Professor Childress’s response focuses on what the Erie decision teaches us about federalism. The Article begins by recognizing that the Erie decision may appear to be problematic as a rule of decision. The Article points out that in application, however, there are rarely cases where the courts are confounded as to the legal test. Rather, they are concerned with Erie’s implications. Problems arise when state law is unsettled or in the rare occasions where the line between substantive and procedural law is blurred. The article concludes by stating that although Erie may have been wrongly decided, it is redeemable by recognizing that it forces courts to take a step back and focus on sensitive federal and state issues.