Debates - University of Pennsylvania Law Review
The University of Pennsylvania Law Review Online is pleased to host debates between respected scholars on current controversies. The format includes an opening statement, a rebuttal, and closing statements by each side. Each contribution is expected to be one to two times the length of an average opinion/editorial newspaper article (i.e., 1,000-2,000 words), and without footnotes. Scholars interested in participating in a Penn Law Review Online Debate should visit our Submissions page.

Should We Dispense with the Electoral College?

Sanford Levinson & John McGinnis

The Future of the Dormant Commerce Clause: Abolishing the Prohibition on Discriminatory Taxation

Edward A. Zelinsky & Brannon P. Denning

Racial Profiling and the War on Terror

David Rudovsky & R. Richard Banks

Hamdan and the Military Commissions Act

Glenn Sulmasy and John Yoo & Martin S. Flaherty

Judicial Activism and its Critics

Kermit Roosevelt III & Richard W. Garnett

The Obviousness Requirement in the Patent Law

R. Polk Wagner & Katherine J. Strandburg

Is the United Nations Still Relevant?

William Burke-White & Abraham Bell