Toby’s blog

Here’s a professor who relishes the energy of an engaged student body: “I think I have a persona as an intimidating teacher, but here, there are many students willing to take me on.”

Professor Mark Tushnet teaches, among other things, Comparative Constitutional Law at Harvard. In this seminar, students with a solid knowledge of the U.S. constitution get exposed to a variety of other constutional systems.

He asks his students a lot of questions. For instance, how do you get constitutions started? How are constitutions made legitimate? Can there be such a thing as an un-constitutional constitutional amendment? How is free speech treated by the law in other countries? To be truly effective lawyers, Tushnet explains, students need to understand other legal systems, and this is a great way to do it. “The course is a very good deepening of a whole range of issues in constitutional theory–(issues) that students will have been exposed to in a U.S. context that look different in a comparative context.”

Harvard is a magnet for many students from outside the United States, adds Tushnet, and when they bring a global perspective to the study of constitutions, it enriches the experiences of everyone in the classroom.

Students often find free speech to be surprisingly complex. “Students come in thinking it’s relatively straightforward. When you actually work with the materials, the problems turn out to be much more complicated, and I try to convey that complexity.”

When you listen to the podcast, you’ll learn what research project was inspired by conversations with his daughter, an intellectual property lawyer, and just what he thinks about that Wikipedia designation as “one of the most radical constitutional law theorists in the country.”

Podcast: Mark Tushnet (9:00)

I know, I know, December is fast approaching, but let’s keep thinking summer thoughts… 3L Robert Cacace spent his summer in Boston’s U.S. Attorney’s office. Here’s his take:

“I’ll start with a caveat: the following thoughts should be viewed as completely impressionistic, as they reflect my first sustained experience with public interest law and were formed as a result of my time in a certain unit (Public Corruptions) of a particular division (Criminal) one of the many, many United States Attorney’s Offices (Boston) across the country. One of the challenges of creating great summer work experiences is learning what to take from the position and what to regard as unrepresentative. That predicament is complicated when taking it second-hand from another person. As you’ll come to appreciate more in law school, job satisfaction ‘all depends’ on a variety of things coming together.

“With that out of the way, I really liked my job and plan to pursue a career in the Department of Justice. The lawyers are talented, dedicated, and hard-working. At the same time, there is an exuberance about the attorneys, attributable perhaps to the highly manageable hours, sense that the work is socially productive, and substantial intellectual investment that each attorney is expected to contribute. The pay is never going to be comparable to that at a firm, but is probably better than most other salaries in the public interest (summers, however, are gratis…Harvard’s SPIF funding is much appreciated, and easier to qualify for than summer funding at almost any other school). The most inexperienced of attorneys practices in court as a litigator, and can draw upon a wealth of helpful institutional knowledge. As interns, we are encouraged to watch district and appellate proceedings; the time spent observing trials and sentencing hearings are as interesting as they are educative.

“Work at a larger USAO surely feels more like work at a firm than other non-government public interest positions. There is no lack of resources or staff support, and attorneys spend most of their days in the office or in court. Since there is no identifiable client for an AUSA, most of the day is occupied by talking to colleagues or investigators on a case, or dealing with the legal and factual issues presented to them. If you crave client contact or a strong sense of connection to the larger community, you should think twice about work in these offices. Interns deal most often with AUSAs on their case, and then on occasion with investigators or witnesses assisting the attorneys.

“The lack of client contact, which seems to be typical of starting firm jobs, leads to what seems to be a more manageable time commitment. Attorneys preparing for trial will of course put in time that equals or exceeds that of the average firm associate. However, the AUSAs whose cases were not at trial spent a shorter amount of time at the office and enjoyed more flexible schedules. It was not uncommon to see the office mostly empty by 6pm. To return to the flipside, trial teams are quite a bit busier, and will remain so throughout the course of the trial. The greenest AUSA is asked to litigate his/her own cases, often following them up to the appellate level if necessary. This hands-on aspect of the job is probably without parallel in terms of the experience that it offers a young attorney to practice in federal court.

“During my summer, interns were able to share in every part of the attorneys’ duties. Some interns worked long hours as part of trial teams, and were asked to prepare same-day memos or motions that would be sent before a judge. Others were asked to complete more long-term projects as part of an appellate brief. I had a mix of both. My attorneys were generous with their time and advice, made efforts to assign me projects that I’d be interested in, and seemed eager to know what my opinion was on a particular legal issue or strategy. The summer was terrific.”

We started to admit a few applicants this week in time for the holiday, but we’ll be admitting people well into the summer, I expect. So you have plenty of time to send in your application.

Still, this might be a good weekend to put that personal statement to bed…

Best wishes!

Diane Rosenfeld teaches gender justice and women’s rights at Harvard, which means she must also pay close attention to the cultural interpretation of those rights. Her reading group ‘Power, Beauty, Sex and Violence’ is one part women’s studies and one part media studies. The group studies the “intersection of those concepts to see what they produce in culture and in law,” says Rosenfeld. “We can identify different locuses for change…So much sexual violence is technically illegal but culturally tolerated.”

Rosenfeld also runs the Gender Violence Clinical Workshop, and offers a reading group for first-year students called ‘The Feminist Experience and the Common Law,’ which asks the question, “How would your 1-L year look different if it was taught from a feminist legal perspective?” This group, she explains, primarily focuses on how rape is taught in criminal law classes.

Reading groups are a relatively new development at HLS. With only 5-15 people, the groups offer a more intimate setting as well as a greater opportunity for participation, not to mention the cultivation of leadership development. Each week, a different student leads the discussion under Rosenfeld’s careful guidance.

Taught from a young age that the law can be used for social justice, she’s busy putting her ideas into action in Louisiana, where she’s advocating for the construction of detention centers for housing men who are abusive to women. “We hear a lot of questions like “why doesn’t she leave when she’s being battered?” says Rosenfeld. “A responsible victim is expected to leave a violent domestic situation.” She asks a simple question: Why doesn’t he leave instead?

Students are very active in that project, as well as in another project with more international breadth. She is working with international organizations on a “five-country comparative study on child protection laws and female genital mutilation, seeing which African countries are really enforcing their laws and what they need in addition to laws in order to stop female genital mutilation.”

She uses her wealth of experience to support students pursuing these important questions. Under President Clinton, she served as senior council for the Office of Violence Against Women. When Harvard students began appealing to Dean Kagan to include more studies on gender justice and women’s rights, the Dean’s swift response sparked the popular reading groups. And with an ideal teacher. After all, we think Rosenfeld personally provides the counterbalance to a cultural problem that she argues is in immediate need of a solution. “Women aren’t getting the message about being strong and intelligent.”

Podcast: Diane Rosenfeld (17:16)

As you can imagine, I’ve been pretty busy reading hundreds of applications over the last few weeks. Still, why work at Harvard Law School if you don’t take advantage of some of the events on campus? You’ve heard a lot of stories from students but you haven’t heard from me for awhile. I thought I’d give you a sampling of my out-of-office experiences over the last couple of weeks.

First I just had to walk next door to see Michael Chertoff ’78, the Homeland Security secretary, speak. But more interesting was the private dinner with about ten students, Professor Ogletree and Mr. Chertoff (and a few other classmates of our guest). The formal speech was a talk about the War on Terror—with quite a few pointed, yet respectful questions from the students in the crowd. The private dinner, on the other hand, was a freewheeling give and take on the subject of Katrina and catastrophe management. I chatted with one of Chertoff’s deputies, a man who has served in the CIA for 40 years.

A few days later I sat in on a discussion led by a Korean human rights expert, Hyo-Je Cho, about the effect of the North Korean nuke test on the South Korean human rights community. The discussion took an emotional turn when one student pushed Professor Cho on the subject of the supposed indoctrination of the North Korean population. “How do you know what they really think? Have you spoken with the refugee community? Have you taken polls?” Another participant brought up the pre-reunification German situation, but Professor Cho pointed to the much more significant economic and social gap between North and South Korea.

And after that I moderated a Traphagen Distinguished Alumni event where a former Goldman partner, Jody LaNasa ’94, discussed his recent “retirement” at the age of maybe 38 with a group of 15 or 20 students over lunch. Don’t worry, he’s starting his own fund and won’t be idling away on a beach somewhere.

Then tonight I sat in on Bruce Mann’s 1L reading group, where the 8 or 9 students discussed with Professor Mann the Morgan biography of Ben Franklin, comparing it to their readings on John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. The group was split on their favorite “character” with most aligning with John Adams—his relationship with Abigail was particularly appealing to the group. A few preferred Ben Franklin but no one much cared for Thomas Jefferson. As Professor Mann said, “The more you read about Jefferson, the less you like him.” (No UVA grads in the room, I guess.) We talked about the different contemporary opinions of Franklin among America, France, and Great Britain; about his relationship with his son; about the public nature of private correspondence among the leading figures of his day; and about the need filled in the American psyche or national myth by Franklin and his peers.

What can I say, I have a tough job…

Just got this from International Legal Studies:

“Through a new program, HLS J.D. and LL.M. students who will be traveling abroad in furtherance of an approved Winter Term Writing or Clinical project will be eligible for Winter Term International Travel Grants of $750 or more. Students who meet basic eligibility requirements will receive a base grant of at least $750 — the precise amount of this guaranteed funding will be determined based on the number of students participating in the Winter Term International Travel Grant Program. As well, all students who meet the criteria for a base grant can be considered for additional funding which will be awarded on a competitive basis.”

HLS students go abroad in great numbers during the summer, but the winter term provides another chance to explore the world. Click here: Winter Term International Travel Grants - Information.pdf for more information about the program.

Another note from Lauren:

“Last week Harvard Law’s American Constitution Society held a brown bag lunch discussion with Professors David Barron, Reva Siegel, and Robert Post on ‘Progressive Constitutionalism.’ Like most brown bags, the event was a chance to sit around a small table and interact with the professors in a more informal setting. This particular event, though it was billed as a ‘debate’ on the role of courts, emerged as a more subtle discussion of how the progressive reliance on courts has shifted and how progressives can use multiple branches to achieve political ends.

“Professor Barron began the discussion by emphasizing that law professors too often analyze only the Supreme Court or the Federal Appellate courts in seeking to understand how courts influence change. In Barron’s opinion, the courts – particularly state and local courts – play an important role in motivating social change (for example, in the case of gay marriage). On the other hand, Professors Siegel and Post emphasized the dangers of an exclusive reliance on the Court system. After labeling herself as a ’soft anti-Court’ person, Professor Siegel explained that progressives had relied heavily on the court system as a means to pressure social change. Then, when the Warren-court era concluded, progressives were left without a developed system to advocate for change in the other branches.

“By the end of the lunch, the professors had revealed a more nuanced strategy for achieving progressive goals that required an examination of all branches and various levels of government. Rather than presenting an answer to the anti-court or pro-court position, the lunch was a chance to learn about flaws in political strategy and to think about the best means of pursuing social change.”

For brief articles by Siegel/Post and Barron on Progressive Constitutionalism, see http://www.hlpronline.com/.

As the weather gets a little more chilly (luckily we have tunnels between the buildings here) let’s do another summer story… Alanna Buchanan, 2L, spent her summer in Washington, DC at the Poverty & Race Research Action Council (PRRAC):

“While we do not engage in direct legal services, we use the power of the law to advocate for the rights of the poor and low-income, by coupling social science research and legal precedent to support the enforcement of equitable public policies. The goal of PRRAC is to bring together ‘advocates and researchers to encourage and further their collaboration on race and poverty issues,’ supporting social science research linked to local, state and national advocacy strategies.

“I have attended meetings with the leading experts on race and poverty issues, where they have come together to discuss the creation of a caucus that will address issues of structural racism. I have been a part of strategy sessions for the development of a critical amicus brief, and I have been able to attend many meetings geared at educating advocates on the most pressing social issues, while providing a forum to discuss how these social ills will be addressed.

“On a day to day basis, I spend a lot of my time culling through and pulling together critical research on issues and inequities at the intersection of race and poverty, and I have looked extensively at such areas as community development corporations, housing mobility, and the continuing reality of our segregated school systems.

“The product of this research takes shape in such forms as annotated bibliographies, literature reviews and internet guides that can be used by others to easily access the critical perspectives on these topics. In addition, I have been able to co-author a report on civil rights best practices among states in their allocation of the Low Income Housing Tax Credits. I have also helped with fundraising endeavors and in pulling together information for PRRAC’s bi-monthly newsletter.”

In the 12+ years she’s spent working for the Bernard Koteen Office of Public Interest Advising at HLS, Alexa Shabecoff has built a tremendous set of contacts in the public sector and a global network of former advisees. She knows she can turn to these enthusiastic resources—after flipping through what she calls her “mental Rolodex”—any time a student seeks guidance about working in public-interest law. Shabecoff, Assistant Dean for Public Service, is proud to have fostered both this network of professional support and a physical space on campus that encourages a student-friendly public-interest community. “Our office is physically set up to support community-building. We have candy, and big heavy chairs. Some students bring in their laptops and hang out and work. I love that.”

Harvard had the first university office exclusively devoted to public-interest advising, and continues to lead the pack in that area. All HLS students are expected to take part in public-service work, an expectation communicated as soon as first-year law students arrive on campus. “The Dean sets the tone of the culture from the top,” says Shabecoff. She also credits the success of OPIA’s program to Harvard’s unwavering financial support of public interest. The school offers the best loan repayment program in the country, which makes it truly possible for students to work in public interest without being overburdened by law school loans. And then there’s the summer funding program. “We still have the most generous summer funding program, and that’s had a dramatic impact on the number of students doing public summer work. I think it was 380 students last year.”

The office provides a range of support, from events like dinners and panels to a program in which current practitioners visit campus to offer one-on-one counseling for students. The office staff also offers lots of expertise in handing out summer jobs, and boasts a robust, “eclectic” clinical program. “There’s a clinical opportunity for everyone.” For public interest jobs, that’s crucial. She took the time to remind me that public-interest law is open to everyone, even those who have never seriously considered it before this very moment.

Podcast: Alexa Shabecoff (27:15)

Our student practice organizations give students the opportunity to engage in “real lawyering” even in the first year. These organizations are the Tenant Advocacy Project (TAP), Harvard Defenders, the Legal Aid Bureau (which Mira Edmonds just blogged about), the Mediation Program, and the Prison Legal Assistance Project (PLAP). 2L Christina Chung describes her experience with PLAP:

“When a prisoner breaks a rule in prison, he/she will get a disciplinary ticket. The ticket can be given for any range of violations from assault on a guard or other prisoner to possessing contraband in their cells. If the prisoner wants to contest the ticket, either because he wants to prove his innocence or he thinks the sanctions are too harsh, he will call us at PLAP (Prison Legal Assistance Project).

“Once we hear the details of the prisoner’s ticket, we decide whether or not we want to represent him during his disciplinary hearing. The hearing provides a great experience for learning real-life lawyering skills because you have to pursue a wide range of activities for your client and you have to construct persuasive arguments from the evidence and relevant statutes.

“When a PLAP-er decides to take a case, the first thing she does is interview the prisoner. Next she will file discovery requests to get any relevant evidence that may be helpful, from surveillance videos to unit activity logs. During the hearing the student attorney makes motions, cross-examines witnesses, and of course makes closing arguments.

“Finally, after the hearing is over, if you do not get a favorable result, you can write an appeal for your client. Writing an appeal memo is a great way to learn persuasive writing and careful marshalling of the facts.

“But aside from lawyering skills, PLAP also helps future lawyers by letting them see a side of the criminal justice system that most will never encounter: prison life. To witness what happens after the sentence is handed down from the judge’s bench is to learn compassion and to appreciate the complex realities of criminal law.”