Chicago Sues Trump Administration Over Threat to Sanctuary Cities

This morning, the city of Chicago filed a lawsuit against Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the Trump Administration over the threats to withhold funding to so-called sanctuary cities. This comes two weeks after the Department of Justice said it would stop certain grant funding to cities unless they provide immigration officers with unlimited access to local jails. Cities will also need to give the DOJ 48 hours notice before releasing people from jail who are wanted for immigration violations. But now Chicago is pushing back. “Chicago will not let our police officers become political pawns in a debate. Chicago will not let our residents have their fundamental rights isolated and violated,” said Mayor Rahm Emanuel in a press conference yesterday.

The Trump Administration cited Chicago’s high murder rate as a justification to withhold grants to the city. “It’s especially tragic that the mayor is less concerned with that staggering figure than he is spending time and taxpayer money protecting criminal aliens and putting Chicago’s law enforcement at greater risk,” a spokeswoman for the DOJ said.

“Chicago will not be blackmailed into changing our values, and we are and will remain a welcoming city” https://t.co/Cf6M6pkjtS

— NBC Los Angeles (@NBCLA) August 7, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: August 7, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

R. Kelly, the R&B singer known for his outlandish, sometimes criminal behavior, is again embroiled in controversy. On Monday, BuzzFeed News reported that the 50-year-old is manipulating a group of young women, controlling everyday aspects of their lives as they stay at one of his properties, apparently by their own free will.

The report features testimony from the parents of some of these women, as well as three former members of Kelly’s entourage who corroborated the details. After luring young, attractive women into his inner circle by inviting them backstage and flying them out to concerts, Kelly would convince them to live in one of his properties in Atlanta or Chicago.

“Puppet Master”

According to the report, Kelly “controls every aspect of their lives: dictating what they eat, how they dress, when they bathe, when they sleep, and how they engage in sexual encounters that he records.” 

The famous artist, who recorded “I Believe I Can Fly” for the Space Jam soundtrack, purportedly uses his lavish lifestyle to attract women before using his verbal skills to convince them to stay with him, according to Cheryl Mack, Kelly’s former personal assistant.

“[Kelly] is a master at mind control. … He is a puppet master,” Mack told BuzzFeed.

One issue with police intervention is that the law allows consenting adults to participate in any relationship they wish, even when it is nontraditional. So when police in Illinois and Georgia performed welfare checks over the past year, no charges were filed. Instead, one 19-year-old aspiring singer staying at Kelly’s mansion in Atlanta, told authorities that she was “fine and did not want to be bothered.”

Some of the parents have spoken with FBI detectives but the bureau could not comment on the investigation to the public.

Mack, along with other former entourage members, said they wish they had documentation to prove their claims. They said Kelly controlled their cell phone usage and barred them from taking pictures of him or his homes. Kelly reportedly has the women call him “Daddy” while he calls them “babies.” He also has them request permission to contact other people besides himself.

For example, the parents of the 19-year-old singer, who last saw their daughter on Dec. 1, 2016, have only received two texts from their daughter since then. The first, sent on Christmas Day said, “I hate Christmas has to be this way this year.” The other came on Mother’s Day: “Happy Mother’s Day from me and Rob,” it said, referring to Kelly’s given name of Robert.

Kelly’s lawyer, Linda Mensch, defended her client’s actions and asked for privacy when BuzzFeed approached her with the allegations. In an email to BuzzFeed, she wrote:

We can only wonder why folks would persist in defaming a great artist who loves his fans, works 24/7, and takes care of all of the people in his life. He works hard to become the best person and artist he can be. It is interesting that stories and tales debunked many years ago turn up when his goal is to stop the violence; put down the guns; and embrace peace and love. I suppose that is the price of fame. Like all of us, Mr. Kelly deserves a personal life. Please respect that.

Criminal Past

Kelly is no stranger to criminal activity and sexual misconduct. In addition to being charged with assault and battery multiple times, Kelly has been accused of sexual relations with underage girls. He settled a dozen or more cases outside of court.

Here is one example of his clear indifference to age-related consent laws:

R Kelly said this but we still bumped “I Believe I Can Fly” at every Kindergarten graduation

pic.twitter.com/O9hlzbmclc

— (@Dr_Sweets23) July 17, 2017

Kelly is perhaps most infamous for a 2002 video which featured him having sex with, and urinating on, an underage girl. During a raid on his property, police found images of the girl on a camera hidden inside Kelly’s duffle bag. Since those images were ruled ineligible in court, Kelly was ultimately found not guilty on 14 child pornography charges. But the stain on his fame and public perception has never disappeared.

And while it’s not criminal, Kelly created the 33-part, 133-minute music video series titled “Trapped in the Closet,” which features a cheating husband, a bisexual pastor, and plenty of gun violence.

“Robert is the Devil”

According to Kelly’s former partners, the women staying at Kelly’s home, or in his Chicago recording studio last summer, include a songwriter, a singer, and a model. There is also a woman known as the “den mother” who teaches newcomers “how Kelly liked to be pleasured sexually,” according to BuzzFeed. All of the women are between the ages of 18 to 31.

Kelly reportedly keeps a black SUV stationed outside each of his properties with a “burly driver” to keep a watchful eye. This is just part of the psychological warfare Kelly wages against his “babies.”

Kelly makes the women wear jogging suits to minimize their attractiveness to other men, Mack said. If the women break one of his rules, Kelly is known to physically and emotionally abuse the women, according to Mack and fellow insider Kitti Jones. Jones said Kelly once pushed her against a tree and slapped her after she was too friendly with a male cashier at a Subway sandwich shop.

“R. Kelly is the sweetest person you will ever want to meet,” Asante McGee, another former Kelly insider said. “But Robert is the devil.”

Kelly wasn’t perceived positively by the public even before this report, but these allegations carry new weight. Every few years Kelly seems to get himself into legal trouble, so this is no surprise, but it is a horrifying portrait of a formerly well-liked artist.

Josh Schmidt

Josh Schmidt is an editorial intern and is a native of the Washington D.C Metropolitan area. He is working towards a degree in multi-platform journalism with a minor in history at nearby University of Maryland. Contact Josh at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post R. Kelly is Reportedly Controlling a “Cult” of Young Women appeared first on Law Street.

“We stand up here, Mr. Jones. Don’t forget,” Bernard Marks, a Holocaust survivor who now lives in Sacramento as an educator, said on Tuesday. Marks was one of hundreds of protesters who gave pointed and stirring speeches at a public forum in Sacramento featuring County Sheriff Scott Jones and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Thomas Homan.

“When I was a little boy in Poland, for no other reason but for being Jewish, I was hauled off by the Nazis,” Marks said. “I spent five and a half years in concentration camp [sic] for one reason and for one reason only: because we picked on people.”

His speech was the boiling point of an already toxic event. From the very start of the forum, Jones and Homan were shouted at by a hostile crowd, as captured by the Los Angeles Times:

Attendees shouted and cursed, chanted and held up protest signs. “Lies!” some yelled when the officials said authorities did not target immigrants who did not pose a danger to the community.

“Where is the money, Jones?” others asked when the sheriff attempted to explain ICE immigration detention contracts, a budget he said totaled $4.8 million for his department.

“You are bringing the uncertainty,” one man shouted at Homan before deputies escorted him out. “You are bringing the uncertainty to everybody.”

Across the country, numerous stories have popped up about actions taken by ICE against illegal immigrants, including Dreamers, or immigrants who came to the country illegally as children. In Portland, a Dreamer was arrested and held in a detention center, which echoes stories concerning detained Dreamers in places like Seattle and Mississippi. In Fort Worth, Texas, 26 parolees suspected of being undocumented immigrants were recently arrested when they showed up to perform their mandatory community service, according to a local NBC affiliate.

They are now detained at an ICE facility in Dallas while they await their fate. In Los Angeles, the LAPD has said reporting of sexual assault and domestic violence among Latino residents has plummeted in 2017, presumably due to concerns over deportation. In the midst of these stories, residents, politicians, and activists around the country have decided to take a stand. And, in a heartbreaking story which has since gone viral, Fatima Avelica, a 13-year-old girl whose father was detained by ICE while he was dropping her off at school, spoke through her tears while telling her story at Sen. Chuck Schumer’s (D-NY) news conference on Tuesday.

Sacramento isn’t the only city standing up for immigrants. On Monday, hundreds of people gathered in Boston outside the JFK Federal Building (where immigration hearings are held) to protest the arrest of three human rights activists from Vermont. Two of the activists were released on bail later that day. In Somerville, Massachusetts, after Bristol County Sheriff Thomas Hodgson called for public government officials of sanctuary cities to be arrested for not following federal immigration orders, Somerville Mayor Joe Curtatone taunted him on Facebook, writing “come and get me.”

Further up north, in Rochester, New York, two immigration protests were held in a span of 24 hours after a woman and her brother, originally from Guatemala, were detained. In Charlotte, North Carolina, 200 protesters “shouted down” a city council meeting concerning the city’s coordination with ICE officials and federal immigration orders. In Chicago, immigration advocates staged a sit-in at a regional ICE office. And in Cape May, New Jersey, protesters made their voices heard at a Board of Freeholders meeting at the county courthouse discussing the county’s new proposed partnership with ICE, according to Shore News Today.

People around the country are standing up for immigrants, and for ICE Acting Director Homan, that is something that will be hard to forget.

Austin Elias-De Jesus

Austin is an editorial intern at Law Street Media. He is a junior at The George Washington University majoring in Political Communication. You can usually find him reading somewhere. If you can’t find him reading, he’s probably taking a walk. Contact Austin at Staff@Lawstreetmedia.com.

The post People Around the Country Are Protesting ICE Arrests and Deportations appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Republicans Finally Introduce Their Obamacare Replacement

Yesterday, House Republicans presented their draft version of a replacement of the Affordable Care Act, which was one of President Donald Trump’s most ardent campaign promises. The new law would keep some of the ACA’s key components, such as prohibiting companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions and allowing people under 26 to stay on their parents’ health plan. However, it would reverse the expansion of Medicaid and drop the requirement that bigger companies must provide health insurance for full-time employees. It also does away with the provision that requires Americans to either have health insurance or pay a penalty fee. And it would get rid of federal subsidies for low-income individuals and, as many people have feared, defund Planned Parenthood for one year (more on that below).

According to Republicans, the ACA is “a sinking ship.” But Democrats are highly critical of this new plan. “Republicans will force tens of millions of families to pay more for worse coverage–and push millions of Americans off of health coverage entirely,” said Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. And some on social media were also critical of the language used to refer to the new plan, claiming it was out of touch and didn’t acknowledge the real costs of care in the U.S.

Yes, the reason poor have trouble affording health care is all the new iPhones they’re buying. https://t.co/EJsZaejOH1 pic.twitter.com/SWoUp2nvAe

— Jamelle Bouie (@jbouie) March 7, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: March 7, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

There’s no doubt that there are a lot of celebrities who are missing President Barack Obama: his effortless cool drew big names to the White House during his 8-year tenure. Now Chance the Rapper, the 23-year old hip-hop star, has taken his Obama appreciation to the next level, modeling for a new fashion line  named “Thank You Obama.”

I’m a model now. #ThankUObama droppin in like 15 minutes. ThankUObama.us pic.twitter.com/Y7jOHKzRam

— Lil Chano From 79th (@chancetherapper) February 2, 2017

The line, from Chicago designer Joe Freshgoods, includes hoodies and tees showing appreciation for the Obama family. In addition to “Thank You Obama” and “Thank You Michelle” clothing, the line also includes a “Malia” t-shirt that includes the message “We all smoke, it’s OK” (a reference to a video of the Obama daughter that sparked some controversy).

Freshgoods wrote about his motivation to start the line on the site:

With this project I wanted to timestamp a period in my life where I felt like I can do whatever I wanted to do and be whatever I wanted to be. The night Obama won his first term gave me so much hope, especially & most importantly as a black man. I decided to make a collection saying “thank you” and give me something to smile at every now and then when I look in the closet.

The ties between Chance and the former president run pretty deep: Chance’s father, Ken Williams-Bennett, served as Obama’s state director when he was a senator. And it appears Obama is a fan, as he cited Chance as one of the “top rappers in the game” in an interview last October. The fellow Chicago native was also tapped to perform at the White House Tree Lighting Ceremony this past December, and was an attendee at Obama’s goodbye party.

Look up Kensli, say cheese!

A photo posted by Chance The Rapper (@chancetherapper) on Dec 31, 2016 at 4:11pm PST

If you’re looking for a fashionable way to show off your gratitude to the former First Family, you can check out the line at thankuobama.us.

Mariam Jaffery

Mariam was an Executive Assistant at Law Street Media and a native of Northern Virginia. She has a B.A. in International Affairs with a minor in Business Administration from George Washington University. Contact Mariam at mjaffery@lawstreetmedia.com.

The post Chance the Rapper Models a New Line of Obama Appreciation Gear appeared first on Law Street.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel unwittingly prompted a public battle with President Donald Trump on Monday, when he criticized Trump for focusing on the crowd size at his inauguration. On Tuesday evening, coinciding with an “O’Reilly Factor” segment on violence in Chicago, Trump tweeted a veiled threat aimed at Emanuel. 

“If Chicago doesn’t fix the horrible ‘carnage’ going on, 228 shootings in 2017 with 42 killings (up 24 percent from 2016), I will send in the Feds!” Trump tweeted, citing figures that aired on Bill O’Reilly’s show. Official statistics from the Chicago Police Department (CPD) put the numbers a bit lower, at 234 people shot, and 38 killed. In 2016, a department spokesman said, 227 were shot, with 33 deaths. The spokesman said the department’s figures do not factor in “justified” shootings (those in self-defense) or officer-involved shootings.

Emanuel’s verbal spat with Trump stemmed from a bit of criticism he lodged at the president on Monday: “You didn’t get elected to debate the crowd size at your inaugural,” the mayor said, referring to Trump’s insistence that his inauguration ceremony was the most-watched ever. “You got elected to make sure that people have a job, that the economy continues to grow, people have security as it relates to their kids’ education. It wasn’t about your crowd size. It was about their lives and their jobs.”

On Wednesday, Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson said his department was “more than willing” to work with the federal government to combat Chicago’s persistent violence. Chicago had a bloody 2016. The death toll was the highest in nearly two decades, at 762 people killed, largely the result of gang violence.

Days before U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch left office, her department released its findings that the CPD “engages in a pattern or practice of using force, including deadly force, in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.” The Justice Department also found a pattern of racial discrimination practiced by Chicago officers.

On Wednesday, a Chicago Democrat, Rep. Luis Gutierrez, came to Emanuel’s defense. “The president wants publicity and to be seen beating up on Democratic elected officials and appearing hostile to a big city like Chicago in the eyes of his suburban and rural voters,” he said.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump Threatens to “Send the Feds” to Chicago to Deal with “Horrible Carnage” appeared first on Law Street.

Christmas Prison Break: Six Inmates Escape Through the Toilet

Early Christmas morning, six inmates at a Tennessee jail made a run for it and escaped through a broken toilet. Police captured five of them pretty quickly, but one is still on the loose. David Wayne Frazier is considered the most dangerous escapee and was imprisoned for aggravated robbery and possession of a weapon.

The unusual escape was made possible by a water leak behind a toilet that had damaged the surrounding concrete wall and bolts. The men were able to simply remove the toilet and crawl out through the hole in the wall, according to the Cocke County Sheriff’s office. At least the men got a little bit of freedom on Christmas.

They were able to unscrew and remove the toilet’s bolts, exposing a hole big enough for them to wiggle through https://t.co/oiK4LzvgoA

— New York Post (@nypost) December 26, 2016

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: December 27, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

A new law will go into effect in Illinois next year that mandates that hair stylists and salon workers receive training to recognize the signs of domestic violence. The bill recognizes the often-close relationship that people develop with their stylists, and is the first of its kind in the United States.

The bill will apply to licensed beauty professionals, including hair stylists, barbers, cosmetologists, aestheticians, hair braiders, and nail technicians. There are approximately 88,000 individuals who fit this designation in the state of Illinois. When applying for a new license, beauty professionals will be required to complete an hour-long course, and then continue to take renewal courses as a part of the continuing education requirements needed to keep a license active. These courses will teach beauty professionals how to recognize and deal with signs of domestic violence. They won’t be required to report anything to the authorities, but will be provided with resources they can give to their affected customers.

This bill was an effort led by Chicago Says No More, an organization aiming to raise awareness of domestic violence. The founder of Chicago Says No More, Kristie Paskvan, pointed out how useful the additional training has the potential to be: “When someone is essentially grooming you, you build a relationship with them. It’s a special relationship. People open up.” The organization is also reportedly considering trying to engage other members of the service sector, like bartenders, in similar efforts.

Of course, there are some who are hesitant about the bill and its effects. It’s a big burden to put on beauty professionals. But the point is just to spread more information and make sure that there are as many resources available to victims of domestic violence as possible. According to the Chicago Tribune:

Although the measure does not require stylists to report incidents to authorities, advocates hope the training will ultimately help lower incidents of domestic violence by making more people conscious of the problem, and offering victims one more place they can turn for help, especially when many do not seek help from authorities, said Kristie Paskvan, founder of Chicago Says No More.

Combatting domestic violence–a crime which often goes unreported–should be a priority for all of the U.S. If Illinois’s innovative new idea works, we may see it extended to other states.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post New Illinois Law Will Help Salon Workers Recognize Domestic Violence appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Motive For OSU Attack Still Unclear

Yesterday, a student at Ohio State University posted a rant online saying “America! Stop interfering with other countries, especially Muslim Ummah [community]. We are not weak. We are not weak, remember that.” Then he drove a car straight into a crowd at Ohio State, before getting out and stabbing multiple people. Abdul Razak Ali Artan was only 18 years old and police are still investigating a possible motive for the deed. None of Artan’s victims died, but 11 people were taken to the hospital and Artan was killed by the police.

Now many people fear that this will increase tensions between the left and right and that Islamophobia and anti-refugee sentiments will get a boost, as Artan was a Somali refugee. And certain controversial political figures got in on that debate right away:

Brutal attack on Americans by Somali refugee today demands urgent electoral reform! Next time, we must be allowed to vote for Trump twice.

— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) November 29, 2016

Watch as Ohio State University stops trending now that twitter knows it was a Somali Muslim refugee student taking an Americans kid’s spot

— Jared Wyand (@JaredWyand) November 28, 2016

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: November 29, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Republican Vice Presidential nominee Mike Pence is being criticized for his response to a controversial case in which a man was wrongfully convicted. Now the man is asking to go back to court for another trial since Pence, as Indiana’s Governor, won’t grant him a pardon until he has tried all other judicial options.

Keith Cooper spent almost ten years in prison for armed robbery, a crime he didn’t commit but was wrongfully convicted for in 1996. During the robbery a teenager was shot in the stomach but survived. When another man involved in the case had his conviction overturned because of new evidence that surfaced in 2005, authorities offered Cooper a new trial, which could take at least two years–or the chance to go home to his family but have a felony conviction on his record.

After being locked up for a decade, Cooper chose the latter. He could finally see his wife and three children again. But since it’s been next to impossible to find a decent job as a convicted felon, he later sought a gubernatorial pardon. In the spring of 2014 the parole board in Indiana unanimously urged Pence to grant Cooper a pardon. This would likely have been the first pardon based on actual innocence in Indiana history.

Mike Pence refuses to pardon an innocent and wrongly convicted man, yet GOP runs a willie horton ad attacking Kaine https://t.co/389BIxtBcQ

— geokaren (@geokaren) October 4, 2016

And according to DNA evidence, Cooper is innocent. The victims and original prosecutor believe in Cooper’s innocence as well. But despite that fact, Pence’s office said in a September 20 letter that Cooper must first try all other judicial options. Basically that means Pence doesn’t have to make a decision about granting a pardon before he leaves office in January.

Many of Cooper’s supporters wanted the case to be brought up at the Vice Presidential debate on Tuesday.

Mike Pence should be asked why he has not pardoned Keith Cooper, an innocent man wrongly imprisoned for ten years. #VPDebate #KeithCooper

— Mike Williams (@drummike2012) October 4, 2016

Can’t believe @mike_pence said this during the #VPDebate Actions speak louder than words! #PardonKeithCooper @ElliotSlosar pic.twitter.com/5WHwWC7at4

— Pardon Keith Cooper (@PardonKeith) October 5, 2016

Cooper’s attorney Elliot Slosar said:

The lack of courage displayed by Gov. Pence is shocking. Instead of using his executive power to change the life of an innocent man, Gov. Pence has decided to punt this issue to the next governor of Indiana and inform Mr. Cooper that he needs to head back to the same court where he got wrongfully convicted in the first place.

But Pence’s deputy of staff chief Matthew Lloyd replied:

The governor’s office believes this is a necessary and proper approach that will produce information the governor will need as he considers a pardon for Mr. Cooper.

Pence has only pardoned three people during his three years as governor, while his predecessor Mitch Daniels pardoned 60 people during eight years in office. The Cooper case has gained serious support on social media as well as on an online petition–we’ll have to see if it has any effect on Pence’s numbers.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Innocent Man Seeks New Trial After Governor Mike Pence Declined Pardon appeared first on Law Street.

During the first presidential debate, Donald Trump made a point of citing violence in Chicago but failed to recognize Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s new plan for fighting violent crime in the city. The plan is broken into three categories: enforcement, investment, and prevention. But will it actually be effective?

The enforcement step of the plan has received the most attention as it involves hiring almost 1,000 new beat cops, detectives, and supervisors (and outfitting them with new squad cars and equipment). Emanuel has pledged not to raise taxes to pay for the expansion of the police force but it is unclear how he plans to fund these new hires. Hiring will begin as soon as January, so the approximately $135 million necessary to fund this wave of new police hires will have to show up quickly if Emanuel wants to make good on his promise.

Although adding officers to the force is an admirable step for a city where the police force has been stretched thin, there are doubts regarding whether Emanuel’s new hires will be enough to seriously impact Chicago. It is not so much the number of officers who are available as it is their training and interaction with the community that will shape attempts to curb violent crime throughout the metropolitan area. Besides concerns that the plan will be ineffective, critics have also stepped forward to argue that this plan gives Mayor Emanuel too much power, as it interferes with the independence of the police force. These objections are largely linked to the establishment of the Civilian Office of Police Accountability, which would have the power to investigate alleged police misconduct to a much greater extent than in the past. The mayor will appoint most of the employees of this investigative agency, which has led community members to question its impartiality and ability to break away from the failures of the Independent Police Review Authority, the agency that it will be replacing.

The mayor unveiled his plan during a speech which was notable not for its rhetoric about improving policing but for what it lacked–there were virtually no references to improving the racial divide between the police force and minority communities. The mayor did not address the issues with predictive policing or this summer’s protests against police brutality in Chicago. The majority of both homicide perpetrators and victims in Chicago are black, and gang membership in the city is primarily concentrated among black and Latino populations. Although one should never jump to the same simplistic conclusion that Trump used in the first debate, implying that all minority citizens of Chicago live in violent squalor, it is undeniable that the black community has seen the largest share of violence in the city. Mayor Emanuel touted mentorship programs and family interventions as solutions to violence in Chicago neighborhoods but he did not go any further to discuss how community leaders can dissuade young people from joining gangs, buying guns, or being injured during violent confrontations with police officers. Community policing is a two-way street: police officers have to be trained but there needs to be community outreach as well. If neither side is being provided with directions and tools on how to improve their relations, will anything really change in Chicago?

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Chicago’s Incomplete Plan to Combat Violence appeared first on Law Street.

Last week’s top stories on Law Street covered Marco Gutierrez’s “taco truck” omen, debunking LSAT myths, and Chicago’s rising violence. ICYMI–check out the best of the week below!

1. The Best ‘Taco Trucks on Every Corner’ Responses

Late last week, one of Trump’s surrogates, Marco Gutierrez, made a bizarre comment about how “taco trucks will be on every corner” if we don’t do something to fix immigration issues in the United States. But tacos are excellent, so most people didn’t have a problem with this concept. Read the full article here.

2. Studying for the LSAT: Myths vs. Facts

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

One of the deadliest cities in America, Chicago, recorded its 500th homicide over Labor Day weekend, making 2016–with four months yet to pass–the deadliest year in a decade in a city where gang-related violence has ruptured in recent years. By the close of the weekend, according to Chicago Tribune data, 512 people in Chicago had been killed this year. Most of the violence occurred from Monday morning into dawn on Tuesday, as all 13 victims died from gunshot wounds. Last weekend, 65 people were shot in total.

According to the Tribune, police attributed the late surge in shootings to retaliatory acts by gang members at holiday gatherings. Many of the homicides took place in the city’s South Side neighborhoods, the nucleus of violence during a historically bloody summer. In August alone, 90 people were killed, the highest single month tally since June 1996.

As the final days of summer tick away, 2016 is projected to be Chicago’s deadliest year in at least a decade. The deadliest city with two million citizens or more (a handful of other cities–St. Louis, Detroit, Baltimore–see more murders on a per capita basis), Chicago is on track to record its highest murder rate since the early 2000s. The projected homicide rate for the city for 2016 is 24.1 deaths per 100,000 people. New York, where murder rates have been steadily declining, is on pace for a substantially lower homicide rate, at 3.8 per 100,000 people.

Violence over the Labor Day holiday brought Chicago’s gun-related homicide total to 512 in 2016#LostStreetsChicago https://t.co/p3TuhFbg4r

— BBC News US (@BBCNewsUS) September 6, 2016

A majority of Chicago’s victims die as the result of gun violence. Proponents of gun-control argue the city needs stricter gun ordinances. But Illinois has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. The reality is that 60 percent of the city’s guns were purchased out of state–many from Indiana–and driven back into the city.  The state government is taking political steps to address the city’s exorbitant violence.

A few weeks ago, Governor Bruce Rauner (R-IL), passed a law to address people without gun-owner IDs  bringing firearms into Illinois. The law reclassifies the act from a crime to a felony, which would carry a penalty of four to 20 years in prison, and up to 30 years for repeat offenders.

Labor Day weekend was the deadliest of the three holiday weekends thus far in Chicago. Six fatalities were recorded over Memorial Day weekend, and five during the July 4th weekend. Among those killed over the weekend was a retired pastor, but most of the victims were 20-something year old males.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Chicago Records 500th Homicide of the Year Over Labor Day Weekend appeared first on Law Street.

Donald Trump’s reaction to the fatal shooting of NBA player Dwyane Wade’s cousin on Friday sparked heated condemnation from actor Don Cheadle and others on Twitter. Nykea Aldridge, 32, was shot and killed in Chicago while pushing her toddler in a stroller on her way to register her kids for school on Friday.

Two men fired shots at another man but accidentally hit Aldridge in the arm and the head. She was later pronounced dead at a hospital. Aldrige was a full-time mother of four: 12-year old Summer, 10-year-old Sincere, 8-year-old Shavae, and Da’Kota, the infant who was with her at the time of the shooting but was not injured.

Dwyane Wade announced his cousin’s death on Twitter, expressing grief and anger over the senseless gun violence that is plaguing Chicago:

My cousin was killed today in Chicago. Another act of senseless gun violence. 4 kids lost their mom for NO REASON. Unreal. #EnoughIsEnough

— DWade (@DwyaneWade) August 27, 2016

On Saturday, Donald Trump tweeted three separate times about the incident. His first tweet misspelled Dwyane Wade’s name and was deleted. He later sent out the same tweet but corrected the spelling:

Dwyane Wade’s cousin was just shot and killed walking her baby in Chicago. Just what I have been saying. African-Americans will VOTE TRUMP!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 27, 2016

Trump sought to use Aldridge’s death to underscore his recent claims about safety in black communities. But many were quick to denounce Trump’s response as inappropriate. Actor Don Cheadle responded forcefully:

You are truly a POS https://t.co/cyTwxgxwDh

— Don Cheadle (@DonCheadle) August 27, 2016

Cheadle quickly tweeted again, this time referencing Trump’s initial misspelling of Wade’s name.

Sorry. I misspelled “die in a grease fire.” https://t.co/16K2iq1pF4

— Don Cheadle (@DonCheadle) August 27, 2016

Hours later, Trump sent his condolences:

My condolences to Dwyane Wade and his family, on the loss of Nykea Aldridge. They are in my thoughts and prayers.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 27, 2016

Two brothers in their twenties were arrested for the fatal shooting and appeared in court on Monday. Both Darwin Sorrells Jr. and Derren Sorrells are convicted felons who were on parole at the time of the shooting. They are also both documented gang members.

The Sorrells were quickly arrested thanks to surveillance footage and help from the public, according to Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson. At a news conference on Sunday he said:

This tragedy isn’t just noteworthy because Ms. Aldridge has a famous family member. Rather, it shows that the cycle of arrests, convictions and parole isn’t changing the behavior of those who repeatedly commit crimes.

He finished by saying, “They’re going to keep doing it until we show them we’re serious.”

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump’s Response to Nykea Aldridge’s Death Sparks Fury from Don Cheadle appeared first on Law Street.

Research and analysis done by Law Street’s Law School Rankings team: Alexis Evans, Anneliese Mahoney, Sean Simon, Alex Simone, Inez Nicholson, Ashlee Smith, Sam Reilly, Julia Bryant.

Click here for detailed ranking information for each of the Top 10 Law Schools for Labor Law.

Click here to see all the 2016 specialty rankings.

Click here for information on rankings methodology.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Top 10 Law Schools for Labor Law: #3 University of Chicago Law School appeared first on Law Street.

On Tuesday, May 3, teachers across Detroit called in sick. Enough, in fact, that 94 of the district’s 97 schools had to close for the day. This was not the result of Zika or some other new super virus; the teachers weren’t actually sick at all and everybody knew it. So what is exactly was happening? A sick-out. In Detroit and in other places in the past, teachers have been resorting to this desperate tactic in order to protest the shabby state of schools. Read on to find out more about the “sick-outs,” why they are happening in Detroit and other places and whether or not they are doing anything to inspire the changes they are meant to incite.

What’s happening in Detroit?

A sick-out is defined as exactly what is sounds like: “An organized absence from work by workers in the pretext of sickness.” The sick-out that occurred in Detroit earlier this month was a two-day, school district-wide protest that involved over half of the area’s 3,000 teachers. After fears that the school district would not be able to pay all of its teachers for the full year heightened, many teachers began protesting.

Specifically, there are two ways teachers can be paid–with paychecks spread out over a full calendar year or only during the school year. Due to serious budgeting shortfalls, the school system is set to run out of money for teacher salaries some time in the summer. As a result, those paid year round will end up with less than those who get paid only during the school year itself. If the budget was in good shape, teachers on both pay schedules would get the full amount, just paid out over a different period of time. Teachers in Detroit already held a mass sick-out in January to protest the deteriorating conditions in many Detroit public schools, which include pest infestations, mold, and damaged infrastructure. They have so far opted for sick-outs because other traditional means of protest, namely strikes, are against the law for teachers in Michigan.

The video below looks at the most recent sick-out:

A stop-gap measure has already been in place since March in the form of a $48.7 million agreement passed by the legislature to keep schools operating until the end of June. While this temporary fix is already in place, Michigan legislators have been debating whether or not to pass an additional $700 million dollar solution. This plan would create a new school district to educate students and leave the debt to be paid off with the old district. Essentially, it would leave one district to handle the task of paying the debt and the other would only be concerned with educating students. However, even if this plan makes it through the state legislature, there is no guarantee that it will work.

These budgeting issues are largely products of Detroit’s much-publicized bankruptcy back in 2013. When Detroit declared bankruptcy, city leaders estimated it had as much as $18 billion in debts that it could not pay, ranging from pensions to bond obligations. The amount of debt was ultimately reduced to $7 billion, which included a grand bargain in which private entities agreed to donate approximately $816 million to not only reduce cuts to pensions but also to ensure the survival of other important aspects of Detroit’s culture, such as its art museum. Even with Detroit emerging from bankruptcy and early returns showing the city doing better, it is still a long path to full recovery.

The following video looks at the totality of the Detroit bankruptcy:

Where else are sick-outs happening?

This was not the first time Detroit’s teachers have fought back. In 2006, they held a strike and earlier this year held another sick-out. However, this most recent sick-out was the largest. Detroit’s teachers are also not alone in using tactics such as these to protest pay and working conditions. In 2014, teachers in Colorado staged sick-outs of their own. In that case, the dispute was partly over the collective bargaining agreement, but also over attempts to prevent changes to history courses, which conservatives within the school districts thought would reflect poorly on American history.

A closer comparison, though, may be what is happening in Chicago. While there have not been any actual sick-outs in Chicago yet, the situation certainly seems ripe for that type of action. Much like Detroit, the governor of Illinois has called for the school district in Chicago to declare bankruptcy, which would, among other things, free the district from its obligations to many of its teachers and employees.

This situation is not new to Chicago either; teachers protested in 2012 over many of these same issues and the situation was only averted through concessions from both sides. However, movements to strip state employee rights as cost cutting measures have been growing lately, as displayed by events like these as well as developments like the anti-union legislation of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. Chicago has already forced teachers to take unpaid days off and has laid off employees, including some teachers, to cut costs. This is also the impetus for getting the school district to declare bankruptcy–if that happens the state is no longer beholden to union agreements and may be able to reduce its pension obligations.

In order for the Chicago Public School System to declare bankruptcy, the city itself would have to declare bankruptcy. In the case of Chicago at least, it is not able to file for bankruptcy under current laws, though a proposal may be making its way through the state legislature. In 2015, Illinois Republicans proposed a bill that would make bankruptcies legal for municipalities, but it failed to pass. While it would certainly be a major embarrassment if Chicago, the third largest and a very affluent city, was forced to declared bankruptcy, many state leaders support the option.

Is any of this making a difference?

The battle in Detroit has drawn the usual criticisms from both sides. The teachers are critical of the government’s handling of the city’s finances, claiming they just want to be paid the money owed to them and be provided with acceptable conditions to teach in. Conversely, politicians called the teachers’ actions political, claiming that they are jeopardizing the futures of the students they teach. While the two sides hurl accusations at each other, it is fair to ask if what they are doing is actually improving the situation.

On the Wednesday following the recent sick-outs, teachers agreed to return to work after the state legislature moved forward on a $500 million measure to address the district’s fiscal issues. However, this deal must still be reconciled with a similar piece of legislation passed by the state’s senate before a solution can be finalized. If the two sides are unable to agree, another stop-gap measure may be used, but that would risk more sick-outs and further erode the confidence in the state government.

The video below looks at the cumulative problems plaguing Detroit Public Schools:

Conclusion

Can Detroit right the ship when it comes to its schools?  This is a question and a problem that is only compounded by the many complicated issues facing the city. Detroit Public Schools have lost over 100,000 students in roughly 13 years to charter schools, private academies, and attrition. That is a lot of lost revenue for any city, but it is especially taxing for one that just emerged from the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history.

Detroit isn’t the only city with public schools in poor fiscal shape. Chicago is probably the most comparable example, which may soon face many of the same issues and has already taken some drastic measures to cut costs. In light of Detroit’s bankruptcy, teachers and city officials have become increasingly concerned with how the school district will meet its long-term pension obligations and even its regular teacher salaries. The same issues play important parts in the debate over whether bankruptcy is the appropriate tool to deal with the city of Chicago and its public school system.

In light of Detroit’s bankruptcy, several difficult decisions were made yet the city’s schools are still in a particularly difficult situation. If the city is unable to find a solution beyond paying off one debt by accruing another, while at the same time offering fewer services, this may not be the last time its teachers call in sick.

Resources

CNN: Most Detroit Schools Closed Again Due to Teacher ‘Sickouts’

Merriam-Webster: Definition of Sick-out

Detroit Free Press: DPS Sick-outs a Symptom of Lansing’s Ill Behavior

Think Progress: Everything You Need To Know About Detroit’s Bankruptcy Settlement

The Bond Buyer: Detroit, A Year Out Of Bankruptcy, Still Faces Long Road Back

In These Times: Why Chicago Won’t Go Bankrupt-And Detroit Didn’t Have To

The Guardian: Colorado Teachers Stage Mass Sick-out to Protest U.S. History Curriculum Changes

Fortune: Why Chicago’s Fight With Teachers Is the Sign of a Much Bigger Problem

Chicago Business: GOP Plan Would Allow State Takeover of CPS and Bankruptcy

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Calling in Sick: The Problems with Detroit Public Schools appeared first on Law Street.

Baltimore recorded its 300th homicide of 2015 last month, marking the highest number of killings for the city since 1999. Given the decrease in the city’s population over the past several decades, the actual murder rate in 2015 may be the highest in the city’s history. While the rising number of homicides is certainly troubling for Baltimore, it is not the only U.S. city experiencing a spike in homicides. The explanations for this abrupt rise, after years of decline, range from the after-effects of much-publicized police killings to a drug epidemic to simply warmer weather. This article will examine this rise and seek to determine if it is an outlier or a sign of some new trend.

Murders on the Decline?

Before even getting to whether homicides are an increasing threat or even up in 2015, the numbers have to be put into perspective. The much larger trend at play has been a large and consistent decline in violent crime, including homicides, over the past few decades.

Since 1993, the violent crime rate per 100,000 people in the United States has dropped by more than 50 percent. Additionally, while the drop was felt nationwide, it was also specifically evident in cities like New York that have historically been associated with crime, though that association may be starting to wear off. In 1990, there were 2,245 homicides in New York City. By contrast, there were 328 murders in 2014, the lowest number seen since 1963 when New York was also a much smaller city. In other words, crime is down, way down, from twenty years ago. Two other examples are Los Angeles and Washington D.C., which saw their murder rates drop 90 and 76 percent respectively since 1992.

The explanations behind these drops range far and wide. A number of factors have been suggested, including a better economy, higher incarceration rates, the death penalty, more police officers, and even the greater acceptance of abortions to name a few. While all these have been suggested, however, none has necessarily been shown to hold water. Interestingly one of the most scientifically supported reasons has been the reduced use of lead in everyday goods because lead exposure in children is believed to cause more violent behavior. Reduced drug and alcohol use is another factor that has been cited in the reduction.

What’s Going on This Year?

In August, the New York Times published an article noting that 35 U.S. cities have seen their murder rates rise in 2015. This includes a number of major cities in the U.S. such as New York, Chicago, Philadelphia and even the nation’s capital, Washington D.C. After years of dramatic decline, what could be causing these rates to reverse course and begin to rise again?

The Devil is in the Details

While the data seems to suggest a rise in violent crime and there are several plausible sounding theories to support it, is it actually happening?  The answer to that question is both yes and no. After the New York Times published its article, Five Thirty Eight decided to take a closer look at the statistics. Using partial-year data for the nation’s 60 largest cities, it found that homicides are indeed up 20 percent from last year in 26 of the nation’s 60 largest cities and 16 percent overall. However, they were also down in 19 of the same 60 cities including places like Boston, Las Vegas, and San Diego to name a few. In other words, the results used in the sample from the Times article may be skewed. While certain cities’ homicide numbers are up, at most they are only up a fraction or not at all. It is also important to look at the raw numbers in addition to the percentages when there is a relatively small number of homicides to begin with. For example, Five Thirty Eight found that Seattle, Washington experienced a 20 percent increase in homicides at the end of August relative to the previous year, but that increase was the result of three additional murders–going from 15 in 2014 to 18 this year. It is also important to acknowledge that the data is preliminary and only includes part of the year. The full, definitive dataset will not be available until the FBI publishes its annual statistics next fall.

While certain cities’ homicide numbers are up, in most they are only up a fraction or not at all. It is also important to look at the raw numbers in addition to the percentages when there is a relatively small number of homicides to begin with. For example, Five Thirty Eight found that Seattle, Washington experienced a 20 percent increase in homicides at the end of August relative to the previous year, but that increase was the result of three additional murders–going from 15 in 2014 to 18 this year. It is also important to acknowledge that the data is preliminary and only includes part of the year. The full, definitive dataset will not be available until the FBI publishes its annual statistics next fall.

Thus, while the overall rise in the national rate of 16 percent is statistically significant–Five Thirty Eight’s finding among the largest 60 cities–many cities’ individual changes are not. Statistical significance is a test to determine whether or not a change or relationship is the result of chance. It is also worth noting that in 2005 almost an identical rise of 15 percent in the national rate of homicides occurred before the number regressed to the mean and continued its slow decline.

The Who, What, Where, and Why

There seem to be as many explanations for murders may be rising in these cities as there were in explaining the large decline in violent crime over previous two decades. However, many of theories behind the recent rise in homicides do not seem to stand up to scrutiny either.

One that has gained a lot of traction is a theory known as the “Ferguson Effect.” According to this theory, a major contributing factor to the spike in violence is a growing reluctance among police officers to carry out routine police work in fear of criticism. This theory is largely a response to the controversial shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri as well as the death of Freddie Gray while in the custody of Baltimore policy. Put simply, bad guys are running free because police officers fear public damnation.

Ironically, there is competing theory from a community perspective, arguing that police actions have made regular citizens less likely to go to the police for assistance and more willing to take matters into their own hands. In either case the rise in violence in St. Louis or Baltimore, which has been attributed by some as the result of a Ferguson Effect, actually started prior to the highly publicized incidents of police brutality so these explanations do not seem very plausible. Attorney General Lauretta Lynch also testified before Congress saying that there is “no data” to support that theory.

Another explanation is the vast number of guns in the United States. While the exact number of guns in civilian circulation is impossible to pinpoint, it is estimated there are as many as 357 million nationwide–approximately 40 million more guns than U.S. citizens. Once again, while having more guns around likely leads to more gun-related deaths, there were hundreds of millions of guns around prior to this year so that explanation is also not very convincing.

Others argue that an increase in gang violence, fueled by drugs, has led to increased homicides. Of the reasons given, increased gang warfare is one of most likely explanations because it would likely affect only certain neighborhoods or cities and not the entire country. Some argue that cities like Chicago, are experiencing an increase in gang violence and illegal guns, which may explain recent spikes in homicides, but that is unlikely to be the case for every city.

Even the economy has been blamed as part of the “routine activities theory,” which suggests that when people are better off financially they more likely to go shopping or out to eat and thus more likely to encounter criminals. Others argue that crime generally goes down when the economy is doing well. However, John Roman, a senior fellow at the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute, noted in an interview with Vox that a good economy can also lead to higher crime if improvements are not distributed equally and the needs of the underserved are not addressed.

When you look at all of the data and try to make sense of it with the competing theories, it seems likely that each city has its own explanation. We do not yet know whether or not the spike identified this summer is indicative of a trend, but if that is the case we likely need more data to determine what might be causing it.

The accompanying video looks at the increase and some of the reasons suggested for it:

Perception is Believing

Despite what the numbers say or whether the theories much of this data is based on are viable, people ultimately make up their own minds on what is true or not. In a 2013 Pew Research Center survey, 56 percent of  those polled believed that gun violence was higher than it was 20 years earlier, but in reality, gun homicides had nearly been cut in half by 2013.  This poll was conducted before the recent spate of highly publicized police killings, indicating the number may even be even higher now. It is not surprising the notion of higher homicide rates resonate with people, even if they are a one term aberration and near historic lows. The following video looks at the perception or misperception of crime in the United States:

Conclusion

While violent crime, including homicides, has been decreasing since the early 90s, recent evidence suggests there may be a spike in homicides this year–at least in some of the United States’ largest cities. But it remains unclear whether this is emblematic of a trend, or even if it was just a brief increase as has often occurred in the past. Even with this increase, however, the rate is nowhere near approaching the record highs from two-decades ago.

In light of these findings, many questions emerge. Why is the homicide rate up this year? Are these numbers skewed by an unrepresentative sample? Is this the sign of a trend or just a temporary blip? Questions like these will not be answered for years if they are answered at all. While it is necessary to try and understand the data in order to improve policing and crime-related public policy, it is important to take a more local look at why homicides might be going up in each city. A spike in several cities is not necessarily indicative of a national problem.

Resources

The Washington Post: Baltimore’s 300th Killing This Year: A violent Milestone in a Riot-Scarred City

NYC: News from the Blue Room

The New York Times: Murders in New York Drop to a Record Low, but Officers Aren’t Celebrating

Forbes: What’s Behind the Decline in Crime?

The New York Times: Murder Rates Rising Sharply in Many U.S. Cities

Vox: Why Murder Rates are Up in St. Louis, Baltimore and Some Other Cities

The Washington Post: There are Now More Guns Than People in the United States

Five Thirty Eight: Scare Headlines Exaggerate the U.S. Crime Wave

Stat Pac: Statistical Significance

Pew Research Center: Gun Homicide Steady After Decline in the 90s; Suicide Rates Edge Up

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rising Homicides in Some American Cities: What’s Actually Going on? appeared first on Law Street.

On December 4, Spike Lee’s much debated new film “Chi-Raq” hit theaters. Some viewers approached the trailer and storyline with trepidation in the wake of its release, as the movie satirically approaches the issue of gun violence in Chicago. After an innocent seven-year-old girl dies in crossfire between the Spartans gang, led by rapper Chi-Raq (Nick Cannon), and rival Trojans gang, led by Cyclops (Wesley Snipes), Lysistrata (Teyonnah Paris), Chi-Raq’s girlfriend, leads a sex strike. The plot is loosely based off the ancient Greek comedy “Lysistrata,” by Aristophanes. Dolmedes (Samuel L. Jackson), the narrator of the film, alludes to such a connection in the opening scene.

Initially, I found the idea of a satirical film about gun violence in Chicago misguided and disconcerting, especially considering the disheartening reality of tragic loss multiple Chicagoans endure everyday due to guns. The name of the film itself references a Chicago nickname dubbed several years ago, its origins unknown, which compares the homicides in Chicago to the death of Americans in the Iraq War. The movie begins with the statistic: between 2003-2011 American deaths totaled 4,424, while homicides in Chicago from 2001-2015 topped 7,356. This year alone there have been 2,221 shootings in Chicago, and police have confiscated 6,521 illegal guns.

Some of the consistently serious tones of the movie revolve around Irene (Jennifer Hudson) the mother of the seven-year-old girl killed. No one admits to the killing, and witnesses neglect to come forth about it. The painstaking silence is strikingly similar to the case of Tyshawn Lee–a nine-year-old boy lured into an alley and killed on November 7th in Chicago in gang retaliation against his father. Not until November 27th did police take Corey Morgan into custody and charge him with first degree murder.

“Chi-raq’s” fictional storyline blatantly mixed with reality during a powerful scene when Lysistrata and her sex strike supporters shouted the names of victims Trayvon Martin, Sandra Bland, and Tamir Rice, among other names. But missing from the list was Laquan McDonald who, sadly, actually might have made the movie had Chicago Police not withheld footage of his shooting for over a year.

“Chi-Raq” could not come at a more relevant time. Yet the lag in political action against gun violence almost ensures that any moment would be appropriate for “Chi-Raq.” While politicians discuss stricter gun regulations yet again on account of the tragedy in San Bernardino someone will lose a son, daughter, brother, or sister to a gun. However, terrorism or assault rifles will not necessarily be the blame for these deaths. Instead, Lee brings attention to the realities of gun violence not always discussed after mass shootings.

Some Chicagoans may dislike “Chi-Raq” for its failure to depict the lived reality of the South Side of Chicago in a genuine form, but it is not meant to be absolutely true to life. Kevin Willmont and Lee poetically infuse insightful criticism of the politics of gun regulations, the systemic oppression of the black community, and the impact of gang violence. The satirical foundation of the plot might not appeal to everyone and the movie has its issues, but the serious moments constantly remind viewers of the real-life victims. Now the only thing I find disconcerting about the film is its likeness to the front page news: how long will the same tragedies continue to happen until things change?

Dorsey Hill

Dorsey is a member of Barnard College’s class of 2016 with a major in Urban Studies and concentration in Political Science. As a native of Chicago and resident of New York City, Dorsey loves to explore the multiple cultural facets of cities. She has a deep interest in social justice issue especially those relevant to urban environments. Contact Dorsey at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Chi-Raq: Not Just Satire appeared first on Law Street.

Big time Illinois lottery winners are lucky–sort of. The recent winners are probably happy to have won big chunks of money, but they also just got news that they won’t receive it any time soon. As a result of the Illinois government’s inability to pass a budget, any winners of $25,000 or more won’t receive their payouts just yet.

It’s now two months into Illinois’s fiscal year without a budget, as the negotiations have reached a standstill. Governor Bruce Rauner is stuck into a fight with the Democrats who control the state legislature. The Democrats are looking to raise taxes, but Rauner is pushing for things like changes to workers’ compensation and collective bargaining.

Right now the two sides are at an impasse–so only essential things are being paid for, like payroll, schools, and child and foster care. The lottery does not fall under the category of essential items; moreover, payments over $25,000 need to be disbursed by the state comptroller. The spokesman for the Illinois Lottery Steve Rossi, explained:

The lottery is a state agency like many others, and we’re obviously affected by the budget situation. Since the legal authority is not there for the comptroller to disburse payments, those payments are delayed.

Lottery officials have explained that eventually the money will be paid out, but no one is exactly sure when. This has created some problems for winners who are waiting on that money, assuming they would have received it by now. This is an issue for winners of $25,000 or more, those who won between $25,000 and $600 can pick it up at various lottery offices throughout the state. Winners of $600 or less can pick their money wherever they bought the tickets.

State Representative Jack Franks, a Democrat, explained how this is indicative of some bigger issues with the lottery system. He stated:

Our government is committing a fraud on the taxpayers, because we’re holding ourselves out as selling a good, and we’re not — we’re not selling anything. The lottery is a contract: I pay my money, and if I win, you’re obligated to pay me and you have to pay me timely. It doesn’t say if you have money or when you have money.

While the lottery is obviously not an essential feature of what a state provides, the fact that a budget hold up reverberates through a state’s many different departments is clear. Not paying out prizes is probably a bad move in the long run–the lottery brings in plenty of revenue, and people won’t be encouraged to play if they aren’t guaranteed that they’ll receive the money. Lottery winners are certainly hoping that the budget snafu will be resolved soon.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Why Can’t Illinois Pay its Lottery Winners? appeared first on Law Street.

Saturday was the beginning of August and the last carefree month of summer break for many. This is the month when people make the most of the free time they have with their loved ones and begin to prepare to get back into their normal work or school routine. But unfortunately in Chicago, Illinois, the beginning of August was marred by an influx of shootings in the Windy City.

Beginning Sunday afternoon, at least 15 people were shot across the city. This is consistent with recent trends–July also saw an elevated number of shootings. During the 4th of July holiday weekend about 10 people were killed and 55 injured during various shooting incidents.

The number of victims this weekend in Chicago is extraordinary–this Sunday afternoon a 17-year-old boy was shot at about 4 p.m. on the South Side.. As the day continued, in the Roseland neighborhood on the Far South Side a 16-year-old boy and 23-year-old man were shot during a drive-by around 7:15 pm. At 8:40 pm a five-year-old girl was shot in the leg in the Englewood neighborhood on the South Side. Five minutes later gunshots were heard in the Belmont Central neighborhood on the Northwest Side as a seven-year-old boy and 19-year-old man were shot. Two women, 34 and 39, and a man, 26, were shot at about 7:55 p.m. Sunday on South Brandon Avenue on the South Side, according to police spokesman Officer Thomas Sweeney. At 9:30 p.m. Sunday, a 19-year-old man was shot in the Cabrini Green neighborhood on the Near North Side, police spokesman Ron Gaines said. The largest shooting incident this Sunday occurred in the West Englewood neighborhood on the South Side of the city. According to Gaines, four men were shot on South Winchester Avenue around 9:50pm. The men were between the ages of 19 and 25. The violence continued all the way through the next morning when a 20-year-old man was shot at 1:40 a.m. Monday, in the West Englewood neighborhood. No one has been taken into custody yet for the shootings and police are still investigating each case. The variety of victims and geographical breadth are certainly concerning.

Over the past five years, Chicago has seen more than 12,000 shootings. By June of this year Chicago had reached a total of 1,000 shootings–almost three weeks earlier than when the city reached 1,000 shootings in 2014. Chicago has gun laws that have banned assault rifles, high-capacity magazines, and places to purchase ammo, which makes it one of the toughest places in the country to legally obtain a firing weapon. But even with these bans, gun violence has not decreased. Although the homicide rate has gone down, the number of shootings in the city is on the rise–indicating that the city still has work to do even with its restrictive gun laws.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Number of Shootings In Chicago Continues To Rise: When Will it Stop? appeared first on Law Street.

This year, Chicago’s celebration of the Fourth of July quickly turned into a bloody massacre. Reports vary on the exact amount of fatalities and people injured, although it appears that at least ten people were killed, and over fifty others were harmed due to gunfire in multiple different incidents throughout the city. This bloodshed was horrifying, although it’s only one of many instances of gun violence in the Windy City in recent years that have left countless people dead and put residents on high alert.

Among the victims was a seven-year-old boy, Amari Brown, who was fatally shot while watching the fireworks with his father, Antonio. Investigators believe that the intended target of the gunfire was his father, who is a known gang member with forty-five past arrests and who refused to cooperate with detectives during the investigation into his son’s death. Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy made an emotional plea to the public, urging people to put an end to this senseless brutality that has swept the city in not only the past few months but throughout recent years.

Chicago has a notorious gang population and the usage of guns is staggering. The problem is not too little of a police presence on the streets, given that it was actually increased by thirty percent over the holiday weekend, nor was it a lack of gun confiscations and arrests since these numbers were also higher than usual. Instead, McCarthy believes that there is a “broken system,” since criminals never really have to deal with the repercussions of their actions. He claims that gun control laws are too lenient in the city, despite Chicago having some of the strictest gun laws in the country.

Shooting during July 4th celebration leaves 7-year-old dead; police say bullet meant for dad http://t.co/GmReoTORHe pic.twitter.com/KLyrggsJ3U

— CBS News (@CBSNews) July 6, 2015

Sadly, these vicious shootings aren’t anything new for Chicago–the city has a long history of gun violence. Police have amped up their seizure of illegal weapons, which has proven to be effective since shooting incident rates are actually down compared to this same short period of time last year, but it’s not quite enough. Chicago has been plagued with crime for many years, garnering attention from news sources nationwide. It is the third largest populated city in the country, and yet its homicide rate is drastically higher than New York or Los Angeles. Evidently, changes must be made in order to put an end to this constant carnage. The cops are working feverishly to deter and terminate gun usage, although this is impossible to do without the full support and cooperation of the public.

One of the victims last weekend was seventeen-year-old Vonzell Banks, who was gunned down in a park that was named after Hadiya Pendleton, an honors student who was murdered in cold blood there in 2013. Pendleton’s death became a symbol of national gun violence, as she was killed while walking with friends through the park only a mile away from President Obama’s Chicago home, not long after she attended his inauguration. Unfortunately, the amount of shootings in this city has hardly decreased since her passing.

Amidst tragedy, authorities are hoping that they can turn these deaths into something positive. In memory of the many victims, they are encouraging the public to band together and not only be vigilant for other possible acts, but also work toward discouraging future gang activity within the community. One tactic that officials have used is creating mentoring programs and day camps for local children as a way to discourage them from becoming involved in gang activity. They are trying to reach kids at a young age so that they always have somewhere to turn to where they can grow and prosper rather than resorting to violence or crime.

In recent years, Chicago has become what can only be compared to a battlefield in certain parts of the city, with some residents even giving it the nickname of “Chiraq.” It has been known for a long time that Chicago is experiencing a surge of unnecessary violence, although the death of the seven-year-old sparked citywide cries for justice and peace. Hopefully those cries will finally start to make a difference.

Toni Keddell

Toni Keddell is a member of the University of Maryland Class of 2017 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Toni at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Endless Bloodshed on the Streets of Chicago Mars Holiday Weekend appeared first on Law Street.

It’s no secret that flying is expensive, and many customers will do almost anything they can to save a few bucks on airfare. Under that assumption, 22-year-old entrepreneur Aktarer Zaman created a website called Skiplagged.com. Skiplagged advertises itself as “better at finding cheap flights than any other website!” However, because Skiplagged operates based on a loophole in airline pricing, airline companies aren’t as ecstatic about this new site as many consumers. In fact, United Airlines filed a suit against Skiplagged. There’s good and bad news for purveyors of cheap flights–the good news is that the lawsuit was just thrown out by a judge.The bad news is that the legal fights aren’t over yet.

Skiplagged is able to find cheaper fares by taking advantage of what is dubbed “hidden city pricing.” These “hidden cities” are the layover locations of flights. Suppose you’re trying to get from Atlanta to Philadelphia. It might be cheaper to book a flight from Atlanta to Boston, with a layover in Philadelphia, then just walk off the plane in Philadelphia and never continue on to Boston. You obviously wouldn’t be able to check a bag, but if you’re looking to save a few bucks, it’s a pretty brilliant idea. It’s always been possible for individuals to do so, but it takes a decent amount of research and work. Zaman built a website that does the same thing.

So financially, it’s definitely a win. But what about the ethics of this approach? That is significantly fuzzier. Technically speaking, by purposely not getting on a connecting flight, you are breaching the contract you signed with the airline when you purchased the ticket. You also may cause delays–if the flight crew is trying to make sure that they have all the customers on board it may take them a while to mark someone a no-show. Most importantly to the airlines, you’re costing them money.

As a result, United decided to sue Zaman, saying that he promoted “unfair competition” and “deceptive behavior.” Travel site Orbitz sued Zaman because you can’t book flights directly on Skiplagged, so the site directs you to purchase them from other retailers, such as Orbitz. Orbitz didn’t want to lose its bookings as a result of Skiplagged’s recommendations. Orbitz, however, settled its lawsuit in February, although the exact details of that settlement have not been disclosed.

As for the United lawsuit, that was just thrown out out by Chicago Judge John Robert Blakey of the Northern District Court of Illinois, but not on the merits of the case. It was thrown out because the court in which it was filed lacked the jurisdiction to decide the suit, given that Zaman did not live or do business in Chicago. This leaves United with the opportunity to try again in a more appropriate jurisdiction.

Trying again is something that the airline probably will do. United released a statement after the decision saying:

We remain troubled that Mr. Zaman continues to openly encourage customers to violate our contract of carriage by purchasing hidden-city tickets, putting the validity of their ticket and MileagePlus status at risk.

So, United will probably continue its quest to put Skiplagged out of business, and given the revenue that airlines have the potential to lose from this trick, others may join the lawsuit. For now, Skiplagged appears operational, but there’s no guarantee it will stay that way for long.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post This Site Will Save You Money on Airfare, But is it Legal? appeared first on Law Street.

Lawsuits, crime, and drugs ruled the news last week and the most popular articles at Law Street were no exception. The #1 article of the week, from Anneliese Mahoney, detailed the suit over royalties earned by “50 Shades of Gray” won by a woman in Texas; #2, also from Mahoney, covers the explosive news out of Chicago that there is a secret ‘black site’ where Americans are held outside of the justice system; and #3, from Alexis Evans, is the story from Wesleyan University where nearly a dozen students were hospitalized in apparent Molly overdoses. ICYMI, here is the Best of the Week from Law Street.

#1 Texas Woman Wins Big “50 Shades of Grey” Royalties Lawsuit

It seems like one of the most popular topics of conversation these days is the movie version of the erotic novel sensation “Fifty Shades of Grey.” (Spoiler alert: It’s really bad. I went hoping to make fun of it and have a few laughs, and it was too awful to even laugh at.) But one woman may be laughing soon–laughing all the way to the bank, that is. An Arlington, Texas woman named Jennifer Lynn Pedroza just won a major “Fifty Shades” related lawsuit. Read full article here.

#2 Chicago “Black Site” Allegations Yet Another Example of Police Brutality

News of a secret detention facility in Chicago broke this week and it’s sparking horror and outrage across the country. This “black site,” revealed by the Guardian, is a nightmare image straight out of a post-apocalyptic movie. People are “arrested” and taken to this site, which is inside a warehouse in Chicago’s Homan Square. Then they are subjected to inhumane treatment. They aren’t afforded the rights that the U.S. Constitution promises all of us. Read full article here.

#3 Mass Molly Overdose Hospitalized 11 Wesleyan Students

Connecticut’s Wesleyan University was flooded with sirens Sunday night as almost a dozen students were rushed to hospitals after reportedly overdosing on the party drug commonly known as Molly, or MDMA. The exact number of alleged victims varies, with police reporting that 11 students were hospitalized for the drug, while Wesleyan University President Michael S. Roth reported the figure as ten students and two visitors in a letter sent to students Monday morning. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

News of a secret detention facility in Chicago broke this week and it’s sparking horror and outrage across the country.

This “black site,” revealed by the Guardian, is a nightmare image straight out of a post-apocalyptic movie. People are “arrested” and taken to this site, which is inside a warehouse in Chicago’s Homan Square. Then they are subjected to inhumane treatment. They aren’t afforded the rights that the U.S. Constitution promises all of us. For example, lawyers claim they aren’t able to visit their clients at the site, and beatings and other forms of violence occur. In some ways most disturbingly, it’s all off the books. People who are taken to the Homan Square site aren’t entered into the Chicago PD system, or have any records of their detainment. As Anthony Hill, a criminal defense lawyer put it, “They just disappear, until they show up at a district for charging or are just released back out on the street.”

Read more: Chicago Still Dangerous Despite Absence From Crime Rankings

The facility at Homan Square is being dubbed a “black site” as a nod to the CIA detention facilities in the Middle East, although others have called them “shadow sites.”

The Chicago Police Department is, of course, trying to play Public Relations catch up. It’s claiming that nothing untoward has happened at Homan square, providing a statement that included:

CPD [Chicago police department] abides by all laws, rules and guidelines pertaining to any interviews of suspects or witnesses, at Homan Square or any other CPD facility. If lawyers have a client detained at Homan Square, just like any other facility, they are allowed to speak to and visit them. It also houses CPD’s Evidence Recovered Property Section, where the public is able to claim inventoried property…There are always records of anyone who is arrested by CPD, and this is not any different at Homan Square.

These revelations come at an interesting time–the United States has been engaged in a discussion over the power of our police forces for a while now. Reports of increased militarization, racial profiling, and human rights abuses are finally seeing the light of day and mainstream news coverage. From Ferguson, Missouri, to New York, New York, people this Fall stood up in protest against police treatment of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, and others. This information out of Chicago seems to be just the latest in a long, terrifying list. It’s horrible, reprehensible, and heartbreaking, but it’s by no means unsurprising.

Reading the Guardian piece, complete with the many, many horrifying examples of what purportedly happens at this detention center, reminded me of a powerful speech by FBI Director James Comey just a few weeks ago. He talked a lot about innate racial biases in law enforcement, particularly in light of those events I mentioned above. Although his speech was by no means faultless, there were many honest truths to which Comey seemingly spoke. At one point, he said:

A mental shortcut becomes almost irresistible and maybe even rational by some lights. The two young black men on one side of the street look like so many others the officer has locked up. Two young white men on the other side of the street — even in the same clothes — do not. The officer does not make the same association about the two white guys, whether that officer is white or black. And that drives different behavior. The officer turns toward one side of the street and not the other. We need to come to grips with the fact that this behavior complicates the relationship between police and the communities they serve.

While there’s no indication exactly what race those interred at Homan Square are–there are certainly claims that many of the people brought there are low-income, and black, Hispanic, or members of other minority populations. It’s sad, in light of Comey’s speech and the events of this summer, how easy this becomes to imagine. Chicago’s police force taking those who lack resources, subjecting them to inhumane treatment, and not worrying about the consequences. It’s easy to silence a voice when that voice is nowhere near a microphone. While it’s yet to be seen what will be borne out of these revelations, I wouldn’t be surprised if more “black sites” exist in other cities. There’s a big problem here–and this is just one more piece of the puzzle.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Chicago “Black Site” Allegations Yet Another Example of Police Brutality appeared first on Law Street.

I’ve heard about judges having very specific laws for their courtrooms before, but a judge in the Cook County Circuit Court, near Chicago, has taken quite an interesting step in that regard. Judge Gloria Chevere has started to fight against saggy pants in her courtroom–even throwing eight people in jail for the offensive apparel in the last three years. When defendants have come into her courtroom wearing pants she deems too low slung, she’s remanded them to jail for “direct criminal contempt.”

That really is pretty extreme–criminal contempt is defined in Illinois as:

Any conduct committed with intent to impede, embarrass, or obstruct the court, or to derogate from the court’s authority, or bring the court into disrepute.

The direct part just means that it is done in the presence of a judge–in this case Judge Chevere. Usually such a designation is reserved for something legitimately distracting–such as fighting, or yelling in the presence of a judge. It wasn’t just pants that got Chevere to invoke that designation though; she had 22 other cases of direct criminal contempt in her courtroom as well over the same period of time. She has now been assigned to a courtroom where she deals more with administrative issues because of worries that her constant throwing people in jail when she didn’t like their pants impeded justice somehow.

I’ve never been to Chicago, but I guess saggy pants don’t just get Judge Chevere up in arms. Apparently it’s a big problem in a small suburb outside of the Windy City, too, called Forest Park. Mayor Anthony Calderone himself proposed legislation that would not allow people to wear “pants or shorts falling more than three inches below a person’s hips and exposing that portion of the person’s undergarments, buttocks, pubic area and/or genitals.”

It’s kind of a weird proposal–it’s one thing to ban someone showing their genitals, but there are, I have to assume, public decency laws already on the books about that kind of exposure. This ban seems tailored at really one thing–a fashion trend that I probably hear people complaining about more than I actually see.

At first glance it seems kind of silly at best, but if you look more closely at the proposed rule, it’s pretty problematic. First of all, it seems to target a particular group–young black men. Those in favor of the ordinance deny that’s the intention. Mayor Calderone, said:

There are people on both sides of the issue. This doesn’t have to do with any sort of racial profiling what so ever. In our town, it’s not been any one specific color (race), it’s been whites and blacks.

While that could be true, the arguments about racial profiling are justified. Those who disagree with the ordinance argue that known discriminatory practices like stop and frisk could be facilitated by this new rule. If police officers can stop a young man from wearing pants that don’t fit the code, they may segue that into a more invasive interaction.

So if you’re a particular fan of sagging pants, don’t wear them in the greater Chicago area. Some places you might get thrown out of a courtroom, and in some you may break a law.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Illinois vs. Saggy Pants appeared first on Law Street.

If you’ve been following Law Street’s Crime in America 2015 city crime rankings you might have one big question: where are Flint and Chicago? Flint, Michigan was the #1 Most Dangerous City with a population under 200,000 last year, and preliminary data from the FBI indicated that it would remain so this time around, and reporting on Chicago’s violent crime pervades American media. So where are Flint and Chicago on these lists?

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE TOP 10 MOST DANGEROUS CITIES WITH POPULATIONS OVER 200,000.

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE TOP 10 MOST DANGEROUS CITIES WITH POPULATIONS UNDER 200,000.

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE TOP 10 SAFEST CITIES WITH POPULATIONS OVER 200,000.

First let’s look at Flint. It’s not because it isn’t still really dangerous–it very much is. It comes down to its population, though, and if the city had just 59 more residents it would have easily maintained its #1 Most Dangerous City ranking over Little Rock, Arkansas. According to the FBI, Flint’s population decreased by 1,691 last year, putting the city just 59 residents shy of the 100,000-person threshold that Law Street uses to rank the most dangerous mid-sized cities.

Flint has a violent crime rate of 1,908 per 100,000 people, which far exceeds Little Rock’s violent crime rate of 1,407. Flint’s murder rate clocks in at 48 per 100,000, while Little Rock is only at 18 per 100,000. Flint’s population statistics speak for themselves as well: the median household income is just $26,339, and almost 40 percent of the population lives below the poverty line.

If Flint had those 59 additional people it would definitely be the #1 Most Dangerous City in America–but that does not mean things aren’t getting better there. They absolutely are; this year’s crime statistics saw a dramatic decrease in violent crime in the city. Last year, Flint had a violent crime rate of 2,729 per 100,000 people, which means that its overall rate has dropped 30 percent. The murder rate dropped by quite a bit too, from about 62 per 100,000 people to 48 per 100,000 people. So while Flint is still incredibly dangerous, things are getting better there, just slowly.

Now to Chicago–another notable exception from the list of Most Dangerous Cities. The answer here is fairly simple. Chicago isn’t included in the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report from which our data is curated. According to the FBI, Chicago under-reports its crime data, so the numbers are simply missing from the FBI report, making it impossible to rank the Windy City in a uniform way with its like-size counterparts.

While Law Street’s statistics are definitive and it’s interesting to look at what cities make the list, it’s also very interesting to see which cities are missing. Flint and Chicago are two notable examples for two very different reasons.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Flint and Chicago Are Still Dangerous Despite Absence From Rankings appeared first on Law Street.

Did you know that you can get a scholarship to not go to law school? Last year, Matthew Willens, a Chicago attorney and part-time legal professor at Loyola Chicago Law School, created a $1,000 scholarship to be awarded to a winning undergraduate student who chooses to pursue any post-graduate path other than law school. This scholarship, which was just awarded for the first time in 2014, is offered as part of the “Anything but Law School” campaign started by Willens.

This may seem a bit odd, given that Willens is an attorney himself, but he firmly stands behind the belief that law school is no longer a smart post-graduate option due to the lack of available jobs. According to Willens, “too many of our best and brightest are pursuing a career where there just aren’t any more seats at the table.”

Willens announced his “Anything but Law School” program last year because he believes that too many people think that going to law school is their ticket to a secure job–they see it as a sure thing. Now, he says, the market is saturated and there are not enough jobs to go around. He says:

If part of your reason for going to law school is that, well, there’ll be a good job that you like and will pay well afterwards, then you’re maybe mistaken. There’s more than 90,000 lawyers in Illinois, and I’m not confident there’s enough jobs.

He also believes that the saturation of lawyers is having a negative effect on the growth of current attorneys, as well as a negative effect on the clients of these attorneys. He explained:

Lawyers don’t finish their education when they graduate. They need extensive training and mentoring to develop their skills. But when new graduates hang a shingle because they can’t find employment, their clients are wronged and their own growth is stunted. They never reach their potential and the profession suffers. Many will never be employed in the profession at all.

There were dozens of applicants for the inaugural “Anything but Law School” scholarship, which was open to students pursuing an advanced degree in anything but law. Applicants were asked to write an essay explaining why they are doing something other than going to law school. The first recipient of the scholarship was Louise Kelly, a 37-year-old music teacher and performer from Chicago. She plans to use the scholarship to help pay for a course at VanderCook College of Music in Bronzeville, Illinois. According to Kelly, a graduate degree will earn her better pay, which will help her to provide for her two children.

While Willens is confident in his stance, not everyone agrees. There has been significant pushback from other attorneys in response the scholarship. Many are offended by the premise of the scholarship, which is completely understandable. This scholarship is essentially a slap in the face to the creator’s own profession. I personally agree with those attorneys. While law school is certainly not for everyone, those who have done the research and have put a great deal of thought into it should not be discouraged from applying. Willens, however, does not consider the scholarship to be “anti-law school.” Rather, he sees it as a statement about suppy-and-demand.

While Willens is certainly making a point with his “Anything but Law School” campaign, in reality, it is unlikely that this scholarship will have a significant impact on the number of people that apply to law school. It will be interesting to see if this movement can gain any more traction in years to come.

—

Brittany Alzfan (@BrittanyAlzfan) is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [jridgewayphotography via Flickr]

Brittany Alzfan

Brittany Alzfan is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Chicago Attorney Continues Scholarship for “Anything But Law School” appeared first on Law Street.

Master of Business Administration (MBA) programs around the country cultivate today’s students to become the pilots of economics and commerce in the world of tomorrow. In an effort to make the business school experience richer and more beneficial for these students, many top business schools have adopted Grade Non-Disclosure (GND) policies to refocus both students and recruiters away from grades and toward other aspects that many feel are more important and valuable. Read on to learn about what these Grade Non-Disclosure policies do, whether or not they’re effective, and the arguments for and against them.

What does a Grade Non-Disclosure policy do?

A Grade Non-Disclosure policy demands that students do not discuss their grades or GPA with recruiters until they have a full-time job offer; however, students are free to discuss any awards or honors, test scores, or undergraduate grades with recruiters. These GND policies are, as of now, only found in business schools, and only elite business schools at that. These policies also vary from school to school. At Harvard up until 2005, when its GND policy was repealed, for example, the school itself introduced and enforced the GND policy. At Wharton and Chicago Booth, the student body approves and imposes the policy upon themselves. Grade Non-Disclosure policies have their advocates and opponents, with school administrators usually favoring disclosure and students usually favoring non-disclosure. See an NYU parody video below about Grade Non-Disclosure policies for a lighter look.

What’s the argument in favor of Grade Non-Disclosure Policies?

Whether instituted by the school administration or the student body itself, advocates say Grade Non-Disclosure allows students to take more engaging and difficult classes without fear of the repercussions on their GPAs, while encouraging a more collaborative atmosphere and focus upon the more important aspects of business school. In a 2011 survey by the Graduate Management Admissions Council, the majority of business recruiters look primarily for applicants who demonstrate initiative, professionalism, motivation, integrity, creativity, efficiency, goal orientation, and adaptability with little emphasis on grades as a criteria for hiring.

Many business professionals note that the importance of business school lies in the networking and employment opportunities that arise from studying in such a setting, not in the receipt of a grade for a particular class. Because grades carry less importance in an MBA program, advocates of GND policies claim that under these policies students are allowed to take more engaging and challenging classes that broaden their intellectual horizons without worrying about taking low-level, GPA-boosting classes. These policies also enable recruiters to focus on the aspects of candidates that many feel truly reveal their real-world potential, such as awards, honors, extra-curricular activity, and other distinguishing factors.

Many institutions have quotas and maximum limits on As and Bs awarded and average GPAs, which fosters fierce competition between the relatively small number of MBA students for those top grades. GND policies eliminate the incentive for this bitter competition and instead promote an environment of collaboration, cooperation, and networking between students.

What’s the argument against Grade Non-Disclosure Policies?

While some opponents may agree that grades are not the sole purpose of a business school program, they do find that Grade Non-Disclosure policies entice students to forego preparing and working hard for classes, and only benefit students of elite business schools because of their name-brand education. A 2011 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research revealed that in the first four years after Wharton students instituted a GND policy, the time spent on academics dropped by 22percent with no patterns of change in the types of courses students were enrolling in. Other graduate students and faculty have noticed that under these policies students exhibit an increase in apathy and a decrease in motivation concerning their classes.

While seven of the top ten MBA programs in the country had GND policies, no schools ranked 20-50 among business schools had them. The reason why these policies only exist at elite schools, many opponents claim, is that by not divulging their GPAs, students at these schools are allowed to rest on the merits of their school’s name, and not upon their own academic achievement. Students in lower-ranked business programs do not have that luxury as the mere name of their institutions would not garner the same respect and prestige that would have an impact on a job interview.

Conclusion

Education is only as valuable as what you learn from it, even at the MBA level. The idea of Grade Non-Disclosure policies is that they help students to focus on learning rather than getting better grades than their peers. After all, the skills that they learn will be significantly more useful in the workforce than the ability to pinpoint and take easy classes. However, opponents of Grade Non-Disclosure policies argue that the policies incentivize students to not work as hard as they can. There’s also the argument that Grade Non-Disclosure policies hurt students who work very hard at lower-ranked schools. Given that there is no centralized MBA Grade Non-Disclosure program, it is likely that schools will continue to make the choices for themselves. For those looking at MBA programs, it’s an important facet of education to take into account.

Resources

Primary 

Chicago Booth School of Business: Grade Non-Disclosure Policy

Wharton Graduate Association: Grade Non-Disclosure Policy

Additional

U.S. News & World Report: Reports Examine Grade Non-Disclosure Policies in MBA Degree Programs

To MBA or Not to MBA: On Grade Non-Disclosure

Financial Times: The Perks of GND

Freakonomics: Why Do Only Top MBA Programs Practice Grade Non-Disclosure?

Business Insider: Wharton Students Don’t Prepare For Class Because Employers Never Find Out Their Grades

NYU Stern Graduate Student Newspaper: On Grade Non-Disclosure

Inside MBA: Which Business Schools Have Grade Non-Disclosure?

Poets and Quants: Cornell Debates Grade Non-Disclosure Policy

Wharton Journal: Grade Non-Disclosure Vote Opens This Week

Economist: News From the Schools

Joseph Palmisano

Joseph Palmisano is a graduate of The College of New Jersey with a degree in History and Education. He has a background in historical preservation, public education, freelance writing, and business. While currently employed as an insurance underwriter, he maintains an interest in environmental and educational reform. Contact Joseph at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Making the Grade? MBA Programs and Grade Non-Disclosure Policies appeared first on Law Street.

Research and analysis done by Law Street’s Law School Rankings team: Anneliese Mahoney, Brittany Alzfan, Erika Bethmann, Matt DeWilde, and Natasha Paulmeno.

Click here to read more coverage on Law Street’s Law School Specialty Rankings 2014.

Click here for information on rankings methodology.

Featured image courtesy of [Alanscottwalker via Wikipedia]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Top 10 Law Schools for Business Law: #4 Northwestern University School of Law appeared first on Law Street.

Research and analysis done by Law Street’s Law School Rankings team: Anneliese Mahoney, Brittany Alzfan, Erika Bethmann, Matt DeWilde, and Natasha Paulmeno.

Click here to read more coverage on Law Street’s Law School Specialty Rankings 2014.

Click here for information on rankings methodology.

Featured image courtesy of [Matthew G. Bisanz via Wikipedia]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Top 10 Law Schools for Business Law: #5 University of Chicago Law School appeared first on Law Street.

Research and analysis done by Law Street’s Law School Rankings team: Anneliese Mahoney, Brittany Alzfan, Erika Bethmann, Matt DeWilde, and Natasha Paulmeno.

Click here to read more coverage on Law Street’s Law School Specialty Rankings 2014.

Click here for information on rankings methodology.

Featured image courtesy of [Amerique via Wikimedia Commons]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Top 10 Law Schools for Business Law: #9 Loyola University Chicago School of Law appeared first on Law Street.

Research and analysis done by Law Street’s Law School Rankings team: Anneliese Mahoney, Brittany Alzfan, Erika Bethmann, Matt DeWilde, and Natasha Paulmeno.

Click here to read more coverage on Law Street’s Law School Specialty Rankings 2014.

Click here for information on rankings methodology.

Featured image courtesy of [Amerique via Wikimedia Commons]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Top 10 Law Schools for Healthcare Law: #1 Loyola University Chicago School of Law appeared first on Law Street.

The latest news from Northwestern Law School seems eerily reminiscent of the TV show “Suits.” Just a few months before graduation, Northwestern University Law School discovered that one of its students, Mauricio Celis, was a Texas felon infamous for posing as a lawyer. Celis was expelled in March from the school’s International Law LLM program as soon as they discovered his criminal history. He is now suing Northwestern over the decision.

Northwestern Law argued that the 42-year-old LLM student misled admissions officials by failing to inform them of his criminal history during the admissions process. Celis’ record includes a felony conviction for falsely presenting himself as a lawyer and a misdemeanor conviction for misidentifying himself as a police officer in an incident involving a woman wandering nude from his hot tub to a local convenience store. According to Northwestern Law, Celis’ criminal history makes him an “undesirable candidate” for their program. School officials say he would not have been admitted had they known of his past.

Celis is arguing, however, that they never asked about his criminal history during the admissions process. He was accepted to the prestigious program in 2012, spent about $76 thousand on tuition and fees, and was never once asked about his criminal history in the process.

While Celis has not commented on the lawsuit, he mantains that he is innocent in the Texas cases, despite the fact that both ended in convictions. He told the Chicago Tribune, “I’ve been trying to put this thing behind me for many, many years already”. According to his Northwestern application, Celis holds dual citizenship in the United States and Mexico. He worked in the legal field in Mexico and then co-founded a personal injury law firm in Texas in 2005.

In 2006, Celis made headlines in Chicago. After six children died in an apartment fire, he read a statement outside their wake. The Chicago Tribune picked up the story, and quoted Celis as the family’s attorney. According to Celis, he has no idea how the Tribune got the impression that he was the family’s attorney. He believes that he was brought in to help because he speaks Spanish, like the victims’ family members.  He has also stated that he has “never allowed anyone to have the impression” that he was licensed to practice law in the United States, and that while he was happy to help, he “let the lawyers do the lawyering.”

In 2007, Celis was indicted in Texas on charges that he illegally presented himself as a lawyer. Based on the court records, the argument was over whether or not Celis could technically be considered a lawyer from Mexico, despite the fact that he never obtained a license to practice law in the United States. Celis argued that the legal education that he received in Mexico qualified him to practice certain types of law there, although he was unable to provide any official documentation of his certification. He also maintained that he never actually practiced law in the United States.

However, the jury wasn’t buying it. They found Celis guilty on 14 counts in 2009, and he was sentenced to 10 years of probation. In response to the jury’s verdict, Celis said, “they looked at me as being some shyster faking my credentials, I am a Mexican lawyer.”

Regardless, Celis was convicted, and the issue at stake here is that Northwestern Law really should have caught it. If they were truly concerned about having convicted felons in their program, then that is something that they should ask about on their application. At the very least, they could have googled him. One quick search and you have access to public criminal records. That way, they wouldn’t have had to kick a student out just months before he was set to graduate. Paul Campos, a University of Colorado law professor and frequent critic of law schools put it best, stating,  “the fact that this guy got into Northwestern … it’s, I think, kind of revelatory of how much checking goes on even at a top program.” If a school doesn’t manage to ask its applicants a question that is found on every McDonalds application, then that’s on them.

Northwestern is arguing that Celis should have known that his criminal history was a problem, and should have voluntarily disclosed the information to admissions. However, I would disagree: if you don’t ask, what would stop someone with a criminal history from applying to your program? If someone with a criminal past wants to do something positive in their life, like get an education, why would they voluntarily disclose information that could stand in their way? It’s the school’s responsibility to ask the right questions of their applicants, not the applicants’ responsibility to anticipate possible issues.

According to court records filed in Chicago, Celis and Northwestern both agreed to a voluntary dismissal of the lawsuit. No details of a settlement were disclosed. While they were able to work something out this time, hopefully this situation will make law schools rethink their application processes so something like this does not happen again.

—

Brittany Alzfan (@BrittanyAlzfan) is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Chris Devers via Flickr]

Brittany Alzfan

Brittany Alzfan is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Too Much, Too Late: Northwestern Law Expels LLM Student for Former Crimes appeared first on Law Street.

Research and analysis done by Law Street’s Law School Rankings team: Anneliese Mahoney, Brittany Alzfan, Erika Bethmann, Matt DeWilde, and Natasha Paulmeno.

Click here to read more coverage on Law Street’s Law School Specialty Rankings 2014.

Click here for information on rankings methodology.

Featured image courtesy of [Mrtoren via WikiMedia]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Top 10 Law Schools for Intellectual Property: #6 The John Marshall Law School appeared first on Law Street.

The presumption of innocence prior to a definitive adjudication of guilt is fundamental to our Constitutional system. In the criminal context, a citizen is innocent until proven guilty. That’s what you learn on day one in your criminal law course. The government must prove every element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt — or you get to go free. But how does this presumption affect a celebrity? How does it differ depending on the crime someone has been charged with. What about the frequency of the allegations? I had a chance to examine my faith in the presumption of innocence when the allegations surrounding recording artist R. Kelly were brought back into the public consciousness. The nature of allegations against the prolific R&B singer gave me pause, and forced me to answer some tough questions about the nature of the benefit of the doubt everyone should be given in criminal matters.

Conceptually, I can wrap my head around a presumption of innocence. It puts the onus on the government to make its case against you. Despite what you’ve been accused of, at least philosophically, a defendant need not put on a case if the government has not shouldered its substantial burden. But in the minds of the lay person, the person who hasn’t read legal opinions by Learned Hand, or Judge Easterbrook, or — God Forbid — Blackstone, all it takes is an accusation of wrongdoing, for a person to be condemned. Despite having gone to law school and believing fundamentally in the presumption of innocence, many times my own natural inclinations are to feel that when someone is accused of especially heinous crimes, “they must have done something.”

That sentiment was never more true than when, some weeks ago, the allegations leveled against recording artist R. Kelly came back to the fore. The Village Voice chronicled the ongoing crusade of journalist Jim DeRogatist to, at the very least, convey the message that there were still more stories — troubling, sickening stories — to be told about the artist R. Kelly and his involvement with under-aged women. What many people relegated to the “rumors from the nineties” category of their pop-culture memory, DeRogatis classifies as heinous, ongoing, and too terrible to not have some basis in truth.

The allegations against Kelly, born Robert Sylvester Kelly, were first broken by DeRogatis when he received an anonymous fax that the artist was being investigated over the course of two years by the sex crimes unit of the Chicago police department. What DeRogatis counts as most remarkable, however, is how those allegations are still classified in the minds of many as “rumors” despite the fact that they were made in filed court documents. Granted, where there is smoke, there is not always fire. A healthy amount of skepticism is natural when it comes to allegations that have not been substantiated in court. What was shocking to me, and I think many, however, was the sheer number of allegations, nudging the idea of Kelly victimizing young women from the plausible, to the probable.

The revelations in the article catch the reader off guard. Not a single allegation, but dozens of lawsuits filed over the years. What DeRogatis explains are multiple sex tapes, only one of which was the basis for the indictment that most remember being leveled against the singer. Without rehashing most of what the Village Voice interview described, the most important concept here is how the masses handle these allegations. The narrative circles back to the presumption of innocence that is the baseline of our criminal system. What do we do in the face of multiple suits alleging heinous acts from the adult Kelly, with women as young as 14 and 15?

The lawyer in me yells, “prove it beyond a reasonable doubt!” The lay person in me thinks, “there is an awful lot of smoke here.” How can I reconcile these perspectives?

The better answer of these choices is to stand by the presumption of innocence. To hew close to the notion that no matter how heinous the charge, it must be proven in open court. The trial is supposed to be the fundamental engine of truth. A search for justice — whatever that means. But that has not been the response since the Village Voice article hit the Internet. In a move that may be in recognition of the allegations resurfacing, Lady Gaga, who had a hit single with R. Kelly with the song “Do What U Want,” released another version of the song with artist Christina Aguilera. Many on the Internet and in the Twitterverse backed off their admiration of the artist in the wake of the Village Voice piece. Where do I stand? Well, I am somewhere in the middle.

There are so many instances when I tell people that I want to be a criminal defense attorney that they say, “So you want to defend rapists and murderers?” If I am annoyed, my response is a flat “yes.” If I am willing to indulge the person, I explain to them that anyone, be he someone arrested for drunk driving, speeding, or serial murder, comes before the court in the exact same position: presumed innocent. He or she is merely a “person accused of _______.” Nothing more, nothing less. R. Kelly can rightfully say the only charge that ever made it to trial — one for child pornography — resulted in an acquittal in 2008. What remains however, are allegations by dozens of very young Black women in the early 2000s of terrible acts by the artist and one reporter’s crusade — not to burn the artist at the stake — but merely to show the public what he himself has seen over the years: doing the research, knocking on doors, and speaking to crying victims.

The presumptions we all have of persons accused of sexual crimes in particular make those cases some of the most volatile. Hell, Law & Order: SVU is, I think, in its 7,000th season and going strong with Android Ice T because of the nature of sex crimes and the pure human emotion involved.

I wonder what it is that makes people take sides so vehemently in the case of R. Kelly? What is it that allows some people to brush off the allegations so lightly? We may never know. There is no convenient answer in situations such as these. But the law defaults to a person’s innocence. It’s something that is hard for many. But it’s the best we’ve got.

—

Dominic Jones (@DomPerinyon) is originally from Atlantic City, NJ. He attended Morehouse College in Atlanta, Ga. followed by law school at the Washington College of Law at American University in Washington, DC. In his spare time he enjoys art, photography, and documentary films.

Featured image courtesy of [Allgamenab via Wikipedia]

Dominic Jones

Dominic Jones is originally from Atlantic City, NJ. He attended Morehouse College in Atlanta, Ga. followed by law school at the Washington College of Law at American University in Washington, DC. In his spare time he enjoys art, photography, and documentary films. Contact Dominic at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Presumptions appeared first on Law Street.

Until last year, there was only one state without a conceal carry law, and that state was Illinois. A Federal Appeals Court stated last winter that the ban on carrying concealed weapons was unconstitutional. The court required the Illinois legislature to draft a conceal carry law by July 9th, 2013, for implementation by January of 2014.

The law has been written, and is ready to take effect, but it has led to a lot of confusion in Illinois. There are a lot of places where it is still forbidden to carry a concealed weapon, and there were many caveats inserted into the brand new law. For example, one of these complications is that it is illegal to take a concealed gun to a large fair or parade. But you can have a gun on the street normally. So, if you happened to be walking home with your legal concealed gun, and run into the parade, your gun suddenly becomes illegal. This makes things very complicated, because if someone was arrested for having a gun in a public gathering, they could just claim they were walking home.

You can have a concealed gun on a bike path that goes through a park, but not in the park itself. You can’t bring a concealed gun into a post office, alright, but you also can’t bring it into a post office parking lot.

Now I think the fact that restrictions are put on where concealed firearms can be taken is a good thing. I live in the one single, solitary place in the United States where it is still illegal to carry a concealed weapon–Washington DC–and I am completely okay with that. But I have to admit that these laws in Illinois do seem unnecessarily confusing.

Colleen Lawson, who owns a gun training facility stated, “it’s like a Byzantine maze. It’s possible to get through it without breaking any laws, but it’s tricky.”

The confusing law seems to be the result of the short period of time that the Illinois Legislature had to cobble it together, as well as the conflicting lobbies fighting for their say, leading to weird contradictions and Catch-22s.

Charles Lawson, Colleen’s husband, gave an interesting example. He described,

a scenario in which an armed person goes to a restaurant for a meal and decides to take a CTA train home. In that case, the permit holder would have to unload the gun and put it in a purse, backpack or other encasement. But the trick is removing it from the holster and unloading it. That can’t be done in public view. You can’t even go to a restroom inside the station and do it. To do it legally, the carrier would have to find a place nearby that allows firearms and go there to unload and put away the gun.

It seems clear that this juxtaposition arises out of the combination of pro-gun groups lobbying to allow that man to carry a gun into the restaurant, but anti-gun groups lobbying to disallow him from carrying it onto the train.

Like I said, it’s hard for me to say that conceal carry laws should be looser, because personally I’m not a fan of conceal carry on principle. But I really do believe that if you’re going to make a law, it shouldn’t be full of such gaping contradictions and complications the way this new Illinois conceal carry law is. It will make patsies out of innocent people who didn’t realize they were breaking the law, and that’s just not right.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Brent Danley via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Conceal Carry Mess in Illinois appeared first on Law Street.

In 2011, a debate over the FBI’s definition of rape emerged. Each year, the FBI creates Uniform Crime Reports, a cooperative effort to gather crime statistics from various jurisdictions all across the United States. In 2011, the FBI was still using a definition that was written in the 1930s. It constituted rape as, “the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will.” This definition came under heavy fire, slammed for being incredibly narrow. There were numerous problems with this definition, but one of the most heavily cited problems included that under this definition, men could not be victims of rape. Another was that under this definition, the victim must have tried to physically resist the assault, preventing victims who were drugged or terrified from being counted. It also could not include any other kind of sexual assault, such as forcing a victim to perform sexual activities. Incest and statutory rape were both excluded.

As a result of this archaic definition, thousands of rapes were not being included in the Uniform Crime Reports each year. After intensive lobbying from special interest groups, law enforcement, and Congress; the FBI did eventually change its definition, in March of 2012. The new definition reads: “the penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” This definition will be put into place for the first time in the Uniform Crime Reports of 2013.

Despite the old definition used by the FBI, many states and cities had long since updated their methods of defining rape and sexual assault. In the years between state statutes updating their definitions, and the FBI taking the same steps, cities and states had to report two separate pieces of data: the ones that were included in a state statue’s usually broader definition, and the smaller number that fell into the FBI’s narrow definition. For example, in 2010, NYPD reported 1,369 rapes, but only 1,036 were entered into the FBI’s database. Minneapolis actually over-reported their rapes, stating that the cases they reported were accurate according to their modern definition, and that they did not have the resources to filter out cases for the FBI’s reports.

One of the few places that did not take efforts to break down the data this way was the city of Chicago. In 2010, Chicago had approximately 1,400 sexual assaults. Not a single one of these made their way into the FBI report, because the FBI did not accept the way that Chicago reported their rapes. For years, Chicago was not included on the FBI list of cities, or any of the underlying data because of this lack of reporting. The first year in which Chicago will actually be able to report their rape statistics accurately will be 2013, so expect changes to violent crime statistics to happen in the new Uniform Crime Reports to be released for 2013. If the measure of violent crime were based on murder, robbery, and aggravated assault (excluding forcible rape), Chicago, Ill. would rank 33 on the overall list of Most Dangerous Cities for calendar 2012.

Click here to read more Crime in America coverage.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Defining Rape: The FBI Takes Action appeared first on Law Street.

This post is not about Kanye West but the title was inspired by him. The title, I think, can forevermore be used as a turn of phrase that attempts to express all the rage, exasperation, and downright frustration experienced by young Black men in America. Kanye used it to reference his experience of celebrity — how he felt trapped in a cage, with insensitive, often antagonistic, onlookers. The paparazzi often “tap on the glass” of his cage merely to elicit a reaction. His response to this madness? The admonition: IT’S NOT SAFE FOR YOU IN THIS ZOO.

Well, I don’t want to use this phrase to qualify my experience as a Black man. I’ve had pretty easy sailing most of my life. My family was working class, but I always had food on the table and a roof over my head. I never got into much trouble, and none of my childhood friends were involved in gang violence. However, that’s more than the urban youth of Chicago can say. Those Black and minority boys are portrayed in the media as nearly subhuman. They are demonized and vilified to the point where some cease to care if they continue the violence that has plagued Chicago recently. I’d argue that there is more to the story.

News about the urban violence in Chicago is inescapable. It’s almost a given that Chicago is synonymous with gun violence these days. There is news of raising minimum sentences for repeat offenders who are involved in violent crimes using guns and would require the person to serve no less than 85% of the sentence imposed. I could spend an entire post chronicling the problems with mandatory minimum sentences, but this most recent proposal seems somewhat tempered by a provision that does not compel the minimum sentence for a first-time offender. But will punishing offenders more harshly really act as a deterrent?

Many people’s image of Chicago is influenced by the popular culture. And no, I don’t mean the movie “The Untouchables” or that “Chicago Fire” show full of dusty white men in Fireman’s uniforms. What I mean is the image of Chicago, and Chicago’s Black youth, as exemplified by everyone’s favorite walking, talking dustball, Chief Keef. If you don’t know Mr. Keef, as he is hilariously referred to in some news articles, allow me to introduce him.

Okay so that’s not Chief Keef, but it’s a close representation of the young man. Here’s what he really looks like:

Chief Keef, born Keith Cozart, was born in the Englewood neighborhood of Chicago’s now-infamous South Side. Without deriding this young fellow, who happens to be only 18, his music and his media image are indicative of the almost rabidly violent frustrations of the Black youth in Chicago. He has an infant child. He’s had trouble with the law. In 2011, he was apprehended on charges of heroine manufacture. [I couldn’t possibly tell you how to manufacture heroine but then again, I guess you could Google it.] When he once left his home with a jacket covering his hands, and an officer stopped to question him, Mr. Keef (see how silly that sounds?) flashed the gun he was concealing at the officer and then ran away. The officer chased while Keef repeatedly turned around and pointed the gun at the officer. The officer discharged his weapon but never struck the rapper. Keef was eventually sentenced to home confinement.

His music is violent. His image is dangerous. But does that really represent the kid? I don’t think so. I think the rapper is representative of a Black youth culture in poorer parts of Chicago that simply doesn’t see a way out of their circumstances. Kanye once asked “what the summer of the Chi’ got to offer an 18-year-old?” Perhaps quite little. But I also don’t think it isn’t fare to scapegoat much of the violence in inner-city Chicago on a populace that is often caught in the same pressures that lead many others, of all races, to lash out with antisocial behavior. But I think the media portrayal of the city and its ills is almost a self-fulfilling narrative.

My point is that when you treat a group of people like animals, when you dehumanize them and talk about them as if they are a collage of violence, drug use, abuse, and distribution, they are bound to begin thinking that’s the only way to identify themselves. But you know what also happens? Sometimes the animals bite back. Sometimes the very societal pressures they struggle under become too much and they erupt. And I guess that was the point Kanye was making when he said “It’s not safe for you in this zoo.” The very idea of a zoo creates a false sense of calm created by the feeling of control the people have over the animals. We begin to believe that these creatures are at our beck and call. We become complacent with the environment in which we have placed these creatures without thought to the stressors we have put them under. And then someone gets hurt, and we wonder why.

Don’t get me wrong, however. Urban violence is not explained away by someone’s lack of social mobility. But neither is it a symptom of some incurable, violent rage that a subset of Chicago’s youth population has. It is more complex. Chicago is just an extreme example, but similar feelings of frustration erupt in towns all across this country. So lest the media fool you into thinking urban violence is exclusively in Chicago, peer out your window and examine the surroundings in your city. Recognize that when you dehumanize a culture you don’t understand, it might not be safe for you in that zoo.

—

Featured image courtesy of [ClaireUS via Flickr]

Dominic Jones

Dominic Jones is originally from Atlantic City, NJ. He attended Morehouse College in Atlanta, Ga. followed by law school at the Washington College of Law at American University in Washington, DC. In his spare time he enjoys art, photography, and documentary films. Contact Dominic at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post It’s Not Safe for You in This Zoo appeared first on Law Street.

I would like to go to law school sometime in the relatively near future. Whenever I tell current lawyers or law school students about my career plans, they tell me one of two things. They either tell me to make sure I take a few years off between undergrad and law school, or they tell me to absolutely not go to law school.

It’s true that having a law degree doesn’t really have the prestige that it used to. As the economy continues to slowly rebuild after the recession, young lawyers are having a difficult time finding employment in their field. Above the Law looked at one of the most recent crops of young lawyers—the class of 2012—only 56% are in full-time, long-term legal employment nine months after their graduation. They are doing slightly better than their predecessors: at the same point last year only 55% of the class of 2011 could report such success. Only about 10-12% of these students are in classic “Big Law” jobs. Furthermore, legal educations are expensive. The cost averages at about $50,000 a year. As a result, it is not unusual for students to graduate with exorbitant debt.

Google “is it worth it to go to law school?”,  you’ll get thousands of results. Every news outlet, blogger, and Internet commentator wants the last word on the law school debate. Now a Chicago attorney is putting his money where his mouth is, literally.

Matt Willens, who heads up the Willens Law Offices in downtown Chicago, is offering a $1000 scholarship to students who chose to pursue a graduate degree in anything that is not law. It seems like he plans to make this a repeat offer for at least the next few years. The firm’s website actually has a page for the scholarship where they outline their motivation behind the incentive program:

“Some of you may be wondering, why would a law firm create a scholarship to dissuade students from practicing law? The answer is simple; we currently do not have enough jobs to be able to effectively train the current number of freshly minted lawyers in our profession. To protect the reputation of our profession, Willens Law Offices has created this scholarship to persuade undergraduates to pursue another graduate degree for a limited time.”

Willens himself commented to the Sacramento Bee:  “the situation has become untenable. Too many of our best and brightest are pursuing a career where there just aren’t any more seats at the table.” The offer is nice, but $1000 is obviously much more of a statement than a generous scholarship. That being said, it could be nice help for a student who is pursuing a non-law degree.

While I understand the logic, I take issue with part of Willens’s idea. While law school is very expensive, so are most other types of graduate programs. While this scholarship is open to any student who chooses a different field over law school, it clearly aims for students who were considering law school and then instead chose another subject. For example, I doubt the Willens Law Office will receive any applications from people who are attending medical school. Students who are passing up law school tend to stick to the humanities, and pursue a graduate degree in something like Political Science, Public Policy, or English. None of these fields necessarily have better career prospects than law. For example, according to the National Science Foundation, among Humanities Ph.D recipients, 43% reported “no definite commitment for employment or postdoctoral study.” People with a Ph.D in a humanities field are doing better than new lawyers, but not by much.

I don’t think the question of “whether or not a legal education is worth it in our current economy?” will be answered anytime soon. Legal education and the legal field as a whole are clearly going through changes, but we don’t know what will happen in the long term. As for me, I still pretty much plan on going to law school—but if anyone wants to offer me a bit more than $1000 to do something else? Well, I’d consider it.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Adam Tinworth via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Would You Rather: Law School or $1000? appeared first on Law Street.