This first issue of our twenty-seventh volume continues one of the Journal's oldest and proudest traditions: the publication of papers from the Federalist Society's National Student Symposium. Held amidst Notre Dame's stark winter beauty, this year's symposium explored the relationship between law and human dignity and pondered the consequences of that relationship as it develops across the breadth of the law. On behalf of the Journal, I express our appreciation to the Federalist Society for sponsoring this Symposium and continuing to publish it in our pages.
One of the symposium participants, Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain, offered us a special treat. We are pleased to publish the address Judge O'Scannlain delivered last spring at Lewis and Clark Law School's commencement. Judge O'Scannlain offers a unique perspective on the dispute over the role of the judiciary and how disagreements about that role affect the judicial confirmation process.
In addition to the symposium pieces, this issue contains several articles on a number of timely subjects. We are particularly proud to present Senator John Cornyn's Our Broken Judicial Confirmation Process and the Need for Filibuster Reform. Senator Cornyn, who serves as Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Property Rights, offers the definitive account of the use of the filibuster against judicial nominations. His withering critique of current practice points toward a solution and marshals support from some surprising sources.
Mr. Paul DeCamp's article considers the future of judicial review of noneconomic compensatory damages in light of the Supreme Court's recent punitive damages jurisprudence. Grounded on a wealth of historical research and rich with analysis, Mr. DeCamp's article will prove invaluable to both scholars and litigators. Professor Joseph Viteritti returns to our pages with a powerful argument for the Court to rethink Free Exercise jurisprudence as it considers Locke v. Davey. Professor Viteritti assembles a compelling array of legal, policy, and historical arguments in support of his position. In our final article, Professor Lisa Shaw Roy considers the new frontier of science--particularly embryonic research and embryo disposition--and challenges the application of Roe outside the narrow context of abortion.
After last Term's affirmative action decisions, many on the right despaired that the legal battle was lost. …