may impact the publication's overall credibility and reach. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, the Boston University Law Review Online is well-positioned to facilitate scholarly engagement and inform legal discourse.

Recommendations

  • ✓ The publication should prioritize accessibility and make its content available to a broader audience, including practitioners and policymakers
  • ✓ The editors should strive to maintain a high level of quality and consistency across the essays and symposia, potentially through more rigorous peer review and editing processes

Sources

Related Articles