New Marquette Lawyer Sheds Light on Issues Shaping Today’s World

Marquette Lawyer Cover Summer 2025Marquette Lawyer is not a news magazine, strictly speaking. In fact, there is hardly anything left of news magazines in the United States. But that hardly means there isn’t a lot to learn about what is in the news. And the Summer 2025 issue of Marquette Lawyer certainly provides news in the sense of insights on several major current matters.

Start with Canada. No, we’re not interested in the controversies over making Canada part of the United States or trade policies between the two nations. But we are interested in understanding our neighbor to the north better, especially when it comes to its legal system, which is surely an appropriate focus for those involved in legal education and the law more generally.

That’s what brought the Hon. Suzanne Côté, a justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, to Marquette Law School to present the annual Hallows Lecture last academic year. “Roots of the Living Tree,” an edited version of her lecture, is the cover story of the magazine and offers insights into the premises and practices of Canadian constitutional law. The text may be read by clicking here.

While the Canadian legal system makes infrequent news in the United States, the rapidly developing world of artificial intelligence is in the news often. How to control problems connected to AI, such as false content known as “hallucinations” and copyright infringement, is a timely and important topic.

That brought Reuven Avi-Yonah, the Irwin I. Cohn Professor of Law and director of the International Tax LLM Program at the University of Michigan, here for the annual Robert F. Boden Lecture this past September. Avi-Yonah, one of the world’s most widely respected scholars on tax law, delivered a lecture, “Can Tax Policy Help Us Control Artificial Intelligence?” That became a major piece in this  issue, which may be read by clicking here.

The way Wisconsin handles decisions about setting boundaries for legislative districts has attracted national attention recently. The ups and downs of redistricting decisions have been both influential in shaping power in Wisconsin politics and difficult to follow. John D. Johnson, a researcher with Marquette Law School’s Lubar Center for Public Policy Research and Civic Education, is an expert on redistricting and what it has meant to Wisconsin politics. “The Boundaries of Law and Politics” is his richly detailed article describing the history of the subject. As redistricting continues to be in the news, Johnson’s guide to the subject provides valuable background. It may be read by clicking here.

Another issue that underlies much of the news in today’s world: the quality of judging and judges, from local courts to the highest courts in the land. “In Search of Humbler—and Wiser—Judgments” offers thoughts from Chad M. Oldfather, professor of law at Marquette University. Oldfather’s new book, Judges, Judging, and Judgment: Character, Wisdom, and Humility in a Polarized World, was published by Cambridge University Press. Oldfather also talks about good judgment in legal practice beyond the courtroom in this question-and-answer dialogue. It can be read by clicking here.

Marquette University’s new president, Kimo Ah Yun, has been in the news a lot. In a Lubar Center “Get to Know” program on January 17, 2025, Ah Yun told moderator Derek Mosley, director of the Lubar Center, and an audience of about 200 his powerful personal story, as well as some aspects of his vision for Marquette. The story of his “underdog” rise may be read by clicking here.

Over the years, ways to improve the outcomes of people being released from incarceration has been the subject of several programs at Marquette Law School. In December 2013, for example, Craig Steven Wilder, a professor of American history at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was interviewed by Mike Gousha, distinguished fellow in law and public policy, about Wilder’s book on how race and slavery issues were handled by some prominent universities.

In the audience was R. L. McNeely, L’94, a retired professor at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee. At a lunch afterwards for a small group, the conversation turned to Wilder’s involvement in a program aimed at helping educate incarcerated people.

McNeely followed up by starting to work on creating such a program in Wisconsin, involving Marquette and ultimately several other universities. It took years for the idea to become reality, and McNeely, who died in 2020, did not live long enough to see that happen. “From Conversation to Dream to Idea to Reality” describes the origins of the idea and the determination of McNeely and several others, including faculty in Marquette University’s Klingler College of Arts and Sciences, to launch what is now known as the McNeely Prison Education Consortium. The article may be read by clicking here.

“Good Neighbors”—that’s the headline on an article about changes in the immediate vicinity of Eckstein Hall, the Law School’s home. The changes include a new pastor at the Church of the Gesu, Rev. Michael Simone, S.J., and a largescale renovation of sections of the church building; the $42 million renovation and expansion of Straz Hall, making it the new home of the College of Nursing under the continued leadership of Dean Jill Guttormson; and the vision of a new director, John McKinnon, at the Haggerty Museum of Art. The Law School community welcomes all three good neighbors. The article may be read by clicking here.

In early 2025, John T. Chisholm stepped down after 18 years as Milwaukee County district attorney and more than three decades of service in the office and is now a senior lecturer at the Law School. In an essay, “A New Venue for Kindling the Fire for Lawyers to Serve Others,” Chisholm offers his perspective on his new role. It can be read by clicking here.

John Novotny recently retired after almost 20 years working on behalf of the Law School and longer service yet to Marquette University. In remarks at Novotny’s retirement reception, Law School Dean Joseph D. Kearney praised Novotny for more than his success in raising funds. Novotny embodies the vision of Jesuit education, Kearney said. The text of his remarks may be read by clicking here.

In his column, titled “Speaking Just for Myself,” Dean Kearney reflects on his approach to aspects of his office. His column may be read by clicking here.

Finally: the Class Notes describe recent accomplishments of more than 40 Marquette lawyers, including Byron B. Conway, L’02, who was recently sworn in as a federal judge serving the Green Bay Division of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The notes may be read by clicking here, and the back cover (here), through two examples, spotlights the impressive record of Marquette law students serving in pro bono and public service roles.

The full magazine may be read by clicking here for the PDF or here for the “interactive” version.

Continue ReadingNew Marquette Lawyer Sheds Light on Issues Shaping Today’s World

Trump is more popular than many of his policies

Many Americans love Donald Trump and even more hate him, but neither of these groups is large enough to win an election by themselves. Except when turnout is low, American elections for the past 9 years have turned with the preferences of those voters whose views of Trump are mixed.

In order to better understand these voters, the Marquette Law School Poll regularly invites a representative sample of American adults to answer the following two simple questions. What do you like about Donald Trump? What do you dislike about him? Respondents can write as much or as little as they want.

The answers to these questions, when paired with traditional multiple-choice items, show a large chunk of the electorate whose attitudes toward the president and broad policy issues, like immigration or trans rights, are malleable. These (potential) voters often hold combinations of views that are rarely found among politicians, making their support for any candidate contingent on issue salience, framing, and whatever ineffable quality makes some candidates seem more trustworthy than the rest.

Our latest poll was in the field in late March, preceding Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff announcement. Previous installments were fielded a few weeks before and about a month after the inauguration.

At a high level, views of Trump changed little throughout the first three months of his presidency. Shortly before his inauguration, 49% of adults in our polling had a favorable opinion of him. That stood at 44% at the beginning of February and 46% in late March–all changes within the margin of error.

The overall patterns in the open-ended answers haven’t changed much either. In the latest poll, 50% of adults listed something they both like and disliked about Trump. 11% couldn’t name anything they disliked, and 36% couldn’t name anything they liked.

Summary of open-ended survey responses
in the Marquette Law School Poll, national adult sample
Attitude toward Donald Trumpsurvey dates
12/2-11/241/27-2/6/253/17-27/25
Can name likes and dislikes51%47%50%
Doesn’t dislike anything12%14%11%
Doesn’t like anything35%36%36%
no answer2%3%2%

This stability in overall attitude toward Trump doesn’t surprise me. After all, he has been at the center of American politics since his first primary campaign began a decade ago. Few voters lack an opinion of him and much of his behavior is already “priced in.”

But even though attitudes toward Trump himself are fairly stable, if trending a bit downward, opinions toward Trump’s favored policies are all over the place.

In our latest poll, we asked about 10 topics related to Trump’s agenda or recent Supreme Court decisions. The graph below shows the responses to each.

The most popular position across all of these questions was support for the 2020 Supreme Court ruling prohibiting workplace discrimination against “gay and transgender workers.” Eight-two percent of adults agreed with extending federal civil rights law to these workers.

At the same time, 72% of adults hope the Supreme Court upholds a Tennessee law prohibiting “medical providers from prescribing puberty-delaying medication or performing gender transition surgery for youth under 18.”

A large majority, 68%, support the deportation of undocumented immigrants when asked “Do you favor or oppose deporting immigrants who are living in the United States illegally back to their home countries?” When the wording is changed to include, “even if they have lived here for a number of years, have jobs and no criminal record?” support falls to 41% and opposition rises to 59%.

A decisive share of voters are not consistently “pro” or “anti” trans rights or deportation. Rather, their answers depend on the specific facts included in each question.

graph showing support and opposition for various policies

For each of the above questions, I coded a respondent as “1” if they supported the Trump/conservative position, “-1” if they chose the Democratic/liberal position, and “0” if they declined to take a side. A respondent receives a score of -10 if they took every liberal position and +10 if they always took the conservative side. The graph below shows the distribution of scores for all adults.

Few respondents fell into the most liberal or conservative categories. Forty-two percent are in the most liberal third and 31% are in the most conservative third of possible scores. Twenty-six percent of adults fell in the middle, with scores reflecting a mixture of support for conservative or liberal policies.

It is the open-ended answers from this last group that give insight into the views and beliefs of the most persuadable section of the electorate.

net ideological score of support and opposition for various policies

Click here to access our tool for viewing randomized responses to our open-ended questions. The tool allows you to filter responses by the respondent’s degree of support or opposition to Trump’s policies.

screenshot of interactive tool
Continue ReadingTrump is more popular than many of his policies

The prohibitive cost of new construction in Milwaukee

Four single-family homes on the 2000 block of W Vliet St

The photo above shows four of Milwaukee’s newest houses. They were built in 2024 in the Midtown neighborhood by the large affordable housing developer Gorman and Co.  Gorman’s goal for the project was to “serve as a proof of concept that market-rate, owner-occupied hous[ing] can work in the area,” according to reporting by Urban Milwaukee.

Instead, it looks like the original developers will lose their shirts on this project—yet another example of how impractical market rate construction remains in most of Milwaukee.

Back in 2021, Gorman expected the houses to cost around $250,000 to build, with sale prices somewhere under $200,000. To make up the difference, the city created a TIF district contributing $75,000 per home, funded by future property taxes from these new homes.

The market changed dramatically in the early 2020s with construction inflation far outstripping the consumer price index. Those “250k” houses wound up costing “approximately $400,000 to build” according to a Gorman official speaking near the project’s competition in August 2024.

Reflecting the 60% increase in costs, the houses originally went on the market at listings of $359,900 and $369,900 (for the two different floor plans). 324 days after the initial listing, the first home finally sold on April 4, 2025. The closing price: $281,000, 24% less than the initial asking price, which was itself below the reported development cost.

How much does new construction really cost?

It can be tough to find detailed, current, and public information about construction prices. Recently, I acquired the applications for all 47 proposed developments applying for affordable housing tax credits in Minnesota during 2024. These applications include a detailed development budget with dozens of line items for specific costs. I’ve requested the same information from Wisconsin but have not received it. Some legal fees likely vary between the states, but I expect development costs to be basically similar between Minnesota and Wisconsin.

This table shows a simple cost breakdown across all the projects. I’ve removed acquisition costs from these calculations, because many affordable housing projects get the land for free. Leaving aside any land costs, the median housing unit cost $414k to build. Of that cost 75% went to the construction budget, 10% to the developer, 7% in professional fees (architect, permitting, legal, etc.), and 6% to financing costs (insurance, interest, etc.).

table showing the median budgeted development costs of 47 projects applying for affordable housing tax credits in Minnesota in 2024

The next graph shows the per-unit total cost vs. the number of units in the development for each project. There is a wide range in costs per project, but generally, larger projects are cheaper. Projects with 50 or more units had a median per unit price of $389,000, compared with $454,000 for those with fewer than 50 units.

The absolute cheapest proposed development was a 65-unit senior-housing apartment building with a per-unit cost of $300,000. Any family-sized housing development inevitably cost more.

How do total construction prices translate to monthly rents? Imagine if you had to pay off a $300,000 unit at a fixed 6% interest rate over 30 years. The principal, interest, and taxes alone would be $2,415 a month. For the median $414,000 unit, the bare minimum PITI and tax payment would be $3,333. In reality, costs are even higher. Occupancy is always less than 100% and apartment developers must budget for repairs, maintenance, and insurance.

scatterplot showing the per unit development cost vs the number of units in each project

Where can the market afford to build new housing in Milwaukee?

This is one of the most underappreciated facts about housing in cities like Milwaukee. We don’t build housing because, in many (if not most) places, you cannot sell a new house for what it costs to build it. And without significant subsidizes, you cannot charge the rents required to finance the construction of a market-rate apartment building.

Let’s take $350,000 as the bare minimum price required to build a standard detached, single-family home. Citywide, just 7% of houses are worth this much.[i] This improves to 43% among houses built since 2000. Still, most ‘modern’ houses in the city are not worth what it would cost to replace them.

This simple fact, in most neighborhoods houses cost more to build than you can sell them for, explains why the city has so many empty lots. In total, I count 1,500 non-tax-exempt empty lots where you could build a house right now under existing land use rules.[ii] 38% of those lots allow single family development under the existing rules, 44% duplexes or triplexes, and 17% quadplexes or more. The quadplex-eligible empty lots are overwhelmingly in the poorest areas of the city. I count 150 lots in just the 6th and 15th aldermanic districts which a private developer could buy right now and build a quadplex on by-right.

map showing the locations of taxable vacant lots colored by max zoned density

This is the basic conundrum: vacant parcels are common in neighborhoods where prevailing values are far below the level needed to finance new construction. Where home values are high enough to finance new construction, buildable lots are scarce. While it’s possible that developers could tear down existing houses to build new ones, this is practically unheard of in Milwaukee, even in neighborhoods where denser development is already legal.

For example, there are over 3,500 single family homes which could be replaced with a quadplex under existing zoning and lot size rules. But I cannot find a single instance of a quadplex replacing a single family home in my parcel records going back to 1990.

Accessory Dwelling Units

For these reasons, I’m most optimistic about accessory dwelling units as a way to add housing units in Milwaukee. They are cheaper to build and can fit in those neighborhoods of the city where property values are highest.

Also, ADUs are nothing new for Milwaukee. I count about 1,200 city lots classified as a “single family” or “duplex” but which hold multiple residentially buildings. Sometimes called “carriage houses,” they are almost entirely in the older neighborhoods surrounding downtown.

According to this 2025 analysis by Angi, the home contractor marketplace, the typical ADU costs $180,000 to build, with prices ranging between $40,000-$360,000. Costs are cheaper for internal basement or garage conversions and higher for new construction.

I wanted to know how many homeowners in Milwaukee might be able to afford costs in this range, so I modeled the home equity of every local homeowner as of January 2025.[iii] Citywide, the median homeowner has accrued $128,000 in home equity. 66% have at least $100,000 and 26% have $180,000 or more. In total, I estimate 18,000 Milwaukee households have enough home equity to finance the average cost of an ADU.

How many would actually do it? I don’t know. In Seattle, where ADUs are far more expensive, they still permit close to 1,000 a year. Right now, in Milwaukee, we’re averaging fewer than 50 new single family homes or duplexes across the entire city in a typical year. We lose about the same number of units to conversions of duplexes into single family homes. Even a small number of people choosing to build ADUs would be a meaningful change from the status quo.


[i] I’m using the 2024 assessed value and adjusting it by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue’s 0.9024 equalized assessed value ratio for the City of Milwaukee.

[ii] I calculate this based on the lot’s current zoning classification and its lot size. Some lots may have idiosyncratic dimensions which further reduce the allowable density.

[iii] I have data on the purchase date and price of every owner-occupied house in the city. To calculate accrued equity, I subtract the owner’s modeled remaining principal from the 2024 equalized assessed value of the property. I model remaining principal by assuming that the owner paid 5% down, received a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage at prevailing interest rates, and has stayed current on their payments without refinancing. Obviously, individual circumstances will vary from the average predicted by the model.

Continue ReadingThe prohibitive cost of new construction in Milwaukee