Print
Comment
Volume 89.4
The Exception to Rule 12(d): Incorporation by Reference of Matters Outside the Pleadings
Laura Geary
B.A. 2018, Swarthmore College; J.D. Candidate 2023, The University of Chicago Law School

I thank Professor William H.J. Hubbard for his expert guidance and thoughtful feedback as well as the editors of the University of Chicago Law Review

This Comment explores the history of Rule 12(d), describes courts’ varying uses of the exception, and proposes a unifying method of interpretation for the future. Drawing on other procedural rules and an analogous doctrine in contract law, it argues that only unmistakably referenced written instruments may be incorporated.

Print
Comment
Volume 89.4
In Need of Better Material: A New Approach to Implementation Challenges Under the IDEA
Annie Kors
B.A. 2018, Yale University; J.D. Candidate 2023, The University of Chicago Law School.

Thank you to Professor Emily Buss for thoughtful feedback throughout this process and to the incredible editors of the Law Review

How far may a school district deviate from the services specified in an IEP and remain in compliance with the IDEA? In other words, how much of the adequate written plan is the student in fact entitled to receive? There are two existing approaches to failure-to-implement cases: the materiality approach and the per se test. This Comment argues that both approaches are flawed.

Print
Comment
Volume 89.4
The Constitutionality of Orthodoxy: First Amendment Implications of Laws Restricting Critical Race Theory in Public Schools
Dylan Salzman
B.A. 2019, Middlebury College; J.D. Candidate 2023, The University of Chicago Law School

I would like to thank Professors Geoffrey Stone, Aziz Huq, and Genevieve Lakier for their guidance. Additional thanks go to the editors and staff of the University of Chicago Law Review for their thoughtful advice and insight. 

This Comment argues that existing doctrine supports recognizing a student right to be free from political orthodoxy in public education. It proposes a burden-shifting test for vindicating that right.

Print
Article
Volume 89.3
The Law and Economics of Animus
Andrew T. Hayashi

I argue for an economic approach to equal protection analysis that is grounded in the motivations of government actors but that addresses some of the longstanding concerns with intent-based tests. The examples of criminal deterrence and equal protection analysis are illustrative of an agenda for law and economics analysis that more incorporates other-regarding motives more generally.

Print
Article
Volume 89.3
Regulation and Redistribution with Lives in the Balance
Daniel Hemel

This Article explores what it might mean in practice for agencies to incorporate distributive considerations into cost-benefit analysis. It uses, as a case study, a 2014 rule promulgated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) requiring new motor vehicles to have rearview cameras that reduce the risk of backover crashes.

Print
Article
Volume 89.3
Experimental Jurisprudence
Kevin Tobia

This Article elaborates on and defends experimental jurisprudence. Experimental jurisprudence, appropriately understood, is not only consistent with traditional jurisprudence; it is an essential branch of it.

Print
Comment
Volume 89.3
Neither Here nor There: Wire Fraud and the False Binary of Territoriality Under Morrison
Jason Petty

This Comment argues that this broad domestic application of the wire fraud statute shields courts from asking whether the statute applies extraterritorially. Further, this Comment argues that courts’ domestic application of the wire fraud statute is sufficiently broad as to begin to resemble extraterritoriality because courts can almost always find sufficient domestic activity to apply the wire fraud statute.

Print
Essay
Volume 89.2
Symposium Introduction: This Violent City? Urban Violence in Chicago and Beyond
Aziz Z. Huq
Professor of Law, University of Chicago Law School.
John Rappaport
Professor of Law, University of Chicago Law School.

Bartosz Woda provided invaluable help in preparing the charts in this Introduction; we owe him great thanks for his remarkable work. Professor Huq thanks the Frank J. Cicero Fund; Professor Rappaport thanks the Darelyn A. and Richard C. Reed Memorial Fund.

Our modest goal in this Introduction is to assemble some baseline empirics concerning both private violence and state coercion to provide a context for the pieces that follow. In so doing, we aim to mitigate the need for “scene setting” by each paper in the Symposium. Readers of the Symposium will find here a synoptic guide to some basic facts about the distribution and extent of criminal violence, as well as socioeconomic conditions and police activity, in Chicago.

Print
Essay
Volume 89.2
The Enduring Neighborhood Effect, Everyday Urban Mobility, and Violence in Chicago
Robert J. Sampson
Robert J. Sampson is the Henry Ford II Professor of the Social Sciences at Harvard University and Affiliated Research Professor at the American Bar Foundation.
Brian L. Levy
Brian L. Levy is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at George Mason University.

The authors acknowledge financial support from National Science Foundation Grant SES #1735505. Direct correspondence to rsampson@wjh.harvard.edu.

A longstanding tradition of research linking neighborhood disadvantage to higher rates of violence is based on the characteristics of where people reside. This Essay argues that we need to look beyond residential neighborhoods to consider flows of movement throughout the wider metropolis.

Print
Essay
Volume 89.2
Neighborhood Inequality and Violence in Chicago, 1965–2020
Patrick Sharkey
William S. Tod Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs.
Alisabeth Marsteller
Researcher at Princeton University’s Office of Population Research.

The authors wish to thank the editors at the University of Chicago Law Review, participants at the Symposium “This Violent City? Rhetoric, Realities, and the Perils and Promise of Reform,”moderator Aziz Huq and panelist Allegra McLeod for their insights on violence in Chicago, and Robert Sampson and Michael Maesano for their comments and feedback on the Essay.

This Essay analyzes trends in violence from a spatial perspective, focusing on how changes in the murder rate are experienced by communities and groups of residents within the city of Chicago. The Essay argues that a spatial perspective is essential to understanding the causes and consequences of violence in the United States and begins by describing the social policies and theoretical mechanisms that explain the connection between concentrated disadvantage and violent crime.

Print
Essay
Volume 89.2
Prospects for Reform? The Collapse of Community Policing in Chicago
Wesley G. Skogan
Professor Emeritus, Department of Political Science and the Institute for Policy Research, Northwestern University.

The author thanks Mark Iris for his review of this manuscript. The author remains solely responsible for any errors.

Community policing’s accomplishments were numerous, but it fell victim to issues commonly facing reform: money—especially the impact of economic downturns; leadership turnover and policy preferences; changes in the social, political, and crime environments; and the emergence of new technologies for responding to community concerns.

Print
Essay
Volume 89.2
Capitalizing on Crisis: Chicago Policy Responses to Homicide Waves, 1920–2016
Robert Vargas
Associate Professor of Sociology, University of Chicago.

We would like to thank Andrew Papachristos, Aziz Huq, Jenny Trinitapoli, and Wesley Skogan for comments and feedback on earlier drafts as well as Cecilia Smith and Parmanand Sinha for technical support with the geographic analyses.

Chris Williams
Ph.D. Student, Sociology Department, University of Chicago.
Phillip O’Sullivan
Joint J.D./Ph.D. Student, Department of Statistics, Harvard University.
Christina Cano
Undergraduate Student, Sociology Department, University of Chicago.

This Essay investigates Chicago city-government policy responses to the four largest homicide waves in its history: 1920–1925, 1966–1970, 1987–1992, and 2016. Through spatial and historical methods, we discover that Chicago police and the mayor’s office misused data to advance agendas conceived prior to the start of the homicide waves.