Welcome to City Square

  • The Fordham Urban Law Journal is proud to present “City Square,” the Journal‘s online companion.  City Square is a competitive and lively arena showcasing meaningful discourse between the nation’s top legal scholars.  City Square features five literary discussions at a time and is regularly updated with new content.   Enjoy the literary discussions as they unfold and stay tuned! City Square Responses and Replies are permanently published on urbanlawjournal.com.  We also hope to make City Square available on Westlaw, LexisNexis, and HeinOnline soon.


Volume XLV Editorial Board and Staff

Editor-in-Chief: Elizabeth Evans
Managing Editor: Laura Bilder
Business Editor: Brendan Kreckel
Senior Articles Editor: Eva Schneider
Online Managing Editor: Daniel Porat
Writing and Research Editor: Thomas Griffith
Cooper-Walsh Editor: Cara Kaplan
Symposium Editor: Frank Kearl

Notes and Articles Editor: Bruna Amaral
Notes and Articles Editor: Chris Guerin
Notes and Articles Editor: Chris Lisiewski
Notes and Articles Editor: Stephen Moccia
Notes and Articles Editor: Matt Rabinovitch
Notes and Articles Editor: Ashley Reicher
Notes and Articles Editor: Kathryn Wright

Associate Editor: Becky Laitman
Associate Editor: Rachel Weiner


Jun 27, 2016 | Read →

Policing in America

Policing in America Introductory Notes: Investigating the Legitimacy of Police Power and Accountability

By Frank Kearl

In March of 2015 the U.S. Department of Justice released its report on the Ferguson Police Department.  In the aftermath of the shooting of Michael Brown, the DOJ spent six months interviewing the city’s police force, reviewing tens of thousands of pages of police records and emails, participating in ride-alongs, and working with statistical experts to analyze data on stops, searches, citations, and arrests.[1]  Their report concluded that the Ferguson Police Department aggressively enforced the city’s municipal code with “insufficient thought given to whether enforcement strategies promote[d] public safety or unnecessarily undermine[d] community trust and cooperation.”[2]


Apr 29, 2017 | Read →

The Fountain Blog

DOJ Drops Long Battle Against Texas Voter ID Law With Case Pending in Fifth Circuit

By Brendan Kreckel

On April 9 the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled for the second time that a 2011 Texas voter ID law was passed with intent to discriminate against eligible minority voters. This decision comes just three months after the the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division (“DOJ”) dropped its complaint opposing the Texas bill, which imposed new ID requirements for eligible voters at the polls. The DOJ withdrew after three years and close to $1 million worth of litigation.


Apr 11, 2017 | Read →

Featured Fellowship

George J. McMahon Fellowship

The Urban Law Journal, in partnership with the Feerick Center for Social Justice, will select a Fordham Law student for the George J. McMahon Fellowship.  Eligible students include rising 2Ls or 3Ls working in public interest or government organizations, preferably outside of New York for the summer.  The student will produce a written work on issues related to his or her research and work for the organization.  The Fellowship provides a $5,000 stipend, and the recipient will work with next year’s ULJ editors to prepare the paper for publication in the ULJ.

Please view more information by clicking on the “Fellowships and Other Funding” link in the drop-down menu “About the Journal” above.

Deadline to submit an application: Monday, March 16, 2015 at 5:00 PM.


Jan 21, 2015 | Read →

Upcoming Issue Preview: Prison Privatization

“Are Private Prisons to Blame for Mass Incarceration and Its Evils? Prison Conditions, Neoliberalism, and Public Choice” by Hadar Aviram

One of the frequently criticized aspects of American mass incarceration, privatized incarceration, is frequently considered worse, by definition, than public incarceration for both philosophical-ethical reasons and because its for-profit structure creates a disincentive to invest in improving prison conditions. Relying on literature about the neoliberal state and on insights from public choice economics, this Article sets out to challenge the distinction between public and private incarceration, making two main arguments: piecemeal privatization of functions, utilities, and services within state prisons make them operate more like private facilities, and public actors respond to the cost/benefit pressures of the market just like private ones. (more…)

Jan 19, 2015 | By Hadar Aviram | Read →

Discussing “In with the New, Out with the Old: Expanding the Scope of Retroactive Amelioration” by S. David Mitchell

1. “Determining the Retroactive Reach of Decriminalization and Diminished Punishment” by Harold J. Krent
May 22, 2013 | By Harold J. Krent | Read →
Images are in the public domain and used freely.