William W. Buzbee · September 2009 77 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 1521 (2009) Current debates over federalism, especially preemption, center on the merits of legal structures that rely on a sole or preemptive federal regulator versus strategies that retain roles for multiple regulatory actors, especially federal, state, and local actors sharing concurrent and interacting authority.... Read More

Matthew D. Adler · September 2009 77 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 1478 (2009) How should we take account of the interests of future generations? This question has great practical relevance. For example, it is front and center in arguments about global warming policy. Unfortunately, the question is doubly difficult—doubly, because it not merely implicates generic... Read More

Jamison E. Colburn · September 2009 77 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 1411 (2009) In this Article I try to map rights experimentalism onto our most recent (re)constructions of constitutional property and show why we owe it to future generations to start thinking about property more experimentally. Ironically, many of the troubles at the interface of... Read More

Neil H. Buchanan · September 2009 77 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 1402 (2009) As part of The George Washington Law Review’s symposium What Does Our Legal System Owe Future Generations? New Analyses of Intergenerational Justice for a New Century, participants discussed the nature of intergenerational obligations as they relate to fiscal policy. The panelists reached... Read More

Nancy J. Altman · September 2009 77 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 1383 (2009) What do generations owe one another? Professor Buchanan subjects to rigorous examination the commonly expressed platitude that we are obligated to future generations. In doing so, he makes a valuable contribution to the literature and thinking about intergenerational equity. In his perceptive... Read More

Lawrence Zelenak · September 2009 77 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 1358 (2009) In his provocative and insightful contribution to this symposium, What Do We Owe Future Generations?, Neil Buchanan takes issue with the conventional wisdom that the United States is harming its future generations by running large and persistent federal budget deficits. He focuses particular... Read More

Daniel Shaviro · September 2009 77 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 1298 (2009) The United States is currently on an unsustainable long-term fiscal path. In the long run, everything must be paid for in one way or the other; there is no free lunch. Our current tax and spending policies, however, would fall vastly short over... Read More

Neil H. Buchanan · September 2009 77 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 1237 (2009) Every decision that we make today can either directly or indirectly affect the interests of future generations, both those generations already born and those to be born in the decades and centuries after we are gone. Even if it is unlikely that... Read More

David DeGrazia · September 2009 77 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 1216 (2009) To whom or what do we have moral obligations? To whom or what should we have legal obligations? Is it possible that some recipients, or beneficiaries, of our obligations are not currently existing persons? Might some of them be human beings who are... Read More

Ori J. Herstein · September 2009 77 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 1173 (2009) What is the moral significance of “future generations”? Can they be the subjects of (legal) rights? And if so, do they have rights? The first part of this Article reflects on who or what in future generations is of moral significance, exploring... Read More