Criminal Law

Online
Post
Lobbying Language: How Supreme Court Opinions Invite Legislative Change
Jack Brake
Jack Brake is a J.D. Candidate at the University of Chicago Law School, Class of 2025.

The author thanks the University of Chicago Law Review Online team for their helpful feedback. 

How often do Supreme Court opinions include what might be called “lobbying language,” which endorses a policy position while calling for another government entity to realize it? Reviewing relevant cases, this Essay finds that the sample set includes at least a dozen examples of lobbying language. As it turns out, lobbying is not so unusual for the Supreme Court.

Print
Comment
85.3
Righting Categorical Wrongs: A Holistic Solution to Rule 8(a)’s Same-or-Similar-Character Prong
Matthew Deates
BA 2012, University of Minnesota; JD Candidate 2018, The University of Chicago Law School

I would like to thank Professor Alison Siegler for introducing me to the law on joinder. This Comment would not exist without her guidance and support. I would also like to thank the talented editors of the Law Review for their helpful comments and suggestions.

A criminal defendant is charged with wire fraud in violation of 18 USC § 1343. As he and his defense attorney prepare for trial, the US Attorney’s Office notifies him that there is reason to believe he has previously committed bankruptcy fraud in violation of 18 USC § 152.

Print
Article
85.3
Rethinking Family-Court Prosecutors: Elected and Agency Prosecutors and Prosecutorial Discretion in Juvenile Delinquency and Child Protection Cases
Josh Gupta-Kagan
Assistant Professor of Law, University of South Carolina School of Law

The author would like to thank Albertina Antognini, Annette Appell, Elizabeth Chambliss, Martin Guggenheim, Avni Gupta-Kagan, Clare Huntington, Cortney Lollar, Adrian Smith, Robin Walker-Sterling, and participants in a faculty workshop at the University of Kentucky College of Law and Duke Law School’s 2015 conference on civil rights, “The Present and Future of Civil Rights Movements: Race and Reform in 21st Century America,” for thoughtful comments on earlier drafts. The author would like to thank Joni Gerrity for excellent research assistance.

The law and the academy have long recognized criminal prosecutors’ immense power, especially the power to determine which cases to prosecute and which not to. Less attention has been focused on related issues in juvenile delinquency and child protection cases litigated in state family courts.
2
Essay
Dupes and Losers in Mail Fraud
Thomas J. Miles
Professor of Law, The University of Chicago Law School

The author thanks James G. Hein, Jr and Richard H. McAdams for helpful comments. This Essay was written for a festschrift honoring Judge Frank H. Easterbrook’s twenty-five years on the Seventh Circuit.

2
Essay
Booker Reconsidered
Jonathan S. Masur
Assistant Professor of Law, The University of Chicago Law School

I thank Frank Easterbrook, Tom Gorman, Bernard Harcourt, Carissa Hessick, Richard McAdams, and David Sklansky for helpful comments.

2
Essay
75.1
Privacy versus Antidiscrimination
Lior Jacob Strahilevitz
Professor of Law and Walter Mander Teaching Scholar, The University of Chicago Law School

The author thanks Ronen Avraham, Howard Beales, Nevin Gewertz, Bernard Harcourt, Uri Itkin, Sarah Lawsky, Ronald Lee, Doug Lichtman, Tom Miles, Beth Milnikel, Jide Nzelibe, Adam Samaha, Max Schanzenbach, Paul Schwartz, David Weisbach, and Noah Zatz for their comments and suggestions, Levi Giovanetto for research assistance, and the Morton C. Seeley Fund and Visa, USA, Inc for generous research support. The author particularly thanks participants in The University of Chicago Law School’s Surveillance Symposium for their suggestions, as well as workshop participants at Northwestern and The University of Chicago.

2
Book review
75.2
The Political Economies of Criminal Justice
Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar
Professor and Deane F. Johnson Faculty Scholar, Stanford Law School; Faculty Affiliate, Stanford Center for International Security and Cooperation

My work on criminal justice has been greatly influenced by conversations with three extraordinary colleagues: Lawrence Friedman, Mark Kelman, and Robert Weisberg. I thank them for their generous willingness to share their thoughts on the field. Needless to say, I absolve them (and anyone else) of responsibility for any errors or omissions.

2
Article
75.2
Reviewing the Sentencing Guidelines: Judicial Politics, Empirical Evidence, and Reform
Max M. Schanzenbach
Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law
Emerson H. Tiller
Stanford Clinton Senior Research Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law

The authors would like to thank Jason Friedman, Ben Schaye, and Grace Tabib for excellent research assistance. The authors also thank participants in workshops at Harvard Law School, Yale Law School, and the University of Minnesota School of Law for helpful comments.