The fifth Harry Potter book is my favorite, chiefly on account of its representation of the Wizard system of government. Harry's endless struggles with the Ministry of Magic -- some humorously bureaucratic, some downright nasty -- and the attitude he developes toward the Ministry give the book a very rebellious and anarchistic tone. I think it's an important aspect of the broader story and it's clear that J. K. Rowling isn't a big fan of government.
However, I don't think this observation merits an entire law review article published by one of the nation's top law schools. And the fact that the author is a real-life law professor who looks like he's on his way to a sorority formal just embitters me even more.
And while we're on the subject, I will happily read the seventh Harry Potter book, knowing full well that it may be as lousy as the sixth, but under no circumstances will I allow Harry Potter and the Law into my home or office.