University of Wisconsin–Madison

Recent UW Law Faculty Scholarship: Interrupting Gun Violence; Integrating Tribal Law into the Legal Research and Writing Curriculum: Benefits, Challenges, and Strategies; Administering Facts-And-Circumstances-Based Tax Tests; and Fammigration Web

Here is the latest faculty scholarship appearing in the University of Wisconsin Law School Legal Studies Research Papers series found on SSRN. Against the backdrop of declining crime rates, gun violence and gun-related homicides have only risen over the last three years. Just as it historically has, the brunt of that violence has been borne by poor Black and brown communities. These communities are especially impacted: they are not only far more likely to be the victims of gun violence, but are also the primary targets of police surveillance and harassment. People of color are disproportionately prosecuted for gun crimes, which, in part, prompted the Black Public Defenders Amicus Brief in support of expanding gun rights in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen. Recognizing that the carceral approach of policing and prosecution has failed to prevent gun violence and has harmed Black and brown communities, this Article sets forth community violence interruption groups as a promising decarceral alternative. Violence interruption groups address violence by working with the people who are most impacted by cyclical gun violence and intervene by mediating conflicts, defusing imminent violence, and encouraging people to give up their firearms. Building on the work of abolitionist scholars and organizers, this Article centers the role of Violence Interrupters as an important alternative to policing and punitive prosecution. It explores legal changes that might minimize the legal barriers to violence interruption, including statutory reform, mens rea reform, expansion of the Second Amendment, and recognition of an innocent possession defense. In the United States, the Constitution recognizes three types of sovereigns: federal, state, and tribal. Each of these sovereign entities possesses the inherent powers of self-government and has the authority to address the social, economic, safety, and cultural needs of their citizens. However, under the mainstream conception of American law, tribal governments are often overlooked. This narrow perspective fails to acknowledge the significant contributions of Native Nations, which play a vital role in shaping the legal landscape of the United States. If we want our students to develop a more comprehensive understanding of America’s laws, we must teach them that the United States is a union not just of fifty states, five territories, and a federal district, but also of 574 unique, federally recognized tribes. As an integral part of the American legal landscape, tribal law should also be an integral part of the law school curriculum, not only as an elective or specialized topic but integrated alongside federal, state, and local law. Legal research and writing instructors are pivotal in this endeavor. They have the unique opportunity to introduce tribal law within the core first-year curriculum. This approach allows instructors to familiarize students with the presence and relevance of tribal law, preparing them for its application in the various legal scenarios that they will encounter later in their law school and legal careers. We believe that including tribal law in LRW instruction can serve as an important step towards inclusivity in the legal profession. Given that LRW courses are where most law students form their bedrock understanding of legal authority and legal information, these courses present a substantial opportunity to help students understand the U.S. justice system in all its nuance and complexity. Graduates with an awareness of tribal law will be better equipped to serve tribal communities, recognize and research tribal law issues when they arise, and contribute to the broader legal discourse surrounding Native American rights and interests. They may also increase their employment prospects as knowledge of tribal law may provide an advantage in some positions. This knowledge does not just benefit those working directly with or for Tribal Nations; it is essential for all legal professionals given that tribes interact extensively with federal and state governments, businesses, and individuals. Understanding tribal law empowers legal professionals to effectively address legal issues in Indian Country and contribute to a more inclusive legal system. This Article will explore the benefits of incorporating tribal law into legal education. Part one presents actionable strategies for the effective integration of tribal law into the legal research and writing curriculum, part two explains the importance and upsides of introducing law students to tribal law research, and part three addresses some of the challenges. Two appendices provide curated lists of resources for further exploration of tribal law. Oftentimes, the appropriate tax treatment of a transaction or event depends on a holistic analysis of relevant facts and circumstances. Facts-and-circumstances-based tests are challenging to administer because they are challenging to enforce and because they address challenging topics on which to provide useful administrative guidance. When a taxpayer claims tax treatment that depends on application of such a test, the IRS cannot determine whether the taxpayer’s claimed position is correct without knowing the relevant facts and circumstances. Yet, often, taxpayers are not required to disclose the relevant facts and circumstances when filing a tax return, making enforcement difficult. Likewise, providing administrative guidance on facts-and-circumstances-based tests is daunting. If the IRS provides concrete examples of the application of such a test, there is a risk the concrete examples will mislead taxpayers. Taxpayers may come away with the impression that the concrete examples illustrate universal rules, which is not the case given the facts-and-circumstances-based nature of the test. If the IRS steers away from offering concrete examples, however, taxpayers will face uncertainty when attempting to determine their tax treatment. This Article proposes a new, two-fold approach to administering facts-and-circumstances-based tests. First, lawmakers ought to require more detailed, standardized disclosure from taxpayers who claim tax positions based upon certain facts-and-circumstances-based tests. Second, when offering examples that illustrate the likely application of such tests, the IRS should steer taxpayers towards claiming the likely outcome but also supplying the relevant disclosure in case the taxpayer’s facts warrant departure from the likely outcome. Making facts-and-circumstances-based tests more administrable aligns with the IRS’s recent pledge to focus additional auditing resources on taxpayers with higher incomes. A growing body of scholarship discusses the expansive nature of the criminal legal system. What remains overlooked are other parts of the carceral state with similarly punitive logics. This Article focuses on the undertheorized convergence of the family regulation system and the immigration system. I argue that their cumulative effects increase the risk of immigration detention, deportation, and ultimately, permanent family separation for non-citizen and mixed status families. This Article provides the first theoretical account of family regulation and immigration convergence. When referring to this phenomenon I utilize the term “fammigration web,” similar to the way other scholars refer to criminal legal and immigration system overlaps as “crimmigration.” Although the exact number of non-citizen families impacted by the family regulation system remains unclear, the existing literature suggests that thousands of families are adversely affected. While practitioners and advocates are increasingly discussing the relationship between the family regulation and immigration systems, scholarship has not fully caught up. This Article fills that gap by identifying how nodes in the fammigration web exacerbate the risk of family separation for non-citizen and mixed status families. This Article makes three central contributions. One, it provides the first theoretical account of family regulation and immigration convergence. Two, it examines how this convergence marks and subordinates immigrant families. Three, it situates efforts to shrink fammigration alongside broader efforts to shrink the carceral state. To dismantle carceral logics, we must identify how they are produced across systems. While this requires long-term strategies, this Article offers a few immediate ways to shrink the fammigration web. For the full text of these works and additional scholarship from UW Law faculty and staff, visit the University of Wisconsin Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series on SSRN. A free email subscription is available at the top right of the page.