Too Small to Fail: A New Perspective on Environmental Penalties for Small Businesses
- Share The University of Chicago Law Review | Too Small to Fail: A New Perspective on Environmental Penalties for Small Businesses on Facebook
- Share The University of Chicago Law Review | Too Small to Fail: A New Perspective on Environmental Penalties for Small Businesses on Twitter
- Share The University of Chicago Law Review | Too Small to Fail: A New Perspective on Environmental Penalties for Small Businesses on Email
- Share The University of Chicago Law Review | Too Small to Fail: A New Perspective on Environmental Penalties for Small Businesses on LinkedIn
In February of this year, we published a call for the government to relaunch the federal Gun Control Act’s § 925(c) petition process, which empowers anyone subject to a federal restriction (“disability”) on their ability to purchase or possess firearms to apply to the Department of Justice for restoration of their gun rights.
The Trump Justice Department has moved with some dispatch to relaunch the program—using a workaround we suggested in our piece. In this short Essay, we propose several improvements to the proposed regulation.
She thanks Henry Gilchrist, Timothy Burke, Kimberly Burke, and Alexis Berg for their support, and the University of Chicago Law Review Online team for all their hard work.
This Case Note explores the possibility that, in a world where TikTok is banned or heavily regulated, individual TikTok users could sue states under a Takings Clause theory. Any such cases would have to wrestle with two core questions (1) whether the account holders hold an actionable property interest in their accounts; and (2) if so, whether permanently and totally depriving users of access to their accounts constitutes a taking.
The author thanks the University of Chicago Law Review Online team for their helpful feedback.
This Case Note first reviews the origins of the postal-matter exception and the FTCA. Then, it analyzes the Fifth Circuit’s holding in Konan and explores contrasting precedent in other circuits, most notably in the First and Second Circuits. Finally, this Note discusses the difficulty of balancing USPS’s interests against enabling suits under the FTCA and considers the implications of providing a tort remedy.