Abstract
What if the key to reducing crime in our communities was not more prosecution, but smarter regulation? I argue in this Article that consumer law is an underused and powerful addition to traditional criminal law in combating crime. Drawing on six cases brought by my office over the last seven years, I show how consumer protection statutes and civil common law doctrines can be used to hold manufacturers, distributors, and retailers responsible for practices that facilitate criminal harm, like gun violence, car theft, and drug misuse. While not a substitute for all criminal enforcement, this “regulatory justice” approach shifts moral and legal accountability upstream, away from the often-marginalized people who have traditionally borne sole responsibility for criminal injury, and toward corporate actors who enable it. In doing so, it also promotes forms of systemic prevention, corporate accountability, and restorative remedies that criminal law often fails to deliver. In reimagining the legal architecture of cri me control, this Article contributes to ongoing debates about mass incarceration, corporate responsibility, and the future of criminal justice reform. It calls on legislatures and other attorneys general to recognize the transformative potential of consumer law as a means of reducing dependence on criminal law, enhancing public safety, and promoting economic account ability.
Volume
110
Issue
5
Page
2005
Year
2026
Recommended Citation
Keith Ellison,
Preventing Harm at the Source: The Case for Regulatory Justice,
110
Minn. L. Rev.
2005
(2026).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/minnlrev/vol110/iss5/1
Rights
http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/
Publication Abbreviation
Minn. L. Rev.
