Lior Jacob Strahilevitz

2
Essay
87 Special
Data Security’s Unjust Enrichment Theory
Lior Jacob Strahilevitz
Sidley Austin Professor of Law, The University of Chicago Law School.

The author thanks the Carl S. Lloyd Faculty Fund for research support and Lee Fennell for helpful comments on an earlier draft.

Print
Essay
86.2
Assessing the Empirical Upside of Personalized Criminal Procedure
Matthew B. Kugler
Assistant Professor, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law.

The authors thank Kiel Brennan-Marquez, Lee Fennell, Woodrow Hartzog, William Hubbard, Aziz Huq, Orin Kerr, Richard McAdams, Michael Pollack, John Rappaport, RichardRe, Victoria Schwartz, Christopher Slobogin, Rebecca Stone, and Alexander Stremitzer, along with workshop participants at UCLA Law School and The University of Chicago Law School, and attendees at the Privacy Law Scholars Conference, and The University of Chicago Law Review Symposium on Personalized Law for helpful conversations and comments on earlier drafts. The authors also thank Liz Sharkey for helpful research assistance. Finally, the authors thank the Carl S. Lloyd Faculty Fund for research support.

Lior Jacob Strahilevitz
Sidley Austin Professor of Law, The University of Chicago Law School.
Imagine a person is being questioned by the police. If this is a mere friendly chat, then the police need not advise that person of her rights. If, however, this is a “custodial interrogation,” then the person—the suspect—must generally be given a Miranda warning for any incriminating statements she makes to be admissible in court.
2
Essay
Pseudonymous Litigation
Lior Jacob Strahilevitz
Deputy Dean, Professor of Law and Walter Mander Teaching Scholar, The University of Chicago Law School

The author thanks Omri Ben-Shahar, Alison LaCroix, Jonathan Masur, Paul Ohm, KarlNicholas Peifer, Matt Tokson, Paul Schwartz, and my editors at The University of Chicago Law Review for helpful comments and suggestions on earlier drafts, as well as Katie Heinrichs for excellent research assistance, and the Morton C. Seeley Fund and Milton and Miriam Handler Foundation for research support.

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.

Print
Article
84.4
The Myth of Fourth Amendment Circularity
Matthew B. Kugler
Assistant Professor, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law

The authors thank Jane Bambauer, Tim Casey, Adam Chilton, Shari Seidman Diamond, Tom Ginsburg, Daniel Hemel, Bert Huang, Aziz Huq, Orin Kerr, Joshua Kleinfeld, Andy Koppelman, Genevieve Lakier, Katerina Linos, Jonathan Masur, Richard McAdams, Janice Nadler, Martha Nussbaum, Laura Pedraza-Fariña, Michael Pollack, Uriel Procaccia, John Rappaport, Richard Re, Victoria Schwartz, Christine Scott-Hayward, Nadav Shoked, Chris Slobogin, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Matt Tokson, and Laura Weinrib, as well as workshop participants at Northwestern University Law School, the University of Chicago Law School, the American Law and Economics Association conference, and the Privacy Law Scholars Conference for comments on earlier drafts, the Carl S. Lloyd Faculty Fund for research support, and Michelle Hayner for helpful research assistance.

Lior Jacob Strahilevitz
Sidley Austin Professor of Law, University of Chicago
It is very difficult to find any proposition in Fourth Amendment law to which every judge, lawyer, and scholar subscribes.