Comment

Print
Comment
86.5
Passive Embezzlement Schemes as Continuing Offenses
William Admussen
BA 2017, The University of Kansas; JD Candidate 2020, The University of Chicago Law School.

David Brunell was indicted on October 26, 2017 on one count of embezzlement of government funds under the federal embezzlement statute, 18 USC § 641. Brunell’s father, prior to his death in 1993, received monthly retirement benefits from the Social Security Administration (SSA).

Print
Comment
86.4
The Underlying Underwriter: An Analysis of the Spotify Direct Listing
Benjamin J. Nickerson
AB 2015, The University of Chicago; JD Candidate 2020, The University ofChicago Law School.

I wish to thank Nicholas B. Aeppel, Douglas G. Baird, William A. Birdthistle, Anthony J. Casey, Ryan D. Doerfler, Thomas J. Miles, and the editors of The University of Chicago Law Review for their thoughtful guidance and advice.

On April 3, 2018, global music streaming company Spotify Technology S.A. (Spotify) went public through a direct listing of its ordinary shares on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). Rather than raise money by issuing new shares to the public through a traditional initial public offering (IPO), Spotify made its existing shares available for purchase on the public exchange through the seldom-utilized direct listing process.

Print
Comment
86.4
Partially Tribal Land: The Case for Limiting State Eminent Domain Power under 25 USC § 357
Addison W. Bennett
BA 2016, Skidmore College; JD Candidate 2020, The University of Chicago Law School.

When a state government pursues a utility project, utility lines must often cross land owned by private individuals. Though the state’s power to condemn property is ordinarily sufficient to allow the government to construct such a line through the property, special difficulty emerges when the utility lines are to cross tribal lands.

Print
Comment
85.8
To Move or Not to Move? That Is the Metaphysical Question
David J. Sandefer
BA 2016, Auburn University; JD Candidate 2019, The University of Chicago Law School

Philosophers have long pondered the metaphysical meaning of an object’s “location” or the “where of a thing.”

Print
Comment
85.8
Waiving Chevron
Jeremy D. Rozansky
AB 2012, University of Chicago; JD Candidate 2019, University of Chicago Law School

I wish to thank William Baude, Brian Feinstein, Daniel Hemel, Aziz Huq, Aaron Nielson, Jennifer Nou, Adam J. White, and the editors of The University of Chicago Law Review for setting me on the right track and improving the Comment at every stage

The Supreme Court’s decision in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc v Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc has been a boon for federal agencies.

Print
Comment
85.7
Inferentialism, Title VII, and Legal Concepts
Lee Farnsworth
BA 2012, Dartmouth College; JD Candidate 2019, The University of Chicago Law School

Of all the things that judges do, central to those activities is saying what the law is, which means saying what the words in statutes mean.

Print
Comment
85.6
Not So Different after All: The Status of Interpretive Rules in the Medicare Act
Graham Haviland
BA 2011, The University of Chicago; JD Candidate 2019, The University of Chicago Law School

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) distinguishes between “legislative rules” that bind with the force of law and “interpretive rules” that merely interpret existing statutes or rules.