Race and the Law

Print
Article
Reimagining National Security
A Transformational Agenda for National Security
Maryam Jamshidi
Associate Professor of Law at the University of Colorado Law School.

Many thanks to Pratheepan Gulasekaram, Aziz Rana, and Wadie Said, as well as participants in The University of Chicago Legal Forum Symposium on Reimagining National Security and the University of Iowa College of Law’s Faculty Speaker Series, for helpful feedback on this piece. Many thanks as well to the editors of The University of Chicago Legal Forum, especially Saloni Jaiswal, for insightful suggestions and careful editing of this Article. All errors are my own.

Past efforts to “reimagine” national security in legal scholarship have largely avoided systematic engagement with the foundational assumptions and presumptions of the field. Challenging and critiquing those assumptions is, however, necessary to producing scholarly work that reimagines, rather than reproduces, status quo approaches to U.S. national security. This Article presents an agenda for reimagining national security through legal scholarship, which is premised on the view that challenging the national security status quo should be part of those efforts. In doing so, this agenda explores seven premises central to how U.S. national security is currently conceived of, practiced, and implemented. Moving beyond the law, the agenda presented in this Article examines the structural power dynamics and political economy of national security, demonstrating why these issues are important to reimagining and transforming how we approach the discipline of national security as legal academics and advocates.

Print
Article
Reimagining National Security
Cultural Heritage and Security Policy
Morag M. Kersel
Associate Professor, Department of Anthropology, DePaul University.
Patty Gerstenblith
Professor, DePaul University College of Law.

I want to thank Cat Mossing (DePaul Law ‘25) and Makayla Reynolds (DePaul Law ‘25) for their research assistance.

National security and cultural heritage protection are connected in several ways. This Article explores how the real or perceived relationship between threatened cultural heritage and national security developed, how this relationship has changed U.S. foreign and cultural policy, and whether these changes are for the better or the worse from a broader policy perspective, particularly with respect to the goal of cultural heritage preservation.

Print
Article
Reimagining National Security
Terrorism, Not Treason: The Rise and Fall of Criminal Charges
Shirin Sinnar
William W. and Gertrude H. Saunders Professor of Law, Stanford Law School.

I owe sincere thanks to Elena Chachko, Kristen Eichensehr, Carlton Larson, Darryl Li, Katerina Linos, Wadie Said, and participants at the University of Chicago Legal Forum workshop and Berkeley Law School Colloquium on Law and Geopolitics for helpful feedback on earlier drafts; Meaghan Corcoran, Olivia Morello, and Shafeen Pittal for indispensable research assistance; the Stanford Law Librarians for extraordinary reference support; Justin Fu for excellent administrative support; and the student editors at The University of Chicago Legal Forum for thorough and careful editing.

This Article advances both legal and sociocultural explanations for the near absence of treason charges in the “war on terror” and the implications for addressing political violence. On the legal side, terrorism charges have replaced treason because they enable the government to do almost everything that it once sought to accomplish with treason charges: they impose extraordinary stigma, they reach speech and advocacy, and they trigger severe penalties. At the same time, terrorism charges face fewer limits than treason charges: they criminalize conduct far removed from actual plots, they require a lesser showing of intent, and they dispense with treason’s constitutionally imposed evidentiary restriction. This Article argues that reimagining national security requires vigilance regarding the shape-shifting nature of responses to political violence.

Print
Article
The Body
Involuntary Reproductive Servitude: Forced Pregnancy, Abortion, and the Thirteenth Amendment
Michele Goodwin
Chancellor’s Professor of Law & Founding Director, Center for Biotechnology & Global Health Policy at the University of California, Irvine.

Much appreciation to the Chicago Legal Forum editors and staff for their thoughtful editorial contributions. My gratitude to the research librarians at Georgetown University Law Center who assisted in my data collection. My appreciation to Dorothy Brown, David Cruz, Victoria Nourse, Dorothy Roberts, Gregory Shaffer, Allison Whelan, Mary Ziegler.

The balance of this Essay describes and analyzes originalism from a different point of view, centering the experiences of Black women and girls. It then argues that the Court's selective canvassing of history exposes a serious fault in the legitimacy, integrity, and character of not only Dobbs, but also its supposed application of originalist methodology.

Print
Article
The Body
Black Masculinity and the Government
Paul Butler
Albert Brick Professor in Law at Georgetown University Law Center

This essay was presented as a work in progress at the University of Arkansas School of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, and Pepperdine Caruso School of Law. I thank the participants in those sessions. Special shout out to Chris Gordon and K-Sue Park. Chibunkem Ezenekwe, Aubrianna Mierow, and Torrell Mills provided exemplary research assistance. Much respect to Timothy Kowalczyk and Kristen Powell, the student editors of a law professor’s dreams.

Black male bodies have long been the subject of special attention from the state. This essay focuses on two government interventions in Black masculinity, dating from the 1960s, and their continuing consequences—including for the criminal justice system, and race and gender justice.