Seth Barrett Tillman, Links to my Publications Posted on SSRN and Elsewhere on the Internet, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=345891.

Professor Gary S. Lawson, Comment, Burning Down the House (and Senate), 83 Tex. L. Rev. 1373 (2005), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=556789 ;

Professor Sanford V. Levinson, Comment, Assuring Continuity of Government, available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=900607 ;

Professor Brian C. Kalt, Response, Keeping Recess Appointments in Their Place, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=959051 ;

Professor Brian C. Kalt, Keeping Tillman Adjournments in Their Place: A Rejoinder to Seth Barrett Tillman, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=962762 ;

Professor Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl, Response, Against Mix-and-Match Lawmaking, available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=932574 ;

Professor Steven G. Calabresi, Rebuttal, Does the Incompatibility Clause Apply to the President?, in Seth Barrett Tillman & Steven G. Calabresi, Debate, The Great Divorce: The Current Understanding of Separation of Powers and the Original Meaning of the Incompatibility Clause, 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. PENNumbra 134, 141-45 (2008), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1294671 ;

Professor Steven G. Calabresi, Closing Statement, A Term of Art or the Artful Reading of Terms?, in Seth Barrett Tillman & Steven G. Calabresi, Debate, The Great Divorce: The Current Understanding of Separation of Powers and the Original Meaning of the Incompatibility Clause, 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. PENNumbra 134, 154-59 (2008), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1294671 ;

Professor Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash, Response, Why the Incompatibility Clause Applies to the Office of President, 4 Duke J. Const. L. & Pub. Pol’y 143 (2009), available at http://tinyurl.com/8bs7fqq; 4 Duke J. Const. L. & Pub. Pol'y Sidebar 35 (2008), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1557164 ;

Professor Jeremy D. Bailey, The Traditional View of Hamilton’s Federalist No. 77 and an Unexpected Challenge: A Response to Seth Barrett Tillman, 33 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 169 (2010), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1473276 ;

Professor Robert F. Blomquist, Response to Geoffrey R. Stone and Seth Barrett Tillman, Beyond Historical Blushing: A Plea for Constitutional Intelligence, 2009 Cardozo L. Rev. de novo 244, available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1483893 ;

Professor Steve Sheppard, Response to Geoffrey R. Stone and Seth Barrett Tillman, What Oaths Meant to the Framers' Generation: A Preliminary Sketch, 2009 Cardozo L. Rev. de novo 273, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2188463 ;

Professor Bruce G. Peabody, Response to Stone, Tillman, and Brownstein, Analogize This: Partial Constitutional Text, Religion, and Maintaining Our Political Order, 2010 Cardozo L. Rev. de novo 204, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1537141 ;

Professor Zephyr Teachout, Rebuttal, Gifts, Offices, and Corruption, 107 Nw. U. L. Rev. Colloquy 30, 30 n.* & n.2, 43 n.55 (2012), available at http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lawreview/colloquy/2012/9/ ;

Professor Zephyr Teachout, Closing Statement, Constitutional Purpose and the Anti-Corruption Principle, 108 Nw. U. L. Rev. Colloquy 200, 200 n.*, 201 & n.3, 202, 205 n.16, 216 (2014), http://colloquy.law.northwestern.edu/main/2014/02/constitutional-purpose-and-the-anti-corruption-principle.html ;

Benjamin Cassady, “You’ve Got Your Crook, I’ve Got Mine”: Why the Disqualification Clause Doesn’t (Always) Disqualify, 32 Quinnipiac L. Rev. 209 (2014), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2447970 ;

Seth Barrett Tillman, Originalism & The Scope of the Constitution’s Disqualification Clause, 33 Quinnipiac L. Rev. 59 (2014), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2484377 (responding to Cassady) ;

....