This short comment on Natapoff’s “Misdemeanor Decriminalization” (2015) offers reasons for skepticism about how broadly we can expect decriminalization reforms to extend in U.S. state criminal codes, and also about the procedural advantages that enforcement officials gain when offenses are converted from criminal to civil status. I then sketch reasons why decriminalization often does not lead to less punitive regulation. One is that civil enforcement typically remains with the same police, prosecutors, and courts. A second is the paucity of enforcement mechanisms that work on low-income offenders. A third looks to durable features of American policymaking and institutional design. Federal and state governments have long maintained a strong state capacity for criminal law enforcement, which stands as an exception to a general disfavor in the U.S. for a strong public sector. Aversion to robust state capacity leads to preferences for privatizing public functions and for self-funding courts and law enforcement agencies through fines and user fees. Dependency on fines and fees paid by violators, coupled with an unwillingness to fully legalize much conduct now regulated through misdemeanor courts, constrains decriminalization efforts.
Gradualism should have won out in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, exerting gravitational influence on the majority and dissenters alike. In general...
Evidence law controls what information will be admissible in court and when, how, and by whom it may be presented. It shapes not only the trial...
On December 15, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued its decision in Illumina, Inc. v. FTC. Although the court vacated and...
On January 17, the Supreme Court heard arguments in what are potentially the most significant commercial law cases of the last decade. In the...
There is a live debate going on over whether antitrust should take a broader view of the economics of market concentration. When antitrust reformers...
This casebook aspires to help students understand and think systematically about the techniques of statutory interpretation. It blends exposition with...
Supreme Court opinions involving race and the jury invariably open with the Fourteenth Amendment, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, or landmark cases like...
On January 1, 2022, the most radical change to the American jury in at least thirty-five years occurred in Arizona: peremptory strikes, long a feature...
In an era defined by partisan rifts and government gridlock, many celebrate the rare issues that prompt bipartisan consensus. But extreme consensus...
How should judges decide hard cases involving rights conflicts? Standard debates about this question are usually framed in jurisprudential terms...
Berryessa et al. (2022) consider how prior experience as a criminal prosecutor may influence judicial behaviour, but their concerns about prior...
For several days, former President Donald Trump and his 18 co-defendants in a Georgia election interference case trickled into the Fulton County Jail...
Virginia adopted a risk assessment to help determine sentencing for sex offenders. It was incorporated as a one-way ratchet toward higher sentences...
The 1968 Fair Housing Act required local government recipients of federal money to take meaningful actions to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH...
Courts routinely use low cash bail as a financial incentive to ensure that released defendants appear in court and abstain from crime. This can create...
A federal grand jury in Florida indicted former President Donald Trump on June 8, 2023, on multiple criminal charges related to classified documents...
We examined how the presentation of risk assessment results and the race of the person charged affected pretrial court actors’ recommendations to...