I became interested in Professor White in my very first semester here, when one of my Civil Procedure readings included her 1990 article, “Subordination, Rhetorical Survival Skills and Sunday Shoes: Notes on the Hearing of Mrs. G.” It described, through the story of one low-income client she had represented, how our procedures still haven’t reached compatibility with the understandings, desires, and communication styles of all people they affect. This grounding in reality was like a breath of fresh air in the middle of what can be a very technical and erudite school year.

So the following semester, when we had chosen our first electives and I was happily taking a different class called Leadership in the Public Sector, I was excited to hear the positive feedback of my section-mates who got into the Poverty Law course Professor White also teaches. Determined to do similarly, I bid highly on each of her courses during the next registration period, which is how I wound up in CASER.

The class is wildly different from what you might expect of law school: just fifteen students meeting from 7-10 p.m. each Tuesday night, with ten or twenty minutes actually built into the beginning of each class for socializing and eating dinner provided by the school. Our discussions of the readings—each addressing a different aspect of rights, organizing, or social change—take the form of open conversations and the most creative group work Professor White can devise, like illustrating, diagramming, and role play.

In the second half of the semester, groups of students have been leading these activities, planning three-hour workshops around concepts like “development” and “democracy.” My own group, made up of myself, another 2L who is from India, and an L.L.M. from Colombia, wore ourselves out leading the “power” workshop this past week and can’t wait to be able to relax and enjoy the “markets” and “raced histories” presentations still to come.

Beyond all this, each student in CASER has been working on an outside project, ranging from UNDP case studies in Ghana, India, and South Africa to a documentary film about an undocumented high school student. My own is a mentoring partnership with the Robert F. Kennedy Children’s Action Corps and a group of at-risk Boston teens. My partner and I are just getting to know the group and, adding to the amount of CASER in my life this week, I led our second meeting with them last Monday.

Feeling surprisingly prepared by my CASER lessons, I got the teens out of their seats with a “four corners” game asking whether they agreed, strongly agreed, disagreed, or strongly disagreed with statements like “minors have different rights than adults” and “I make a positive contribution to my school.” I learned that many of them feel less safe inside school than outside in their communities, but most think they could attend law school someday. We ended by deciding that they would actually come to Harvard soon and visit a CASER class. With the permission of Professor White and the group leading that session, I’ve scheduled this for December 1 and couldn’t be more excited to see how it goes.

If this sounds like a lot of work, it is—much more than I was expecting. But fortunately, I’ve found my 2L schedule more than flexible enough for this commitment. It’s so easy to get motivated around CASER that the class often feels more like a treat. And when people I tell about it seem surprised, I wonder how they haven’t learned not to underestimate Harvard by now.

- Lea

Last semester I went to see one of my professors during office hours to talk about a paper I was writing for his class. Before we even started to talk about the paper he asked me questions about myself. He seemed to really care about how I was doing and whether I liked my classes. After chatting for a while we started talking about the assignment. He was really nice about answering my questions and leading me toward the right sources for my topic. Once all of the academic stuff was out of the way, we kept talking about things like career goals and family. When professors at HLS remind students about office hours they always say that students can come to them with questions about anything even if it has nothing to do with the law. I never believed them when they said it and didn’t really think I should bother them to ask about non-academic topics. During this visit to office hours, I realized that they mean what they say. I got all sorts of great advice about balancing work and home life and starting a family as a young lawyer. I left with more than just insight on how to write one paper.

There are even opportunities to get to know professors that you have never had classes with. Last year our student government organized faculty lunches for students to meet in groups of five or six and have discussions with various professors. I signed up for a lunch based my interest in trusts and estates. I had never met the professor before but I thought there would be less pressure if I got to chat with him in a group setting. We went to a Chinese restaurant that I hadn’t been to before. He explained that it was a popular hangout for professors. He was right. We saw several professors while we were there. We talked about classes and the transition to HLS because all the students in the group were 1Ls. The professor talked to us about his experience as a clerk for Judge Posner in Chicago and how he came to be a professor. He even made himself available for questions or advice later on. I felt like he really wanted to be there and meet with us rather than just use it as a working lunch.

Just last week, I was sitting with several friends from my 1L section out on the Hark patio when we saw our civil procedure professor walking by. We greeted him and asked how he was doing and before I knew it, he was sitting down with us for lunch. I was apprehensive about it because I thought for sure we would start to talk about something related to the law and I would feel like I was in class because my other experiences with professors outside of class had only revolved around classes and HLS news. What happened was completely different. I don’t know exactly how it happened but we started to talk about television and celebrity gossip. It was actually my professor who brought up the Kardashian sisters. It was really nice to see my professor as a person outside of his professional capacity. While listening to him talk about reality television, I realized that not too long ago, he was a law student just like me.

- Elizabeth

After being here for almost a month, I am proud to report that my nervousness was unfounded. At first, 1L year felt more like a reversion to high school than an advancement to the top of the academic pantheon. I keep all of my books in a locker, take all of my classes with the same group of people, and eat most meals in a cafeteria. However, as the days went by, the unique academic experience that this place offers began to show through. Life here is a surreal hodgepodge of traditional student life mixed with unparalleled legal opportunities. In an average day I can go from hanging out with friends in Harvard Square to listening to a Supreme Court justice speak. Yesterday, I had to decide between watching my properties professor sit on a panel with two Nobel Laureates and going to a mixer for a student practice organization I’m interested in. Literally as I write this I am coming from meetings with a flurry of well respected policy journals, all of whom brag about the amount of substantive editorial work they give to first year students. As soon as I finish writing this I will be meeting friends for the the law school’s weekly “bar review” (bar here means pub not scary law school test).

The story that best sums up this contrast between quirky student life and unmatched academics took place my first week of classes. My section was assigned a criminal law professor that after 45 years of teaching at Harvard, had decided that we would be his final class. Somehow our section also learned that our first day of class just happened to coincide with this professor’s birthday. We knew we had to do something to celebrate the occasion. We eventually planned it so that when the professor walked in, he was greeted by a sea of students all wearing party hats singing a chorus of Happy Birthday. Without missing a beat, the professor grabbed a party hat of his own and proceeded to introduce the class in it. To any scared potential 1Ls out there wondering if law school is really that terrible, I would like you to picture one of the most senior professors at Harvard Law School giving the introduction to his final class while both students and teacher are wearing headgear intended for five-year-olds. If that scene was in The Paper Chase, I definitely missed it.

- Anit

All day Friday, HLS was abuzz with anticipation of the return of former HLS Dean Elena Kagan, the first woman to serve as Solicitor-General.  Kagan was appearing on a panel entitled “Views from Washington: Reflections from the Solicitor General’s Office” which was moderated by Dean Martha Minow and also included Professors John Manning and Charles Fried. 

Professor Fried, a former SG under Reagan, opened the discussion by outlining the virtues of the SG’s Office.  He cited the interpersonal support and lack of rivalries as a “model of what lawyers working together should be.”  Professor Manning, who spent several years as a civil servant in the SG’s Office in the early ‘90s under Presidents Bush and Clinton then offered his own unique perspective.  Drawing from his time as an Assistant to the SG he praised the “ethos of professionalism and neutrality that is unique” to the SG’s Office. General Kagan remarked on the “lack of partisanship and politicization” and praised the “professionalism and commitment” of the staff.  She also provided some interesting detail regarding the make-up of the office (20 out of the 22 members are civil servants while only 2 are political appointments) and her day-to-day responsibilities (she has to personally approve every appeal the U.S. undertakes, which adds up to about 3-4 cases she has to review and approve or deny per day, the supervision of the 50-55 Supreme Court hearings per year in which the office is involved, and preparing as the SG to argue 6-7 cases/year in front of the Supreme Court.)

When the panel began the question and answer portion, the discussion quickly turned to the hot topic of the day: General Kagan’s first argument before the Supreme Court two days prior.  General Kagan likened arguing in front of the nine justices to arguing in an HLS class with question after question coming from your professor, hypotheticals piling up on hypotheticals, but with nine professors rather than one – not a pleasant thought for a 1L.  When asked about her statement to Justice Scalia that he was wrong, General Kagan said that she knew she could say that to Justice Scalia because “he likes a good battle” and “he gave me one.” 

The panel also spoke about the role of the SG within the US government.  Despite being appointed by the President and serving at his behest, the SG often defends other interests including that of Congress which crafted legislation being challenged or administrative agencies.  Thus, the SG has a daily working relationship with the Attorney-General and rarely sees the President.  In fact, Professor Fried remarked that President Reagan NEVER told him what to do while Fried was serving as SG.  As a result, there is no clear client for an SG.  The trick to the job, General Kagan told the crowd, is trying to figure out how to accommodate all those masters.  In the end, despite being a part of the executive branch, the SG has a unique role defending acts of the legislature and serving as almost a “10^th Justice,” a special officer of the Court and repeat player whose success depends on utmost honesty and the highest level of professional responsibility.  As General Kagan concluded, the SG is a lawyer like any other, but unlike every other.  The SG is “lawyer with a client and cases come across your desk and you have to defend it,” but the client is the US.

Editor’s Note:  If you’re interested in learning more about HLS SG’s in history, check out this recent article from the HLS website: http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/spotlight/public-service/related/hls-solicitors-general.html

If you’d like to learn more about the inner workings of some top government law positions, many of which are now occupied by former HLS professors, check out this article from the HLS bulletin: http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/bulletin/2009/summer/feature_3.php

What is the public interest auction?
The public interest auction is a fundraiser run entirely by the 1L class that raises money to support students who do public interest work over the summer. We solicit donations from faculty, staff, alumni, parents, students, firms, and local businesses. Some donate money and some donate things to auction off. We receive all sorts of donations – things like Red Sox tickets, gift certificates to restaurants and salons, lunches and fishing trips with professors, cookies and brownies made by the librarians, and a tour of the Northwest Corner Construction project. The auction is one of the biggest social events of the year. Every year the auction has a theme, and we decorate Austin Hall accordingly. This year the theme was “Bright Lights: Bid City” and so the different rooms were decorated as different big cities – London, Paris, and New York.

What has gone into preparing for this event and what have you gotten out of the experience as a co-chair?
Almost all of the 1L class helps out with the auction. We divide the students up by committees and committees mostly help out either by asking for donations, calling alumni and asking them to donate, emailing firms, going door to door in Cambridge, or by helping process the donations and get them ready to sell, or by helping out on the night of the auction. As one of the auction co-chairs, I had the opportunity to work with a group of amazing people to try to plan and coordinate this huge event – it was definitely a  challenging experience for all of us. From coordinating hundreds of student volunteers to keeping track of hundreds of donations, to making sure everything comes together on the night of the auction, being a co-chair was a lot of work, but it was extremely rewarding. It was also a good opportunity to meet new students.

The event is always a lot of fun for students, faculty and staff. What was your favorite part of the evening? Did anything surprise you?
The event was a huge success. My favorite part of the evening was the live auction. Our auctioneers – this year Professors Elizabeth Warren and Jonathan Zittrain – were auctioning off the “right to be – or not be – in the 2010 parody.” The first bidder was the Dean of Students because they gave her a hard time this year in the parody, but then Professor Mann, who bought this item last year, got in a bidding war with Professor Warren and everyone was laughing so hard!

Why should admitted and prospective students seeking a strong public interest community choose Harvard? Why did you?
I think that students looking for a strong public interest community should choose Harvard because they can go anywhere and do anything with a degree from Harvard Law. We are a bigger law school, but as a result, we have so many more options to pick from than other law schools. Good public interest law jobs are really competitive – and since I want one, I’m glad I chose Harvard. I know that the connections and friends that I will make here, with professors and fellow students, will be of benefit for the rest of my life.

The question of whether to apply as a transfer student is the right move is up to you, but we think that a little research will show you the vast benefits of transferring to HLS. With 102 full-time professors and more than 300 courses, HLS is home to the most intellectually stimulating legal community in the world. Outside the classroom, there are 14 journals, over100 student organizations, clinical placements in approximately 30 areas of the law, and more than enough opportunities for you to experience the incredible diversity of the HLS community during your second- and third- year. For example, the Harvard Law Review encourages transfer applicants to apply for membership and several past transfer students have been successful in that endeavor.

Bottom line? Whether you are interested in constitutional law or environmental law or human rights advocacy or any number of other areas, the breadth and depth of our offerings is incredible. Whether you want to clerk at the circuit court level, follow the path to academia, or pursue a career in public service, the opportunities presented to our graduates are unsurpassed.

For more details on the transfer application process including eligibility guidelines, deadlines, and application requirements, please visit: http://www.law.harvard.edu/prospective/j…

Also, stay tuned in the coming days and weeks for blog entries of a few students talking about their experience transferring into Harvard Law School!

In his study with Professor Matthew Kahn of UCLA, Professor Glaeser began by estimating the amount of carbon dioxide an average household (measured by family size and income) would emit if it settled in a variety of major metropolitan areas in the U.S. and then measured comparative data between projected central city versus suburban emissions within new or recently built homes. “We calculate carbon emissions from four different sources,” said Glaeser, “including home heating, electricity, driving, and public transportation, which make up approximately 40% of America’s carbon footprint.”

When examining the results, it may not come as a surprise that the five metropolitan areas with the lowest levels of carbon emissions are all in California. Naturally temperate climates and dedicated environmentalists battling for the use of energy efficient appliances and hydroelectric power are two factors that make colder or warmer cities like Rochester (with more heating emissions) or Houston (more electricity use) appear ‘browner.’ And New York, in spite of low electricity usage and impressively low transportation-related CO2 emissions, tends to use dirtier sources of power such as coal. Sunbelt cities, like Atlanta and Memphis, ranked worst not by heating their homes but rather by electricity (dirtier sources of energy and hot summers) and the geographic sprawl that demands driving. “The data suggests that households in dense urban areas have significantly lower carbon emissions than households in the suburbs,” said Glaeser.

The question of environmental damage associated with carbon emissions nationwide remains. Even by the most conservative estimates, new homes in Memphis do more than $600 worth of environmental harm per year than homes in San Francisco, which are associated with fewer tons of carbon. “Before carbon taxes,” said Glaeser, “the country should rethink its land-use policies which currently push people towards high emissions areas and away from greener ones.” Specifically, Glaeser referred to California’s strict land use regulations that inhibit the growth both upward and outward of cities. “By restricting local development, California regulators just make that construction occur elsewhere… [more] building in the state would reduce average commute lengths and improve per-capita emissions. Higher densities could also justify more investment in new, low-emissions energy plants.”

Professor Glaeser is the Fred and Eleanor Glimp Professor of Economics at Harvard, where he also serves as Director of the Taubman Center for State and Local Government and the Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston.

Teles began by framing the Federalist Society in terms of what it does and doesn’t do. “To understand what the Federalist Society doesn’t do,” he said, “it’s important to make a distinction between the Society and the networks created by the Society… much of what people attribute to the Federalist Society are done by members as facilitated by the organization.” At the heart of Teles’ discussion was the notion of direct versus indirect outputs. Direct outputs included the Society’s charter goal of creating a “parallel curriculum” for law schools, most of whom had few to no conservative faculty a couple of decades ago, and through this, to create safe space for conservative dialogue. Indirect outputs included such conceptual goals as the recruitment of members and the provision each of social, human, and cultural capital for the conservative movement. “Conservative lawyers had instincts they weren’t acting on because the social, professional and intellectual network wasn’t there to support them,” he said. “There was also a stigma associated with the brand.”

In direct response to Teles’ remarks on social capital, Tushnet pointed out that social capital can be destroyed as easily. “One issue for the Federalist Society is how to deal with credibility issues when prominent sources of thought are no longer credible,” he said, alluding to the infamous memos of former DOJ legal advisor John Yoo in which he advocated the possible legality of torture and that enemy combatants could be denied protection under the Geneva Conventions. “Yoo’s memos became associated with conservative legal thought… how does the Society deal with the effects that the Bush administration has had on conservative credibility?”

Regarding human and social capital, Tushnet and Teles explained that the development of the movement has been tied to the existence of Republicans in government. In the absence of a Republican administration, “the Federalist Society has always been dependent on jobs in, big Washington law firms, which are in turn dependent on the existence of an administrative state” said Tushnet. So what happens in periods like the present when this pipeline narrows and this source of jobs dries up? According to Teles, the rational adaptation to being out of government is to “crank up the size of public interest” when your only allies are in the judiciary.

In closing, Teles questioned whether the Federalist Society is a victim of its own success. “There’s not as much need now for a parallel curriculum in law schools,” he said. “The general environment now is not as hostile for conservatives in law schools.”

Actually, argued Sunstein, it is precisely because of this ability to customize our news sources according to where our interests lie that we have become more polarized.

“The conception of free speech emphasizes the architecture of control by which we can construct topics that serve our interests,” said Sunstein. “…but there’s a suggestion that this system of self-sorting will diminish the serendipity of knowledge that comes with exposure to thoughts from unanticipated sources.” To illustrate this point of increasing polarity, Sunstein posed three empirical cases. For the first case his research team brought together like-minded conservatives in Colorado Springs, CO and like-minded liberals in Boulder and asked them, anonymously and without deliberating with others, to give their opinions on issues ranging from climate change to affirmative action. Then, the groups were asked to deliberate about the issues in their respective groups. “On each issue, the like minded liberals and conservatives became much more extreme in their views,” said Sunstein, “almost all of the internal diversity that might have existed before deliberation evaporated.” Another case involving federal judges sought to establish how liberal and conservative appointees vote when both alone and as a group. “The splits in this case were stark… where there’s normally a 10-15% split between liberals and conservatives in any given issue, the behavior the judges exhibited when segregated mirrored the Colorado case; the split on one conservative issue was 90%.”

“We need to recover the public forum of ideas,” Sunstein said. “we need to recover our sense of constitutional aspirations and the deliberative forums in which diverse people get into contact.”

Stay tuned for more Sunstein!

If you missed the story, here it is.

By the way, I don’t suppose I need to blog about our new president-elect and HLS alumnus (’91)…do I? We expect to see more than a few HLS grads as part of the new administration (including the First Lady).