DOCSLIB.ORG

Law Journals: Submissions and Ranking Feedback to Stephanie Miller Explanation Ranking Methodology Combined Score Impact- Factor Currency-Factor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Law Journals: Submissions and Ranking Feedback to Stephanie Miller Explanation Ranking Methodology Combined Score Impact- Factor Currency-Factor Law Journals: Submissions and Ranking Feedback to Stephanie Miller Explanation Ranking methodology Combined score Impact- factor Currency-factor All Subjects For Editorial R Co CaC Information I Jn C an mb se os A Select left, then All Countries F ls F English non- k . s t English 20 Multi Sep B 11 Jnl-name words arate then General Specialized older surveys C Check create Student-edited Peer-edited Refereed spreadsheet To submit Print Online-only articles to law journals Ranked Non-ranked Submit clear Submit via Rank (e.g. 15,17-25) LexOpus 0.33 ImpF-Weight (0..1) Combi Rank Journal ned 04- 11 1 Harvard Law Review 100 2 Columbia Law Review 85.8 3 The Yale Law Journal 80.3 4 Stanford Law Review 79.3 5 Michigan Law Review 69.5 6 California Law Review 67.2 7 University of Pennsylvania Law 66.6 Review 8 Texas Law Review 66.2 9 Virginia Law Review 65.6 10 Minnesota Law Review 63.9 11 UCLA Law Review 63.4 12 The Georgetown Law Journal 62.8 13 New York University Law 62.7 Review 14 Cornell Law Review 59.8 15 Northwestern University Law 59.7 Review 16 Fordham Law Review 59.5 17 Notre Dame Law Review 56.1 18 Vanderbilt Law Review 51.6 18 William and Mary Law Review 51.6 20 The University of Chicago Law 48.9 Review 21 Iowa Law Review 48.4 22 Boston University Law Review 47.2 23 Duke Law Journal 46.3 24 North Carolina Law Review 41 25 Emory Law Journal 40.7 26 Southern California Law 40.2 Review 27 Cardozo Law Review 39.6 28 Boston College Law Review 38.1 28 The George Washington Law 38.1 Review 30 UC Davis Law Review 36.9 31 Hastings Law Journal 36.4 32 Harvard Journal of Law & 35.7 Technology 33 American Journal of 34.8 International Law 34 Indiana Law Journal 33.9 34 University of Illinois Law 33.9 Review 36 Wisconsin Law Review 33.3 37 Harvard International Law 31.8 Journal 38 Wake Forest Law Review 30.9 38 Washington and Lee Law 30.9 Review 40 Florida Law Review 30.8 41 American University Law 30.5 Review 41 Houston Law Review 30.5 43 Supreme Court Review 30.2 44 Ohio State Law Journal 29.8 45 Connecticut Law Review 29.7 46 Washington University Law 29.5 Review 47 Virginia Journal of 29.2 International Law 48 Arizona Law Review 28.8 48 University of Colorado Law 28.8 Review 50 Harvard Civil Rights-Civil 28.2 Liberties Law Review 51 Harvard Journal of Law & 28.1 Public Policy 52 Lewis & Clark Law Review 27.8 53 Berkeley Technology Law 27.3 Journal 53 The Harvard Environmental 27.3 Law Review 55 Brooklyn Law Review 27.2 56 University of Cincinnati Law 27.1 Review 57 Yale Journal on Regulation 26.8 58 Journal of Legal 26.2 Analysis (2009-) 59 Michigan State Law Review 26.1 60 Harvard Journal on Legislation 26 61 Hofstra Law Review 25.2 62 University of Pennsylvania 25.1 Journal of Constitutional Law 63 The Journal of Criminal Law 24.7 and Criminology 64 Alabama Law Review 24.6 64 DePaul Law Review 24.6 66 The American Journal of 24.3 Comparative Law 67 Akron Law Review 24.2 68 Columbia Journal of 24 Transnational Law 68 Tulane Law Review 24 70 Journal of Empirical Legal 23.9 Studies (2004-) 71 Law and Contemporary 23.3 Problems 72 University of Michigan Journal 23.1 of Law Reform 73 Florida State University Law 22.9 Review 74 The Journal of Legal Studies 22.6 75 Georgia Law Review 22.5 75 Washington Law Review 22.5 77 The Journal of Corporation Law 22.2 78 Michigan Journal of 22.1 International Law 79 Buffalo Law Review 21.8 79 Michigan Telecommunications 21.8 and Technology Law Review 81 Harvard Law & Policy 21.7 Review (2007-) 82 Chicago Journal of 21.6 International Law 83 Cornell Journal of Law and 21.4 Public Policy 83 Utah Law Review 21.4 85 American Criminal Law 21.3 Review 86 Brigham Young University 21.1 Law Review 86 San Diego Law Review 21.1 86 University of Chicago Legal 21.1 Forum 89 The Georgetown Journal of 21 Legal Ethics 90 Yale Law & Policy Review 20.7 91 Fordham Urban Law Journal 20.6 91 George Mason Law Review 20.6 93 The Business Lawyer 20.4 93 Cato Supreme Court Review 20.4 95 The Yale Journal of 20.3 International Law 96 Stanford Law & Policy Review 19.9 96 Supreme Court Economic 19.9 Review 98 Pepperdine Law Review 19.6 99 Arizona State Law Journal 19.5 99 European Journal of 19.5 International law (United Kingdom) 99 Loyola of Los Angeles Law 19.5 Review 99 Ohio State Journal of Criminal 19.5 Law (2003-) 103 Delaware Journal of Corporate 19.2 Law 103 Harvard National Security 19.2 Journal (2010-) 105 Harvard Journal of Law & 19 Gender 105 Yale Journal of Law & 19 Technology [online] 107 American Business Law 18.9 Journal 107 William & Mary Bill of Rights 18.9 Journal 109 Administrative Law Review 18.7 109 Penn State Law Review 18.7 109 Yale Journal of Health Policy, 18.7 Law, and Ethics 112 Constitutional Commentary 18.4 112 University of Richmond Law 18.4 Review 114 Missouri Law Review 18.2 114 New York University 18.2 Environmental Law Journal 116 SMU Law Review 18.1 116 The University of Kansas Law 18.1 Review 118 Vanderbilt Journal of 18 Transnational Law 119 Cardozo Arts & Entertainment 17.9 Law Journal 120 Case Western Reserve Law 17.8 Review 121 Catholic University Law 17.5 Review 122 Chicago-Kent Law Review 17.4 123 Nevada Law Journal 17.3 123 Stanford Environmental Law 17.3 Journal 123 Villanova Law Review 17.3 126 Columbia Human Rights Law 17.2 Review 126 Santa Clara Computer and High 17.2 Technology Law Journal 126 Santa Clara Law Review 17.2 129 Columbia Journal of Gender 17.1 and Law 129 Harvard Negotiation Law 17.1 Review 131 Oregon Law Review 17 132 Temple Law Review 16.8 133 Nebraska Law Review 16.7 133 Seton Hall Law Review 16.7 135 The American Bankruptcy Law 16.6 Journal 136 Maryland Law Review 16.5 137 Columbia Journal of 16.4 Environmental Law 137 Denver University Law Review 16.4 137 Fordham Intellectual Property, 16.4 Media & Entertainment Law Journal 137 Fordham International Law 16.4 Journal 137 South Carolina Law Review 16.4 137 University of Miami Law 16.4 Review 143 Berkeley Business Law 16.3 Journal (2004-) 143 New York University Review 16.3 of Law & Social Change 143 Theoretical Inquiries in 16.3 Law (Israel) 146 Albany Law Review 16.1 146 University of Pennsylvania 16.1 Journal of Business Law 148 Rutgers Law Review 15.9 148 St. John's Law Review 15.9 150 Berkeley Journal of 15.8 International Law 150 New England Law Review 15.8 150 Stanford Journal of Civil Rights 15.8 and Civil Liberties (2005-) 153 Loyola University Chicago Law 15.7 Journal 154 Northwestern University Law 15.6 Review Colloquy (2006- )[online] 155 Cornell International Law 15.4 Journal 155 University of Pittsburgh Law 15.4 Review 157 New York Law School Law 15.3 Review 157 University of Pennsylvania 15.3 Journal of International Law 159 Antitrust Law Journal 15.2 159 Ecology Law Quarterly 15.2 161 George Washington 15.1 International Law Review 162 Kentucky Law Journal 15 163 Environmental Law 14.9 163 Law & Social Inquiry 14.9 163 Stanford Technology Law 14.9 Review [online] 166 Seattle University Law Review 14.8 166 Stanford Journal of 14.8 International Law 168 The Review of Litigation 14.6 169 Boston College Journal of Law 14.5 and Social Justice 169 Drake Law Review 14.5 169 Journal of Law and Policy 14.5 169 New York University Annual 14.5 Survey of American Law 169 Tax Law Review 14.5 169 Valparaiso University Law 14.5 Review 175 American Bankruptcy Institute 14.4 Law Review 175 American Journal of Law & 14.4 Medicine 175 Baylor Law Review 14.4 175 The Journal of Law, Medicine 14.4 & Ethics 179 Clinical Law Review 14.3 179 The Columbia Journal of Law 14.3 & the Arts 179 Hastings Constitutional Law 14.3 Quarterly 182 Columbia Business Law 14.2 Review 182 Law and Inequality 14.2 182 Washington University Journal 14.2 of Law and Policy 185 Louisiana Law Review 14.1 185 Minnesota Journal of Law, 14.1 Science & Technology 185 Saint Louis University Law 14.1 Journal 188 Howard Law Journal 13.9 189 Berkeley Journal of 13.8 Employment and Labor Law 189 Journal of National Security 13.8 Law & Policy (2005-) 189 Marquette Law Review 13.8 189 Virginia Journal of Law & 13.8 Technology [online] 193 Michigan Journal of Race & 13.7 Law 193 Texas International Law 13.7 Journal 195 Boston College Environmental 13.6 Affairs Law Review 195 Cleveland State Law Review 13.6 195 The Hastings Business Law 13.6 Journal (2005-) 195 The Journal of Law & Politics 13.6 195 The Virginia Journal of Social 13.6 Policy & the Law 200 Boston College International 13.5 and Comparative Law Review 200 Columbia Science and 13.5 Technology Law Review [online] 200 Duke Journal of Gender Law & 13.5 Policy 200 Journal of Tort Law (2006- 13.5 )[online] 200 University of San Francisco 13.5 Law Review 200 William Mitchell Law Review 13.5 206 Marquette Intellectual Property 13.4 Law Review 206 Ohio State Journal on Dispute 13.4 Resolution 206 Tennessee Law Review 13.4 206 UMKC Law Review 13.4 210 Brooklyn Journal of 13.2 International Law 211 California Western Law 13.1 Review 211 Duke Law & Technology 13.1 Review [online] 211 Michigan Journal of Gender & 13.1 Law 211 North Carolina Journal of Law 13.1 & Technology 211 Rutgers Law Journal 13.1 211 Suffolk University Law Review 13.1 217 Annual Review of Law and 13 Social Science (2005-) 217 Virginia Tax Review 13 219 Duke Environmental Law & 12.9 Policy Forum 219 Duke Journal of Comparative & 12.9 International Law 219 Journal of High Technology 12.9 Law [online] 222 Washburn Law Journal 12.8 222 Yale Journal of Law and 12.8 Feminism 224 Boston University International 12.7 Law Journal 224 Boston University Journal of 12.7 Science & Technology Law 224 Vermont Law Review 12.7 227 Harvard Human
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Regulating Sports Gaming Data
    REGULATING SPORTS GAMING DATA Ryan M. Rodenberg* I. INTRODUCTION “Congress can regulate sports gambling directly, but if it elects not to do so, each State is free to act on its own,” concluded the U.S. Supreme Court in Gov. Murphy v. NCAA.1 In the two years since the Supreme Court declared the partial federal sports betting ban in the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (“PASPA”)2 unconstitutional and, in turn, opened up the legalization of sports betting nationwide, there has been one topic that has garnered considerable attention—sports gaming data. ‘Data’—a generic word that includes news and information about sports gaming—has become one of the most-discussed contemporary topics in sports gaming regulation globally.3 Indeed, since the Supreme Court case, the regulatory treatment of sports betting news, information, and data has taken a prominent role in dozens of legislative bodies, at numerous industry conferences, and in a prominent lawsuit recently filed in the United Kingdom. Industry * Associate Professor, Florida State University. This paper was completed in conjunction with a non-resident research fellowship granted by the International Center for Gaming Regulation (“ICGR”) at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The ICGR is an academic institute dedicated to the study of gaming regulation and policy development. The author would like to thank the ICGR for its research support and Christopher Perrigan for excellent research assistance. 1 Murphy v. Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n, 138 S. Ct. 1461, 1484–85 (2018). As of June 20, 2020, there remains a spin-off legal proceeding in the court system that is unrelated to the foci here.
    [Show full text]
  • Tribal Public Health Law Resource Table
    TRIBAL HEALTH Table Tribal Public Health Law Resource Table The Tribal Public Health Law Resource Table lists organizations with experience in tribal and public health law classified under I. Epidemiology Centers, II. Academic, III. Non-profit and Public, and IV. Legal Services. Contact information and relevant areas of practice or foci are also provided (to the extent available). I. Epidemiology Centers Tribal Epidemiological Practice: Broad policy-based disease prevention and control. 12 centers Contact info for individual centers: Centers nationally https://tribalepicenters.org/ Example: Development of immunization program to track state and Indian Health Service (Federal Indian Health Service) immunization registry overlap (https://tribalepicenters.org/). Alaska Native Epidemiology (907) 729-4569 Anchorage, AK Practice: Monitoring and reporting health data, providing technical assistance and Center [email protected] supporting initiatives to promote health. Serves American Indians and Alaska Natives. (Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium) Albuquerque Area (505) 764-0036 Albuquerque, Practice: Providing health-related research, surveillance and training to improve the Southwest Tribal NM [email protected] quality of life. Serves American Indians and Alaska Natives in Colorado, New Mexico, Epidemiology Center Texas, and Utah. (Albuquerque Area Indian Health Board) California Tribal (916) 929-9761 Sacramento, Practice: Broad policy-based disease prevention and control. Serves American Epidemiology Center CA Request Technical
    [Show full text]
  • The World's Only Gaming Law Degree
    THE WORLD’S ONLY GAMING LAW DEGREE. In the gaming capital of the world. William S. Boyd School of Law MASTER OF LAWS (LL.M.) IN GAMING LAW AND REGULATION s gaming continues to expand throughout the world, we see an increased need for talented and knowledgeable gaming lawyers. AWith our location in an international gaming destination, you will gain access to globally renowned gaming professionals and regulators, observe and learn from cutting-edge debates and decision making, and make lasting professional connections that will serve you well at the beginning of and throughout your law career. “I loved every minute of my experience as an LL.M. gaming law student. I have grown professionally and was the beneficiary of this exceptional program. In addition to the excellent legal education I received, the LL.M. program provides flexibility for students to craft unique learning experiences whether they be academic or industry specific. Some of my learning opportunities included collaborating with faculty on a book, creating a casino game, and getting an inside look at casino operations through the externship program.” Becky Harris, Former State Senator and current Chairwoman of the Nevada Gaming Control Board (LL.M., 2016) law.unlv.edu Why should I pursue an LL.M. in Gaming Law? • Technology Innovation. The online gaming infrastructure and its related applications are developing at a rapid pace. Lawyers and industry professionals CURRICULUM* must anticipate technology advancements and their impacts on regulators and 24 units on the industry. REQUIRED COURSES: • Global Gaming. Gaming is a booming multi-billion dollar industry within the 12 units United States, and it continues to flourish worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Responsible Gaming Regulations & Statutes
    RESPONSIBLE GAMING REGULATIONS & STATUTES AUGUST 2016 Introduction 3 The States 6 Colorado 7 Delaware 9 Florida 11 Illinois 15 Indiana 23 Iowa 30 Kansas 32 Louisiana 37 Maine 51 Maryland 59 Massachusetts 66 Michigan 86 Mississippi 91 Missouri 97 Nevada 105 New Jersey 110 New Mexico 118 New York 125 Ohio 136 Oklahoma 138 Pennsylvania 141 Rhode Island 161 South Dakota 163 West Virginia 164 American Gaming Association 2 INTRODUCTION Responsible gaming programs are a critical The compilation and release of this publication part of everyday business practices in the U.S. is reflective of the industry’s ongoing casino industry. The central goal of these commitment to responsible gaming. programs is universal - to ensure that patrons safely and responsibly enjoy casino games as Viewed holistically, across the many a form of entertainment. jurisdictions in which commercial casinos now operate in the U.S., this compendium The industry has in place numerous policies underscores the degree to which common and initiatives to achieve this goal including approaches to responsible gaming have support for best practices research, the emerged across the various states. Whether development and distribution of educational driven by improved information sharing or materials for customers and other stakeholders, increased knowledge based on research and and extensive and ongoing employee training, real world experience, consensus is forming among other things. with respect to which policies, programs and initiatives are most effective in the area of Responsible gaming programs operate in responsible gaming. compliance and in parallel with state laws and regulations on responsible gaming, including State requirements throughout this document the funding and provision of problem gambling are organized by subject – such as self- services.
    [Show full text]
  • Partners Honored As Lawyer of the Year by Best Lawyers
    PARTNERS HONORED AS LAWYER OF THE YEAR BY BEST LAWYERS Press Release Professionals 85 LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE ATTORNEYS IN THE BEST ■ Anne Aikman-Scalese LAWYERS IN AMERICA 2018 ■ Amy E. Altshuler 08/15/2017 ■ Bryant D. Barber ■ Edwin A. Barkel PHOENIX – Lewis Roca announces that 12 partners are named Lawyer of the Year ■ Frederick J. Baumann in The Best Lawyers in America® 2018. A total of 85 the firm’s lawyers are included ■ Stephen M. Bressler in the new edition of Best Lawyers. ■ John Carson ■ Rob Charles Best Lawyers lists are compiled annually by conducting peer-review surveys in which ■ Howard E. Cole leading lawyers confidentially evaluate their professional peers. Lawyer of the Year ■ Carla A. Consoli awards are presented to a single outstanding lawyer in each practice area and ■ Ross L. Crown designated metropolitan area. ■ Dale A. Danneman ■ Scott D. DeWald Lewis Roca lawyers named Lawyer of the Year in their respective cities and practice ■ Thomas J. Dougherty areas include: ■ Susan M. Freeman Albuquerque ■ Michael T. Hallam ■ Gregory Y. Harris ■ Jeffrey H. Albright - Environmental Law ■ Stephen M. Hart ■ Frances J. Haynes Denver ■ Joel D. Henriod ■ Steven J. Hulsman ■ Fred Baumann – Bet-the-Company Litigation ■ William P. Johnson ■ Lawrence A. Kasten Las Vegas ■ Kevin M. Kelly ■ ■ Anthony Cabot – Gaming Law Peter A. Larson ■ James M. Lyons Phoenix ■ Scott Y. MacTaggart ■ H. William Mahaffey ■ Bruce Samuels - Copyright Law and Trademark Law ■ Michael J. McCue ■ Bryant Barber – Municipal Law ■ Robert H. McKirgan ■ Linda M. Mitchell ■ Stephen Bressler – Mass Tort Litigation/Class Action-Defendants ■ Franklin D. O'Loughlin ■ Thomas Campbell – Energy Law ■ Ben M.
    [Show full text]
  • International Narcotics Control Strategy Report
    United States Department of State Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs International Narcotics Control Strategy Report Volume II Money Laundering and Financial Crimes March 2014 INCSR 2014 Volume II Common Abbreviations Table of Contents Volume II Common Abbreviations .................................................................................................... iii Legislative Basis for the INCSR ................................................................................... 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3 Bilateral Activities ......................................................................................................... 4 Training and Technical Assistance ........................................................................................................... 4 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System ................................................. 5 Department of Homeland Security .............................................................................. 6 Customs and Border Protection ................................................................................................................ 6 Homeland Security Investigations ............................................................................................................ 6 Department of Justice .................................................................................................. 8 Drug Enforcement
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Recourse for Victims of Gaming Fraud
    SMITH FORMATTED 5.22.17.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 5/30/17 2:23 PM CHEATER’S JUSTICE: JUDICIAL RECOURSE FOR VICTIMS OF GAMING FRAUD Jordan T. Smith* I. INTRODUCTION Legends of extrajudicial “cheater’s justice” dealt upon gaming con-artists and swindlers have deep historical roots. In the Old West, a card shark may have been shot on sight.1 Later, when the mob (allegedly) ran Las Vegas, a hustler might have been given the choice of “hav[ing] the money and the hammer or [walking] out of here,” but not both.2 Gradually, as gambling became more socially acceptable and government regulation of it increased, disputants transitioned from wielding brutish self-help remedies to pursuing legal retribution.3 Today, courts largely accept that a party cheated in a gambling game can recover any losses in a civil action without necessarily being limited to administrative remedies through a state’s gaming regulators.4 * Mr. Smith is an attorney in Nevada. The views expressed in this Article belong solely to the Author and do not reflect the views of any employer or client. 1 See People v. Grimes, 64 P. 101, 103 (Cal. 1901) (“The deceased may have treated the appellant unfairly and unjustly in the matter of the game of cards, but that treatment gave appellant no legal excuse or justification for taking his life.”); see also State v. Vansant, 80 Mo. 67, 73–74, 1883 WL 9952, *5 (1883); Johnson v. State, 10 S.W. 235, 236 (Tex. App. 1888); State v. Shadwell, 57 P. 281 (Mont. 1899).
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 10 (2013) | ISSN 1932-1821 (Print) 1932-1996 (Online) DOI 10.5195/Taxreview.2013.18 |
    Volume 10 (2013) | ISSN 1932-1821 (print) 1932-1996 (online) DOI 10.5195/taxreview.2013.18 | http://taxreview.law.pitt.edu This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. This journal is published by the University Library System of the University of Pittsburgh as part of its D-Scribe Digital Publishing Program, and is cosponsored by the University of Pittsburgh Press. PITTSBURGH TAX REVIEW Volume 10 Spring 2013 Issue 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLES WHEN ARE DAMAGES TAX FREE?: THE ELUSIVE MEANING OF “PHYSICAL INJURY” Ronald H. Jensen ................................................................... 87 ENTRY-LEVEL ENTREPRENEURS AND THE CHOICE-OF-ENTITY CHALLENGE Emily Ann Satterthwaite ...................................................... 139 NOTE AVOIDING DELEGATION DOCTRINE CHALLENGES TO INTERNET SALES TAX LEGISLATION: LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE MAIN STREET FAIRNESS ACT Michael J. Bouey ................................................................. 203 Pitt Tax Review | ISSN 1932-1821 (print) 1932-1996 (online) DOI 10.5195/taxreview.2013.18 | http://taxreview.law.pitt.edu i PITTSBURGH TAX REVIEW Volume 10 Spring 2013 Issue 2 2012 – 2013 EDITORIAL BOARD Senior Editors Michael J. Bouey Editor-in-Chief James Flannery Mirit Eyal-Cohen Anthony C. Infanti Faculty Editor Chief Faculty Editor Faculty Editor Sarah Martin John W. Kettering Executive Editor Production Editor Saheli Chakrabarty Ryan P. Hinsey Jeremiah Vandermark Notes Editor Articles Editors Jennifer Saint-Preux Sarah J. Ratzkin Research Editor Bluebook Editor Managing Editors Ashley Hileman Brian Fraile Sam Pangas Max Slater Kelly Smith Associate Editors Becky Armady Sung Un Kim Sean M. O’Rourke Patrick Carew Frank Kimmel Emily Osgood Jamie L. Davis Sarah Knerr Ryan Perlson Katelyn M.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to the Law of Internet Gambling
    Gambling and the Law®: An Introduction to the Law of Internet Gambling I. Nelson Rose Abstract This article brings to gaming researchers, with or without a legal education, a roundup of major issues and problems in the unsettled field of Internet gaming. By citing laws, cases, articles and treatises this annotated essay leads the reader through the maze of confusion and contradiction that now clutters the legal scene. Topics touched on include: elements of gambling, Federal, state and local gambling regulation, organized crime implications, extraterritorial jurisdiction, police power and advertising. Conclusions are addressed to businesses considering the risks of operating Internet gambling web sites. Key Words: Internet gaming law, Wire Act, betting, pay-for-play, police power, advertising, organized crime Basic Question The question, "Is gambling on the Internet legal?" is by no means simple (Rose & Owens, 2005). Some state and federal law enforcement officials declare flatly, "Yes, it's all illegal." Yet with thousands of websites taking billions of dollars in wagers each year, fewer than 25 people have ever been prosecuted in the United States for online gambling. Most were bookies who were also taking sports bets by telephone. Only one was a regular player: Jeffrey Trauman, a car salesman and online sports bettor, pleaded guilty to "placing a wager over $500," a misdemeanor in North Dakota, was fined $500 and given a one-year deferred sentence (Rose, 2003); North Dakota Century Code). The day seems to have passed when advocates of the Internet would assert that it was something so new and different that there were no laws surrounding online activities, that the Internet is like the Wild West.
    [Show full text]
  • SAMPLE Content Directory
    SAMPLE Nearly 1,300 Journals Content Directory Participating! http://heinonline.org Please Note: This is a list of ALL content available in our two main library modules through the HeinOnline interface. Due to the various subscription packages available, access to this content may vary. TABLE OF CONTENTS: Law Journal Library ..................................................................................................................................... pp. 1-25 Legal Classics Library................................................................................................................................. pp. 26-56 LAW JOURNAL LIBRARY VOLUMES YEARS Acta Juridica 1958-2003 1958-2003 Acta Universitatis Lucian Blaga 2001-2005 2001-2005 Adelaide Law Review 1-24 1960-2003 Administrative Law Journal of the American University† 1-10 1987-1996 Administrative Law Review (ABA) 1-57 1949-2005 Advocate: A Weekly Law Journal† 1-2 1888-1890 African Human Rights Law Journal 1-3 2001-2003 African Journal of Legal Studies 1 2004-2005 Air Force Law Review 1-58 1959-2006 Air Law Review † 1-12 1930-1941 Akron Law Review 1-38 1967-2005 Akron Tax Journal 1-21 1983-2006 Alabama Law Journal (Birmingham) † 1-5 1925-1930 Alabama Law Journal (Montgomery) † 1-4 1882-1885 Alabama Law Review *JUST UPDATED* 1-57 1948-2006 Alaska Law Review 1-22 1984-2005 Albany Law Environmental Outlook Journal 1-10 1995-2005 Albany Law Journal † 1-70 1870-1909 Albany Law Journal of Science and Technology 1-15 1991-2005 Albany Law Review 1-69 1931-2006 Alberta Law Quarterly
    [Show full text]
  • The Regulation of Online Gaming Across Jurisdictions: Success, Standards and Stability
    P a g e | 1 The Regulation of Online Gaming Across Jurisdictions: Success, Standards and Stability Peter Nelson Bemidji State University Political Science Senior Thesis Bemidji State University Dr. Patrick Donnay, Advisor April 2012 P a g e | 2 Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................................3 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................4 Literature Review.............................................................................................................................5 Methodology ..................................................................................................................................16 Interpretation of the Findings.........................................................................................................17 Conclusion .....................................................................................................................................20 Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………...…….21 References……………………………………………………………………………….……….23 P a g e | 3 Abstract In 2005 the gaming market was worth an estimated six billion dollars, half of that represented by online gambling revenues. However not all jurisdictions (countries) regulate the industry the same. Some jurisdictions allow the industry to flourish while some go as far as banning the industry all together. I gather
    [Show full text]
  • Duane Morris LLP Global Gaming Practice at a Glance
    GLOBAL GAMING PRACTICE Duane Morris gaming attorneys have decades of experience representing the diverse and growing range of participants in the gaming industry. We Duane Morris gaming lawyers carefully consider have significant experience advising clients including owners and operators and evaluate the impact of any advice — regardless of casinos and pari-mutuel wagering facilities, online/mobile operators, of the task at hand — on our clients’ continued manufacturers of gaming equipment and software, esports entities, key compliance with gaming laws and their reputation employees, banks and nontraditional lenders, as well as vendors that provide goods and services to casinos. We also represent technology among gaming regulators for honesty, integrity and providers for internet and mobile gaming, sports wagering operators business acumen. That is our value add. and multimedia companies seeking to establish, coordinate, work with and form partnerships with these new industry participants. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we have guided casinos in complying with emergency regulations and drafting related internal controls and procedures. BOUTIQUE FIRM FOCUS, FULL-SERVICE CAPABILITIES Duane Morris’ gaming lawyers have the seamless support and resources of our full-service international law firm to assist clients in all facets of their gaming or gaming-related businesses. Our core gaming lawyers focus on regulatory and licensing issues and work closely with other Duane Morris lawyers when clients seek to establish new ventures, expand organically or by acquisition, raise debt or equity capital, or face other issues that arise in the course of business. At our core is a team with extensive experience in corporate transactions, commercial arrangements and dispute resolution known for successfully navigating the most complex of matters.
    [Show full text]