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.




Democracy, Political Ignorance, and Constitutional Reform

Ilya Somin & Sanford Levinson

Implicit Race Bias and the 2008 Presidential Election: Much Ado About Nothing?

Gregory S. Parks & Jeffrey J. Rachlinski & Richard A. Epstein

The Great Divorce: The Current Understanding of Separation of Powers and the Original Meaning of the Incompatibility Clause

Seth Barrett Tillman & Steven G. Calabresi

First Amendment Limits on the Regulation of Judicial Campaign Speech: Defining the Government’s Interest

Paul E. McGreal & James J. Alfini

Workplace Federalism

Paul M. Secunda & Jeffrey M. Hirsch