Chisholm: Revise Truth-in-Sentencing, Support “Smart” Use of Alternatives to Hold Down Costs and Fight Crime

Crime can continue to go down in Milwaukee and spending on criminal justice can be controlled successfully, but only if steps are taken to give local judges, prosecutors, police and others involved in criminal justice tools, incentives and support in doing so, Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm said in a speech Friday at Marquette University Law School.

In what he described as a major policy statement, Chisholm called for modifying the state’s truth-in-sentencing law and maintaining support of programs that assess the risks and needs of people charged with crimes so that fewer end up in prison and more end up on paths that lead  away from re-offending.

“Both sides of the political spectrum must acknowledge that talking tough on crime has reached its limits,” Chisholm said. “Being smart on crime is the solution.”

(The text of Chisholm’s comments can be read here and a video of his speech and a question and answer session following it can be viewed here.)

Chisholm said such “smarter” efforts are paying off in Milwaukee, but are in danger of being undermined by major cuts in federal anti-crime programs and in state aid to criminal justice  work.

Continue ReadingChisholm: Revise Truth-in-Sentencing, Support “Smart” Use of Alternatives to Hold Down Costs and Fight Crime

Simon to Speak on Punishment for Murder

I’m looking forward to the upcoming George and Margaret Barrock Lecture on Criminal Law.  Berkeley Professor Jonathan Simon will be visiting us on January 24 at 12:30 to speak on punishment for murder.  Here is the teaser:

Although the death penalty may be dying out in the United States, the end stage of capital punishment leaves us grasping more than ever for principles that could govern the power to punish those who are convicted of society’s most feared and loathed category of crime. This need is particularly acute in the United States, where the rise of general incapacitation as the dominant purpose of punishment has produced sentences that are far in excess of international and historic American standards. Professor Simon will suggest that these sentences help to anchor an overall structure of imprisonment that appears unjust and unsustainable, argue for a new version of selective incapacitation limited by dignity as the central purpose of imprisonment, and propose a restructuring of the law of murder to effectuate those goals.

More information about Simon’s lecture, including details about how to RSVP, is here. 

Continue ReadingSimon to Speak on Punishment for Murder

The IRS’s Hollow Victory in Crane v. Commissioner, 331 U.S. 1 (1947)

[Editors’ note: This is the fourth in our series, What Is the Most Important U.S. Supreme Court Case in Your Area of the Law? The first three installments are here, here, and here.]

There are many important Supreme Court tax cases.  However, few are identifiable just by reference to a footnote number.  Tax scholars and academics will easily recognize the Supreme Court’s decision in Crane v. Commissioner simply by reference to footnote 37.  In my opinion, Crane is the most important case in tax history, and footnote 37 is the most famous footnote.

The issues presented in Crane arose when the taxpayer inherited an apartment building from her husband. 

Continue ReadingThe IRS’s Hollow Victory in Crane v. Commissioner, 331 U.S. 1 (1947)