The 1918 influenza pandemic stands out because of the unusual age pattern of high mortality. In the United States, another feature merits scientific scrutiny: against a historical backdrop of extreme racial health inequality, the pandemic produced strikingly small ratios of nonwhite to white influenza and pneumonia mortality. We provide the most complete account to date of these racial disparities in 1918, showing that, across U.S. cities, they were almost uniformly small. We examine four potential explanations for this unexpected result, including [1] socio-demographic factors like segregation, [2] city-level implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), [3] exposure to the milder spring 1918 “herald wave,” and [4] early-life exposures to other influenza strains resulting in differential immunological vulnerability to the 1918 flu. While we find little evidence for 1-3, we offer suggestive evidence that racial variation in early-life exposure to the 1889-1892 influenza pandemic shrunk racial disparities during the 1918 pandemic. We also raise the possibility that differential behavioral responses to the herald wave may have protected nonwhite urban populations. By providing a comprehensive description and careful examination of the potential drivers of racial inequality in mortality during the 1918 pandemic, our study provides a framework to consider interactions between the natural history of particular microbial agents and the social histories of the populations they infect.

Against a backdrop of extreme racial health inequality, the 1918 influenza pandemic resulted in a striking reduction of non-White to White influenza and pneumonia mortality disparities in United States cities. We provide the most complete account to date of these reduced racial disparities, showing that they were unexpectedly uniform across cities. Linking data from multiple sources, we then examine potential explanations for this finding, including city-level sociodemographic factors such as segregation, implementation of nonpharmaceutical interventions, racial differences in exposure to the milder spring 1918 “herald wave,” and racial differences in early-life influenza exposures, resulting in differential immunological vulnerability to the 1918 flu. While we find little evidence for the first three explanations, we offer suggestive evidence that racial variation in childhood exposure to the 1889–1892 influenza pandemic may have shrunk racial disparities in 1918. We also highlight the possibility that differential behavioral responses to the herald wave may have protected non-White urban populations. By providing a comprehensive description and examination of racial inequality in mortality during the 1918 pandemic, we offer a framework for understanding disparities in infectious disease mortality that considers interactions between the natural histories of particular microbial agents and the social histories of those they infect.

During the twentieth century, privacy evolved from an ambiguous legal idea into a defined state-centric right, while privacy claims against non-state entities became more marginalized. Whereas prior studies treat this as the direct outcome of cultural shifts or landmark interventions by legal elites, I document legal institutionalization as a three-stage process of domain formation and meaning making. Using a combination of citation network analysis and qualitative research, I show that the concept of privacy first entered the legal field when journalists raised concerns about the unauthorized use and commodification of personal data; that US jurisprudence produced two competing schools of legal thought as judges and legal scholars struggled to give substance to an abstract concept and structure to an evolving domain of judicial practice; and that privacy was consecrated as a constitutional right when state courts and the US Supreme Court selectively mobilized the language of privacy to confront the expanding reach of the American state. These findings demonstrate the processual nature of legal institutionalization, draw attention to intra-legal contestation and the implicit pluralism of American jurisprudence, and highlight an emerging distinction between the legal regimes governing bureaucratic rule and market exchanges in the early twentieth century.