The University of Chicago Undergraduate Law Review (UCULR) is a student-run publication dedicated to the discussion, analysis, interpretation, and evaluation of a variety of legal issues. It aims to provide a better understanding of the law in all of its ambiguities and contradictions in order to reveal how complex compilations of regulatory components can not only serve as reflections of social attitudes towards general ideas of order, agency, consent, power, and choice, but influence the most minute details of everyday life.
UCULR’s first issue explores the complexity of the state and how it fails and succeeds in defining itself, establishing representative and efficient rules and regulations, working as a unified institution, and reflecting the needs and wants of its members. From how the Russian government’s narcotics legislation exacerbates the spread of HIV to how the New Deal Court’s decisions in three cases fundamentally transformed the relationship between the states and the federal government, this issue seeks to uncover how laws and legal decisions that are frequently unobserved or overlooked by the public affect it on an individualized scale. Ultimately, while many of these arguments posit solutions to problems caused by the way governments run their respective states, they are also meant to elicit self-reflection on the nature of the state and how it impacts its members.
The appeal of drones is obvious. They are remote-controlled, and therefore they reduce the possibility of US casualties and allow for quick response times. They are quiet and can go long periods of time without refueling, making them ideal for spying and targeted killing, which enables missions that would otherwise be impossible. In fact, 95% of targeted killings have been drone strikes and so the drone policy is tantamount to the targeted killing policy. The program has accelerated since 2008, but due to the secrecy of the program, it is difficult to say how much. Such secrecy is increasingly questioned, as it is now known that that drones have been used to target and kill American citizens in the name of national security. How does the government choose which Americans are to be killed? How are they killed? Is their right to due process being violated, and if so, how?
This article does not argue that the US can never use lethal force against American citizens, but rather that the secrecy of the drone program makes its use against Americans constitutionally dubious, at best, possibly depriving American citizens of their due process rights.
LATEST BLOG POST
The challenges of providing for the growing population of seniors and the need for greater domestic consumption are widely acknowledged in the literature about China. This post will show how these two seemingly independent issues can be linked in a simple way: by boosting the consumption power of current and future senior citizens. As long as China is making efforts to increase domestic consumption as a percentage of GDP, focusing on the elderly, who are growing as a segment of China’s population, is a reasonable approach. This solution combines two sources of great concern to China’s government and citizens.