Responding to Elon Musk's proposed acquisition of Twitter, Daphne Keller suggests that "middleware" models, not common carriage rules, best put control over internet speech regulation in the hands of users.
Responding to Elon Musk's proposed acquisition of Twitter, Professors evelyn douek and Genevieve Lakier argue that the Twitter deal is a byproduct, not a driver, of broader ongoing shifts in free speech politics and First Amendment doctrine.
Professors Guha Krishnamurthi and Peter N. Salib analyze state gun use and self-defense laws and provide a framework for understanding when such laws can lead even perfectly rational, well-intentioned actors to engage in escalatory small arms races.
Writing for the University of Chicago Law Review Symposium 2022 on Law and Labor Market Power, Marissa Piccolo evaluates when and how criminal antitrust enforcement can address the problem of labor monopsonies.
Writing for the University of Chicago Law Review Symposium 2022 on Law and Labor Market Power, Spencer J. Parts argues that private lawsuits and state enforcement were a suboptimal way of causing many national franchises to abandon the use of no-poach agreements.
Writing for the University of Chicago Law Review Symposium 2022 on Law and Labor Market Power, Henry Walter suggests that antitrust reform efforts directed at labor markets should proceed slowly, mindful of reform's fragile political support and the potential for backlash.
Simon Jacobs analyzes how public nuisance litigation can affect workplace safety in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Caitlan M. Sussman explores whether extradited defendants have standing to challenge their American prosecutions under extradition treaties.
Sandra G. Mayson aims to clarify the concept of personalized law by considering the nature of legal rules, which must all generalize on some dimension.
Hans Christoph Grigoleit takes a look at personalized law's procedural consequences for the allocation of functions between the legislature and judiciary.