CrimProf Blog

Donnelly on Civil Asset Forfeiture and Police Budgets

Kathleen Donnelly has posted Civil Asset Forfeiture's Part In Funding Police Budgets (McGill Undergraduate Law Review No. 9) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

 

Asset forfeiture, a mechanism that empowers law enforcement and government agencies to seize private property associated with criminal activities, is a complex legal process. Distinct from criminal trials, civil forfeiture lacks essential constitutional safeguards, such as the right to counsel and a higher burden of proof, leaving property owners vulnerable. This paper delves into the problematic facets of asset forfeiture, aligning with critics who argue that its deficiencies allow law enforcement agencies to exploit the system for financial gain. The lucrative nature of the process has transformed proceeds into integral components of police budgets, inadvertently creating a perilous incentive structure. Critically assessing civil forfeiture's dearth of protective measures, this paper exposes how law enforcement agencies misuse this tool, disproportionately impacting already marginalized communities, particularly those with low incomes and people of colour. The analysis reveals a disturbing trend in the excessive utilization of civil forfeiture, emphasizing its evolution from its historical intended purpose. As a result, the proceedings now lack adequate protections for property owners, contributing to a cycle of exploitation that not only raises concerns about constitutional rights but also exacerbates societal inequities based on social class and race.

"The Big Prison Myth That Hurts Reform"

From Slate, via NACDL's news update:

America’s infatuation with incarceration isn’t just an artifact of its racist past. It is frequently nourished by the support of both Democrats and Republicans, and it is often welcomed by rural communities of color needing help. Its jobs sustain hundreds of thousands of Black and Latino workers. The forces supporting America’s prison system are far more complex—and diverse—than is commonly understood. That doesn’t mean that our sprawling overincarceration system is a good thing. But only when we truly understand the dynamics of the prison-building can we begin to identify and implement the policies needed to dismantle it.

Barsky on Opioid Overdoses and Internet Drug Prohibition

Benjamin A. Barsky has posted Internet Drug Prohibition and the Opioid Overdose Crisis (Washington Law Review | Vol. 99:361, 2024) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

The Ryan Haight Online Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act (Ryan Haight Act) prohibits controlled substance tele-prescribing when it occurs without a preliminary in-person medical evaluation. This Article details the Ryan Haight Act’s consequences for the practice of telemedicine in general and opioid addiction treatment in particular. In doing so, it builds on literature exploring the tension between the federal criminal regulation of controlled substance prescribing and the management of large-scale public health crises, particularly the opioid overdose crisis.

By restricting the tele-prescription of certain controlled substances used for opioid addiction treatment, the Ryan Haight Act limits access to care for a highly vulnerable patient population that surpasses six million people nationwide. This issue has persisted despite telemedicine proving to be as effective as in-person health care for this form of treatment.

Continue reading

"New York City turns to AI-powered scanners in push to keep guns out of the subway system"

From AP, via NACDL's news update:

New York City is turning to AI-powered scanners in a new bid to keep guns out of its subway system, but the pilot program launched Friday is already being met with skepticism from riders and the threat of a lawsuit from civil liberties advocates who say the searches are unconstitutional.

. . . 

“City officials have admitted that these scanners are primarily to combat some riders’ ‘perceptions’ that they are unsafe on the subway — this is not a justifiable basis to violate the Constitution,” said NYCLU attorney Daniel Lambright.

Bourke on Stopping Consumer Scams

Nick Bourke has posted Stopping Scams Against Consumers: Roadmap for a National Strategy on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

A discussion paper about how industries could work together and with government to prevent fraud and other harms against consumers and businesses. It is increasingly easy for criminals to scam consumers and businesses. Scammers exploit communications and financial systems using fake texts or social media profiles to fraudulently obtain payments from victims' bank accounts. Yet e orts by firms and law enforcement agencies in the United States remain fragmented and siloed. This paper argues that a coordinated national strategy is necessary to e ectively combat this issue. The proposed strategy calls for a broad government mandate, potentially directed at the White House or Congressional level, to facilitate coordination across the banking/financial services, telecommunications, and technology/social media sectors. Drawing on interviews with diverse experts and examples from overseas, the paper outlines the need for a comprehensive approach that focuses on sharing information to better detect and prevent scams that cause economic harm to consumers and businesses. To achieve a national strategy, industry leaders must form a cross-sector campaign using consistent messaging and advocating for strong government leadership. Key elements of the strategy include measures to stop account spoofing and other impersonation scams and establishing standardized mechanisms for educating, warning, and assisting potential or actual victims. 

Kahn-Fogel on The Fourth Amendment Property-Rights Baseline

Nicholas Alden Kahn-Fogel (Pennsylvania State University, Dickinson Law) has posted The Benefits of the Property-Rights Baseline in Fourth Amendment Decisionmaking on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

 

Since 2012, Fourth Amendment claimants have had two alternative doctrinal tests available to establish that government investigative activity constitutes a Fourth Amendment search implicating their rights. First, if the government physically intrudes onto a person, house, paper, or effect to gather information, its conduct is a search, even if the claimant had no reasonable expectation of privacy against the government intrusion. The Court has referred to this directive as the "property-rights baseline." Second, even in the absence of a physical intrusion onto a constitutionally protected area, if government surveillance infringes a person's reasonable expectation of privacy, such surveillance is also a search. I have previously argued that expansive property frameworks proposed by Justice Gorsuch and by some scholars are likely to resemble the privacy rubric for Fourth Amendment interpretation, both in the results they would produce and with regard to the subjectivity and unpredictability often attributed to the privacy model. However, contrary to recent scholarly claims, the narrower physical intrusion test is a valuable supplement to the privacy framework; it will often lead to different results than the privacy standard and will frequently lead to clearer analysis, more predictable results, and broader protection against government surveillance than was the case under the exclusively privacy-based regime that preceded the Court's endorsement of the property-rights baseline.

Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads in Criminal Law eJournal

are here.  The usual disclaimers apply.

Rank	Paper	Downloads
1.	How Does Concealed Carrying of Weapons Affect Violent Crime? John R. Lott and Carlisle E. Moody Crime Prevention Research Center and College of William and Mary - Department of Economics Date Posted: 31 May 2024	1,559
2.	Charting the Indicted Crimes in Trump’s New York Criminal Trial Guha Krishnamurthi University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law Date Posted: 15 May 2024	233
3.	Solving General and Specific Intent: A Mapping on the MPC and Applications to the Categorical Approach Dinis Cheian Harvard University, Harvard Law School Date Posted: 11 Apr 2024	192
4.	An Open Letter to Law Students on the Death Penalty Jesse Cheng and Helen Prejean DePaul University - College of Law and DePaul University Date Posted: 11 Jul 2024	158
5.	Dead Bodies as Quasi-Persons Ela A. Leshem Fordham University School of Law Date Posted: 24 May 2024	130
6.	Public Defense and an Abolitionist Ethic Vincent Southerland New York University School of Law Date Posted: 14 May 2024	104
7.	Rights, Reasons, and Culpability in Tort Law and Criminal Law Gregory Antill Columbia Law School Date Posted: 27 Jun 2024 [9th last week	96
8.	Trauma-Focused Justice: Recognizing Systemic Trauma Samantha Buckingham Loyola Law School - Center for Juvenile Law and Policy Date Posted: 09 May 2024 [10th last week]	95
9.	The New Outlawry Jacob D. Charles and Darrell A. H. Miller Pepperdine University - Rick J. Caruso School of Law and The University of Chicago Law School Date Posted: 10 Jun 2024 [8th last week]	92
10.	Needles in Haystacks: Noncitizen Voting Violations in Minnesota Virgil Wiebe University of St. Thomas - School of Law (Minnesota) Date Posted: 25 May 2024 [new to top ten]	82

Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads in Criminal Procedure eJournal

are here.  The usual disclaimers apply.

Rank	Paper	Downloads
1.	Against Privacy Essentialism Daniel J. Solove George Washington University Law School Date Posted: 14 May 2024 [2nd last week]	719
2.	A Large-Scale Study of the Police Retention Crisis Ben Grunwald Duke University School of Law Date Posted: 26 Jun 2024 [3rd last week]	317
3.	Loper Bright and the Great Writ: Will the New Constitutionalists End "Treason to the Constitution," Restore the Judicial Power, and Make the Law of the Land Supreme Again? James S. Liebman and Anthony Amsterdam Columbia University - Law School and New York University School of Law Date Posted: 11 Jul 2024 [4th last week]	203
4.	An Open Letter to Law Students on the Death Penalty Jesse Cheng and Helen Prejean DePaul University - College of Law and DePaul University Date Posted: 11 Jul 2024 [5th last week]	158
5.	Minimal Rationality and the Law of Evidence Ronald J. Allen, Michael S. Pardo, William J. Lawrence and Christopher Smiciklas Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Sidley Austin LLP and Northwestern University - Pritzker School of Law Date Posted: 11 Apr 2024 [6th last week]	127
6.	Trauma-Focused Justice: Recognizing Systemic Trauma Samantha Buckingham Loyola Law School - Center for Juvenile Law and Policy Date Posted: 09 May 2024 [9th last week]	95
7.	The Paper Prisons Racial Justice Act Data Tool Colleen V. Chien, William A. Sundstrom, Akhil Raj, Bennett Cyphers and Rayna Saron UC Berkeley School of Law, Santa Clara University - Leavey School of Business - Economics Department, Santa Clara University, UC Berkeley School of Law and UC Berkeley School of Law Date Posted: 05 Jun 2024 [8th last week]	94
8.	What Fischer v. United States Gets Wrong About Prosecutorial Discretion Cindy J. Cho Indiana University Maurer School of Law Date Posted: 26 Jun 2024 [10th last week]	85
9.	Punishing Gender Erin Collins University of Richmond School of Law Date Posted: 23 May 2024 [new to top ten]	64
10.	Stormy Winds in Uncharted Seas: Navigating the Trump False Records Prosecution Franklin G. Snyder Texas A&M University School of Law Date Posted: 22 May 2024 [new to top ten]	63

Hong on Prosecutors and the Child Wellbeing Framework

Esther Hong (Arizona State University (ASU) - Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law) has posted Prosecutors and the Child Wellbeing Framework (U. Chi. L. Rev. Online (June 8, 2024)) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

 

The guiding principle of the inaugural Restatement of Children and the Law is the Child Wellbeing framework. While the Restatements are written primarily for judges, the goals of the Child Wellbeing framework cannot be fully realized by judges alone. Other stakeholders and state actors involved in youth offenses and crimes must also recognize their responsibility in prioritizing children’s developmental health and wellbeing. This Essay focuses on one specific subset of state actors within the juvenile and criminal systems: prosecutors.

Often, it is the discretionary decisions that prosecutors make—long before a child even steps into a courtroom and meets a judge—that will determine the extent to which the goals of the Child Wellbeing framework can be realized in individual cases and courtrooms, and thereby systemwide. Of particular significance are the initial decisions that prosecutors make that determine the sovereign (federal, state, or tribal) that will be responsible for responding to the youth offense, as well as the system (criminal or juvenile) that will house the prosecution.

Continue reading

Wallace-Wolf on Geofencing

Jordan Wallace-Wolf (University of Arkansas, William H. Bowen School of Law) has posted A Fourth Amendment of People and Places: Three Foundational Claims about Geofencing on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

 

In Carpenter v. U.S., the Supreme Court held that sufficiently lengthy surveillance of a person's location was a search that presumptively required a warrant. This holding, the Court wrote, was an application of U.S. v. Katz's battle cry that the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. Unfortunately, that battle cry is increasingly part of the problem. It was suited to Carpenter because it concerned the surveillance of Timothy movement over 127 days. But police are increasingly supplementing long-term tracking of particular suspects with comparatively short-term tracking of whoever happens to occupy a particular swath of space during a particular span of time. Worryingly, this latter, place-based kind of surveillance seems to sidestep person-centered rationale, even though it plausibly implicates the values that animated that opinion. Analyses of these problems often compare geofencing warrants to Ybarra v. Illinois and all-person warrants, but the jurisprudence that stems from Maryland v. Garrison is more on point. It leads to what I call the public scene principle for judging the appropriate breadth of geofencing warrants. Third, I argue that even though reverse keyword searches like the one in U.S. v. Seymour bear some similarities to geofencing queries, they are also crucially distinct in concerning intellectual rather than locational privacy. They should therefore be subject to greater judicial scrutiny.

Schenck on Military Justice

Lisa Schenck (George Washington University - Law School) has posted Modern Military Justice: Cases and Materials (4th Ed.) (2024) (West Academic) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

 

This textbook comprehensively covers the modern military justice system of the United States, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  This text is appropriate for all students, with or without prior military experience.  It covers court-martial procedures, substantive criminal law, and nonjudicial punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, in addition to the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, which gives federal courts jurisdiction over certain acts committed abroad.  Materials from every Service within the Armed Forces show how the military justice system addresses all criminal offenses, ranging from minor infractions to serious offenses, such as the misconduct of soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison.  The text covers the jurisdiction of courts-martial; sources of military law; military offenses and defenses; pretrial, trial, and appellate procedures; the role of judge advocates; nonjudicial punishment and other alternatives to courts-martial; special forums, such as boards of inquiry; the relationship of courts-martial to state and federal courts; and much more.  All chapters include policy questions about controversial issues. The Fourth Edition addresses all the changes to the UCMJ and the Manual for Courts-Martial since publication of the Third Edition in the Spring of 2019.  The Fourth Edition also includes several recent cases and updates that address the significant changes made in the 2024 Manual for Courts-Martial, and other recent legislation.  Additionally, this new edition contains a revised Chapter 1 that provides an overview of the new military justice charging system, and includes an updated chapter concerning the substantive law of rape and other sex crimes, as well as an expanded coverage of inappropriate relationships and extramarital sexual conduct, under the UCMJ.

Koh on Criminal Law's Hidden Consensus

Steven Arrigg Koh (Boston University School of Law) has posted Criminal Law's Hidden Consensus on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

 

American criminal law is facing a crisis of meaning. On one hand, the "traditional school" invokes the archetype of the violent criminal-a murderer, rapist, or thief-who must be prosecuted and punished. On the other hand, the "critical school" invokes the archetype of the low-level drug offender, sentenced to a draconian prison term for mere possession of low levels of marijuana. On this account, the criminal legal system is itself systemically pathological, perhaps even warranting abolition. Like ships passing in the night, the two schools appear irreconcilable. This Article helps break this impasse and builds toward a justification for criminal law minimalism. It shows that, in fact, both schools share a hidden consensus: redressing wrongs. For the traditional camp, the wrong is harmful human conduct. For the critical camp, the wrong is the criminal legal system.

Continue reading

Martin on Generative AI and Fabricated Evidence During Interrogation

Gregory Martin has posted Generative AI and Fabricated Evidence Ploys: A Threat to Procedural Justice and the Legitimacy of Police on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

The implications of generative AI for society are not yet fully understood, but its continued advancement will clearly be a transformative force on both public and private institutions. While some have proposed ways in which generative AI might be used to make law enforcement more effective, one insidious prospect that remains undiscussed is the potential for police to use this technology to fabricate realistic evidence to trick suspects into confessing during interrogation. This Article explains how, under the weak constitutional protections that apply in the context of police interrogation, a majority of courts have permitted police to use fabricated evidence ploys to secure confessions. Shockingly, under the majority approach, there will be no legal barrier to the incorporation of generative AI into fabricated evidence ploys despite the powerful consequentialist and deontological arguments against this extreme form of police deception. This Article argues that this prospect is in direct conflict with the widespread movement for greater procedural justice in policing. Fabricated evidence ploys contribute to an untrustworthy and opaque interrogative process, evince a disrespect for the public, and disregard individual citizens' voices, all problems that will be exacerbated by the capabilities of generative AI. This Article concludes by discussing judicial and legislative remedies that would head off a future in which the police are empowered to use generative AI to deceive the public. 

"Bodycam footage shows Illinois sheriff’s deputy shooting Black woman over boiling water"

From Jurist:

Deputies arrived at Massey’s house in the early morning hours of July 6 after Massey made a 911 call concerned that someone could be outside of her house. While Massey was looking for her identification, Grayson pointed towards a pot on the stove, which Massey then went to turn off, and one of the deputies said, “We don’t need a fire while we’re here.” The deputy who was responding with Grayson backed out of the kitchen while Massey turned off the water and took the pot towards the sink.

After the deputies told Massey that they were stepping back from her hot water, she responded “I rebuke you in the name of Jesus.” Grayson replied, “You better f— not. I swear to God I’ll f— shoot you right in your f— face.” The deputy then pulled out his gun, ordered Massey to drop the pot, and Massey released the pot and then ducked, saying “OK I’m sorry.” As Grayson approached with a gun in hand, Massey could be seen throwing water in the deputy’s direction. Grayson then fired his weapon, striking her in the head.

Fragale & Grilli on Deferred Prosecution Agreements

Mauro Fragale and Valentina Grilli (Bocconi University and Bocconi University) have posted Impunity for Sale: Are Deferred Prosecution Agreements a Way for Companies to Evade Liability? ( Trento Student Law Review, Volume 6, No. 1. Pp. 41-70, 2024) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) have emerged as a contentious legal instrument, as they allow corporations to negotiate their way out of criminal liability without facing the full weight of a trial. This paper aims to explore the inherent benefits of DPAs – such as the potential for corporate reform, cooperation with law enforcement, preservation of jobs, and economic stability – while highlighting the criticisms, including concerns about accountability, transparency, and the perception of impunity. This article argues that, when appropriately structured and administered, DPAs provide benefits that significantly outweigh their drawbacks, as they offer a practical and flexible solution for addressing corporate wrongdoing where traditional criminal prosecution may be impossible or excessively burdensome. Nevertheless, their current limitations call for legislative amendments aiming at achieving a fairer and more comprehensive legal framework. These changes should address issues such as ensuring transparency in DPA negotiations, establishing clear criteria for DPA eligibility, and enhancing judicial oversight. 

"How Project 2025 Plans for Trump to Have Unprecedented Power Over the Justice Department"

From The Marshall Project, via NACDL's news update:

Project 2025, a nearly 1,000-page policy agenda for a second Trump presidency compiled by the right-wing Heritage Foundation, suggests that the Department of Justice would reject federal probes into police abuse once again. That worries Yasmin Cader, director of the Trone Center for Justice and Equality at the American Civil Liberties Union. “It's a really important government function,” Cader said of these civil rights investigations, “and if it's abandoned, it leaves local jurisdictions to do whatever they may, without the fear of that investigative force.”

. . . .[T]he second iteration of the Trump Administration’s Department of Justice is set to remake the division as an instrument for promoting a right-wing agenda.

That’s according to Trump's campaign rhetoric, in which the former president has pledged to open civil rights investigations into what he called “radical leftist prosecutor’s offices” that “refuse to charge criminals.” His campaign has singled out district attorneys in Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

 

Li on Criminal Records in China

Enshen Li (City University of Hong Kong) has posted The Qianke System in China: Disorganisation, Discrimination and Dispersion (Criminology & Criminal Justice, volume 23, issue 4, 2023) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

 

In the Chinese criminal legal system, the term 'Qianke' (前科) is conceptually interchangeable with the idea of a criminal record that lists one's past crimes, convictions and sentences. In this article, by situating Qianke within the context of China's distinct criminal justice and social governance ethos, my central claim is that the status quo of the Qianke system features disorganised, discriminatory and dispersed modes of social and penal controls. Specifically, the management of Qianke represents an uncoordinated structure in which criminal record data are regulated by divergent rules and institutions but remain under the complete control of the state. Although largely inaccessible to the general public, the discriminatory effect of Qianke is sweeping. By and large, it is characterised by the imposition of restraints on not only individuals with a criminal record but also their families in accessing equal opportunities in education, employment and public services. This distinctive form of state discrimination is informed by an emerging concern with risk prevention within Chinese criminal justice policy which is further enhanced by Qianke's orchestrated penetration into the social system (e.g. via the Social Credit System). Moving from the criminal legal system to the social system, Qianke also serves as a tool of control aimed at managing individuals with a criminal history in a way that is conducive to the state's prioritised governance agenda.

"Innocent Missouri prisoner held 43 years freed after trial court orders release"

From Jurist:

Wrongfully convicted Missouri inmate Sandra Hemme was released from prison Friday after a monthlong battle with the state’s attorney general who sought to deny the release on procedural and jurisdictional grounds.

Hemme’s release was the outcome of a sequence of motions and petitions. Following Circuit Judge Ryan Horsman’s decision to overturn Hemme’s conviction based on withheld exculpatory evidence, the AG filed a motion to deny her release. In this motion, the AG argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to issue the order, that they had the right to judicial review, and that Hemme would be a danger to herself and others. The appeal court denied this motion and Judge Horsman again ordered Ms. Hemme to be released. The AG then called the correctional facility holding Ms. Hemme and countermanded the order, preventing her release.

Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads in Criminal Law eJournal

are here.  The usual disclaimers apply.

Rank	Paper	Downloads
1.	How Does Concealed Carrying of Weapons Affect Violent Crime? John R. Lott and Carlisle E. Moody Crime Prevention Research Center and College of William and Mary - Department of Economics Date Posted: 31 May 2024	1,547
2.	Charting the Indicted Crimes in Trump’s New York Criminal Trial Guha Krishnamurthi University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law Date Posted: 15 May 2024	233
3.	Solving General and Specific Intent: A Mapping on the MPC and Applications to the Categorical Approach Dinis Cheian Harvard University, Harvard Law School Date Posted: 11 Apr 2024	191
4.	An Open Letter to Law Students on the Death Penalty Jesse Cheng and Helen Prejean DePaul University - College of Law and DePaul University Date Posted: 11 Jul 2024 [new to top ten]	146
5.	Dead Bodies as Quasi-Persons Ela A. Leshem Fordham University School of Law Date Posted: 24 May 2024 [5th last week]	126
6.	Public Defense and an Abolitionist Ethic Vincent Southerland New York University School of Law Date Posted: 14 May 2024 [7th last week]	98
7.	A World Without Federal Sentencing Guidelines Sam J. Merchant University of Oklahoma College of Law Date Posted: 30 Apr 2024 [8th last week]	96
8.	The New Outlawry Jacob D. Charles and Darrell A. H. Miller Pepperdine University - Rick J. Caruso School of Law and The University of Chicago Law School Date Posted: 10 Jun 2024 [10th last week]	91
9.	Rights, Reasons, and Culpability in Tort Law and Criminal Law Gregory Antill Columbia Law School Date Posted: 27 Jun 2024 [new to top ten]	90
10.	Trauma-Focused Justice: Recognizing Systemic Trauma Samantha Buckingham Loyola Law School - Center for Juvenile Law and Policy Date Posted: 09 May 2024 [new to top ten]	86

Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads in Criminal Procedure eJournal

are here.  The usual disclaimers apply.

Rank	Paper	Downloads
1.	A Regulatory Roadmap to AI and Privacy Daniel J. Solove George Washington University Law School Date Posted: 11 Jun 2024	1,745
2.	Against Privacy Essentialism Daniel J. Solove George Washington University Law School Date Posted: 14 May 2024	710
3.	A Large-Scale Study of the Police Retention Crisis Ben Grunwald Duke University School of Law Date Posted: 26 Jun 2024	295
4.	Loper Bright and the Great Writ: Will the New Constitutionalists End "Treason to the Constitution," Restore the Judicial Power, and Make the Law of the Land Supreme Again? James S. Liebman and Anthony Amsterdam Columbia University - Law School and New York University School of Law Date Posted: 11 Jul 2024 [new to top ten]	162
5.	An Open Letter to Law Students on the Death Penalty Jesse Cheng and Helen Prejean DePaul University - College of Law and DePaul University Date Posted: 11 Jul 2024 [new to top ten]	146
6.	Minimal Rationality and the Law of Evidence Ronald J. Allen, Michael S. Pardo, William J. Lawrence and Christopher Smiciklas Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Sidley Austin LLP and Northwestern University - Pritzker School of Law Date Posted: 11 Apr 2024 [4th last week]	125
7.	A World Without Federal Sentencing Guidelines Sam J. Merchant University of Oklahoma College of Law Date Posted: 30 Apr 2024 [5th last week	96
8.	The Paper Prisons Racial Justice Act Data Tool Colleen V. Chien, William A. Sundstrom, Akhil Raj, Bennett Cyphers and Rayna Saron UC Berkeley School of Law, Santa Clara University - Leavey School of Business - Economics Department, Santa Clara University, UC Berkeley School of Law and UC Berkeley School of Law Date Posted: 05 Jun 2024 [6th last week]	92
9.	Trauma-Focused Justice: Recognizing Systemic Trauma Samantha Buckingham Loyola Law School - Center for Juvenile Law and Policy Date Posted: 09 May 2024 [7th last week]	86
10.	What Fischer v. United States Gets Wrong About Prosecutorial Discretion Cindy J. Cho Indiana University Maurer School of Law Date Posted: 26 Jun 2024 [8th last week]	82