Civil Rights

Print
Article
Volume 92.7
The Contractualization of Disability Rights Law
Yaron Covo
Assistant Professor, Case Western Reserve University School of Law.

For helpful comments on earlier drafts, I thank Sania Anwar, Ian Ayres, Abbe Gluck, Adi Goldiner, Hanoch Dagan, Doron Dorfman, Klaas Eller, Elizabeth Emens, Jasmine Harris, Avery Katz, Craig Konnoth, Juliet Kostritsky, Shirley Lin, Daniel Markovits, Petros Mavroidis, Jamelia Morgan, Szymon Osmola, David Pozen, Jessica Roberts, Emily Rock, Elle Rothermich, Kate Sapirstein, Ani Satz, Michael Ashley Stein, Karen Tani, and Cristina Tilley, as well as participants in the Junior Scholars Conference at Northeastern School of Law (2024), the Junior Faculty Forum at Richmond School of Law (2024), the 47th Health Law Professors Conference (2024), and the Ninth Annual Health Law Works-in-Progress Retreat at Seton Hall Law School (2025). Lastly, I thank the editors of The University of Chicago Law Review for their insightful and helpful edits and suggestions.

In this Article, Yaron Covo argues that disability rights law in the United States is shaped not only by civil rights statutes but also by contract law doctrines. Contract law surfaces in the disability rights context through judicial determinations of accommodations negotiations and spending clause language in disability rights statutes. The Article argues that this intertwining has eroded rights under statutes meant to promote equality and protect vulnerable classes. The Article concludes with two recommendations: replacing the “individualized” negotiation model with a uniform model and adding certain mandatory rules and defaults in the disability rights context.

Print
Comment
Volume 92.5
Eliminating the Malice Requirement for Fourth Amendment Malicious Prosecution Plaintiffs
Sabrina Huang
B.A. 2022, University of California, Los Angeles; J.D. Candidate 2026, The University of Chicago Law School.

I would like to thank Maria Sofia Peña, Joseph Oten, Zoë Ewing, Karan Lala, John Cooper, Chloe Li, Helen Chamberlin, Quinten Rimolde, Jonathan Tao, Luke Henkel, Jackson Cole, Robert Dohrman, Hana Ferrero, Miranda Coombe, and all the other wonderful editors and staff of The University of Chicago Law Review for their insightful feedback and careful editing. I would also like to thank my family for their unconditional support.

In this Comment, Sabrina Huang argues that courts should eliminate the subjective malice requirement for Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claims. She draws on other constitutional torts that arise during encounters with actors in the criminal justice system to show that a plaintiff-friendly objective standard is more appropriate than a subjective standard. If courts are unwilling to eliminate the malice requirement, the Comment proposes an alternative to the requirement: a burden-shifting test. The intended effects of both proposals are to expand relief to more litigants across jurisdictions, harmonize Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, and deter police and prosecutorial misconduct.

Online
Essay
College Athletes As Employees: Implications for Title IX and (Un)Equal Pay
Hana Ferrero
Hana Ferrero is a J.D. Candidate at The University of Chicago Law School, Class of 2026.

This Case Note argues that categorizing college athletes as employees would, under a faithful application of Title IX and the court’s reasoning in Johnson, take wage payments outside the purview of Title IX’s equal opportunity requirement for athletes. Instead, Title IX as applied to college employees would govern, along with the other relevant employment discrimination laws. Under these statutes, it would likely be permissible for colleges to pay athletes in revenue-generating sports more than those athletes in nonrevenue sports.

Online
Post
Children’s Autonomy Rights Online
Clare Ryan
Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Alabama School of Law

She thanks Esther Hong, Zalman Rothschild, and Lisa Washington, as well as the participants and organizers of the University of Chicago’s 2023 Law Review Symposium on Children and the Law.

Children’s lives are increasingly shaped by their online environment, quite apart from the physical geographies of home and school. How they make choices in that space, and how those choices are shaped by law and parental authority, warrants deeper discussion than the Restatement of Children and the Law was able to provide. The complex challenges of children’s engagement with social media, both as content creators and consumers, help illuminate some of the core tensions in this Part of the Restatement—namely, the tension between children’s autonomy, parental authority, and state regulation.

Print
Essay
85.2
The Wrong Rights, or: The Inescapable Weaknesses of Modern Liberal Constitutionalism
Richard A. Epstein
Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law, New York University School of Law; the Peter and Kirsten Bedford Senior Fellow, The Hoover Institution; and Senior Lecturer, The University of Chicago Law School

My thanks to Julia Haines and Manuel Valle, The University of Chicago Law School, Class of 2017, and Kenneth Hersey and Jonathan Povilonis, NYU School of Law, Class of 2018, for their usual excellent research assistance.

Professors Tom Ginsburg, Aziz Huq, and Mila Versteeg (GHV) have written a mile-a-minute, and decidedly one-sided, account of the decline and fall of liberal constitutionalism throughout the world in the past generation.

2
Article
75.2
Affirmative Action in Law School Admissions: What Do Racial Preferences Do?
Jesse Rothstein
Assistant Professor of Economics and Public Affairs, Princeton University
Albert H. Yoon
Professor of Law and Professor of Political Science (by courtesy),Northwestern University

We are thankful for comments from workshop participants at the American Bar Foundation, the National Bureau of Economic Research, and The University of Chicago; and from Douglas G. Baird, Richard Brooks, David Gerber, Lani Guinier, John Heinz, Bill Kidder, Richard Lempert, Tracey Meares, Randall Picker, Eric Posner, Max Schanzenbach, Stephen M. Shavell, David Weisbach, Justin Wolfers, and Robert Yalen. We thank the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation for financial support.We alone are responsible for the contents and for all remaining errors.