Comment

The Legality of Prolonged Traffic Stops after Herring: Brief Delays as Isolated Negligence

Reid M. Bolton

AB 2004, Harvard University; JD Candidate 2010, The University of Chicago Law School

Share The University of Chicago Law Review | The Legality of Prolonged Traffic Stops after Herring: Brief Delays as Isolated Negligence on Facebook
Share The University of Chicago Law Review | The Legality of Prolonged Traffic Stops after Herring: Brief Delays as Isolated Negligence on Twitter
Share The University of Chicago Law Review | The Legality of Prolonged Traffic Stops after Herring: Brief Delays as Isolated Negligence on Email
Share The University of Chicago Law Review | The Legality of Prolonged Traffic Stops after Herring: Brief Delays as Isolated Negligence on LinkedIn

The potential for a traffic stop by law enforcement is present every time a driver in the United States gets behind the wheel of a car. Traffic stops are a part of American culture as well as an ever-present reality. They are also a continuing focus of legal scholarship, with numerous legal experts writing about various facets of the traffic stop and their validity under the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against “unreasonable searches and seizures.”

This Comment explores a small niche of the larger traffic stop universe, namely the constitutional validity of traffic stops where police (1) extend the length of the traffic stop beyond what is exclusively necessary for the original purpose of the stop and (2) lack any reasonable suspicion of further illegal activity. In addition, this Comment examines the admissibility of evidence gleaned from these traffic stops.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Online

Essay

Automation Rights: How to Rationally Design Humans-Out-of-the-Loop Law

Orly Lobel

Orly Lobel is the Warren Distinguished Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Employment and Labor Policy (CELP) at the University of San Diego.

She graduated from Tel-Aviv University and Harvard Law School. Named as one of the most cited legal scholars in the United States, and specifically the most cited scholar in employment law and one of the most cited in law and technology, she is influential in her field. Professor Lobel has served on President Obama’s policy team on innovation and labor market competition, has advised the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and has published multiple books to critical acclaim. Her latest book, The Equality Machine, is an Economist Best Book of the Year.

This Essay argues for the development of more robust—and balanced—law that focuses not only on the risks, but also the potential, that AI brings. In turn, it argues that there is a need to develop a framework for laws and policies that incentivize and, at times, mandate transitions to AI-based automation. Automation rights—the right to demand and the duty to deploy AI-based technology when it outperforms human-based action—should become part of the legal landscape. A rational analysis of the costs and benefits of AI deployment would suggest that certain high-stakes circumstances compel automation because of the high costs and risks of not adopting the best available technologies. Inevitably, the rapid advancements in machine learning will mean that law soon must embrace AI; accelerate deployment; and, under certain circumstances, prohibit human intervention as a matter of fairness, welfare, and justice.

Best Practices Law and Economics Machine Learning Oversight Regulation

Online

Essay

Evaluating Mistakes of Law: Objective Reasonableness Under Title VII

Gabrielle Dohmen

Gabrielle Dohmen is a J.D. Candidate at the University of Chicago Law School, Class of 2023.

She thanks Matthew Makowski, Abigail Barney, Annie Kors, and Maggie Niu for their very helpful comments.

Title VII’s anti-retaliation provision is clear: if an employee complains about employment discrimination, it is illegal for an employer to retaliate against them.

Law and Economics

Online

Essay

Small Arms Races

Guha Krishnamurthi

Guha Krishnamurthi is an Associate Professor of Law at the University of Oklahoma College of Law.

Peter N. Salib

Peter N. Salib is an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Houston Law Center and an Associated Faculty Member at the University of Houston Hobby School of Public Affairs.

The authors thank Jacob Charles, Charanya Krishnaswami, and Alex Platt for insightful comments and suggestions.

On November 19, 2021, Kyle Rittenhouse was acquitted of homicide charges stemming from his killing of two people—Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum—at a protest of police violence in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Rittenhouse had armed himself and traveled to the protest, purportedly to defend Kenoshans’ property against looting.

Law and Economics Second Amendment