There has been a surge of publication of papers on official secrecy, national security classification and freedom of information in law reviews and other professional legal journals. Not all are equally original in their analysis or compelling in their conclusions, but they typically provide a scholarly perspective on matters of secrecy policy, and they often include valuable source citations.
Some of the more interesting new law review articles that have come to our attention are these (mostly pdf):
“Congressional Access to National Security Information” by Louis Fisher, Harvard Journal on Legislation, Volume 45, No. 1, Winter 2008.
“Classified Information Leaks and Free Speech” by Heidi Kitrosser, University of Illinois Law Review, 2008, Issue 3.
“The Chilling of Speech, Association, and the Press in Post-9/11 America” (multiple papers and conference presentations), American University Law Review, June 2008.
“Government Lawyers and Confidentiality Norms” By Kathleen Clark, Washington University Law Review, 2008.
“Our Very Privileged Executive: Why the Judiciary Can (and Should) Fix the State Secrets Privilege” by D. A. Jeremy Telman, Temple Law Review, 2007.
“‘Nothing Is So Oppressive as a Secret’: Recommendations for Reforming the State Secrets Privilege” by Emily Simpson, Temple Law Review, 2007.
“Secrecy and Access in an Innovation Intensive Economy: Reordering Information Privileges in Environmental, Health, and Safety Law,” by Mary L. Lyndon, University of Colorado Law Review, Volume 78, Issue 2, Spring 2007 (not online).
The bootcamp brought more than two dozen next-generation open-source practitioners from across the United States to Washington DC, where they participated in interactive modules, group discussions, and hands-on sleuthing.
Fourteen teams from ten U.S. states have been selected as the Stage 2 awardees in the Civic Innovation Challenge (CIVIC), a national competition that helps communities turn emerging research into ready-to-implement solutions.
The Fix Our Forests Act provides an opportunity to speed up the planning and implementation of wildfire risk reduction projects on federal lands while expanding collaborative tools to bring more partners into this vital work.
Public health insurance programs, especially Medicaid, Medicare, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), are more likely to cover populations at increased risk from extreme heat, including low-income individuals, people with chronic illnesses, older adults, disabled adults, and children.