§ 1983

Online
Essay
The Specter of a Circuit Split: Isaacson, Bankshot, and § 1983
Quinten J. Rimolde
Quinten J. Rimolde is a J.D. Candidate at The University of Chicago Law School, Class of 2026.

He thanks Will Horvath, Brandon Stras, Graham Kingwill, Professor William Baude, and the entire University of Chicago Law Review Online team.

At first glance, the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Isaacson v. Mayes (2023) set the stage for the perfect law review student comment. It called out the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in Bankshot Billiards, Inc. v. City of Ocala (2011) by name. And the Congressional Research Service listed Bankshot and Isaacson among 2023’s circuit splits. By all accounts, the two circuits had split over a significant issue. They disagreed over whether a party needs to connect its injury to a constitutional right in order to establish standing for claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Only one problem remained: the courts were on the same page. What emerged was the specter of a circuit split.

§ 1983
2
Article
76.4
Regulating Privatized Government through § 1983
Richard Frankel
Associate Professor of Law, Earle Mack School of Law at Drexel University

I would like to thank Steven Goldblatt, Jane Aiken, Amanda Leiter, Kathryn Sabbeth, Erin Aslan, Eliza Platts-Mills, Tabatha Abu El-Haj, Rebecca Lee, and Marcy Karin for their assistance back when this Article was just an idea. I also would like to thank Dan Filler, Alex Geisinger, David Cohen, Lawrence Rosenthal, Jack Beermann, Daryl Levinson, Margo Schlanger, David Achtenberg, and Alan Chen for their thoughtful and detailed feedback. Additionally, I would like to thank the faculties at the University of Denver Strum College of Law, Quinnipiac University School of Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law, and the Earle Mack School of Law at Drexel University for their helpful ideas and suggestions.

Constitutional Law Institutional Design § 1983

Volumes