Follow HLS on
The Boston Globe
Charles Ogletree, Harvard law professor, says he has Alzheimer’s
After decades of fighting for justice, civil rights, and equality, the man whose friends call him “Tree” is now ready for a new battle. “You have to fight it; you have to address it,” Charles J. Ogletree Jr.
says of his recently announced diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Despite revealing that he has the disease, the Harvard Law School professor, activist, and author said Monday that he has no plans to retire or clear his busy schedule. Instead, he feels called to spread awareness, especially among other people of color, who are disproportionately likely to develop the neurological disorder.
The Boston Globe
Obama saddened by Ogletree’s Alzheimer’s diagnosis
President Obama is fondly voicing support for his close friend and mentor, Harvard Law School professor Charles Ogletree
, who has announced he has Alzheimer’s disease. Obama has spoken of Ogletree as a constant source of inspiration to him, particularly during difficult times. In a statement to the Globe, the president said Tuesday that he and his wife, Michelle, are saddened to hear of the diagnosis. Michelle Obama is a 1988 Harvard Law School graduate. “Professor Charles Ogletree has been a dear friend and mentor to Michelle and me since we met him as law students more than two decades ago,” Obama said. “But we are just two of the many people he has helped, supported, taught, advised and encouraged throughout his life. “We were saddened to hear of his recent diagnosis, but we were also so inspired by Charles’s courageous response,” the president continued.
Death in black and white
The shooting deaths of two black men in Louisiana and Minnesota at the hands of police last week, captured on social media, followed by the killing of five Dallas officers by a retaliating sniper, shocked the nation and left many Americans feeling like the country is unraveling. Police supporters and critics of the Black Lives Matter movement complain that citizen protests and inflammatory rhetoric are inciting violence against law enforcement. Movement supporters and protestors seeking reforms say that unpunished police violence against black people is fanning community anger. Professor Ronald S. Sullivan
is a legal theorist in areas including criminal law, criminal procedure, and race theory, and serves as faculty director of the Criminal Justice Institute at Harvard Law School. In a Q&A session, Sullivan spoke with the Gazette about the shootings and the longstanding tensions between police and African-Americans.
The Washington Post
The Supreme Court and political world are more entangled than either acknowledges
...The entanglement of the judiciary and the political world was on full display recently with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s now-regretted unloading on presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump....The condemnation of Ginsburg’s remarks by Republican politicians and conservatives was unsurprising. More interesting was the split on the left, where most of the legal establishment resides. Reaction to Ginsburg launched a thousand op-eds and blog posts. “To the extent that the current flap tells us something interesting about contemporary norms regarding the Court, it is that many people think there’s something important about maintaining the facade that the Justices are above politics, at least when they are considering actual cases,” Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet
wrote on the liberal blog Balkinization. “But I have a bridge to sell you if you think that the Justices (any of them) were above politics in . . . Bush v. Gore, or in many recent cases.”
GOP leaves questions on financial reform
If drafts of the Republican Party platform are any indication, banking -- specifically, reshaping financial regulation -- would be a big priority under a Trump administration...Hal Scott
, professor of law at Harvard Law School and director of the Committee on Capital Markets Regulation, sees the platform as a positive step toward paring back regulation he says is stifling the economy. "Some people have had their heads in the sand in thinking that overregulation doesn't have any negative impact on growth," Scott says.
Is free trade dead?
Even before the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, question marks hovered over Europe’s ability to conclude the mammoth transatlantic trade deals under negotiation...Could free trade be dead? POLITICO asked experts, trade representatives and writers from across the political spectrum to weigh in...Mark Wu
: A backlash against free trade and economic integration has been brewing in advanced economies worldwide. Europe is no exception, as the Brexit vote made clear. But the reaction we are witnessing is as much against globalization and immigration as it is against free trade. If the project is to move forward, political leaders will have to make a more convincing case about the benefits of greater integration.
As President Calls For Dialogue On Race, 3 Mass. Parents Highlight ‘Despair,’ Challenges (audio)
At a memorial service in Dallas Tuesday for five police officers killed last week, President Obama called for Americans to participate in honest dialogue about race. The president said such conversations are the antidote to the violence and despair set off by the killings of two black men last week by police in Louisiana and Minnesota, incidents that proceeded what followed in Dallas. Those seven deaths last week, far from Boston, remain the source of confusion and frustration for many families in Greater Boston. Parents are trying to figure out what to say to children, especially black children, about justice, safety and progress. Three parents discussed these concerns on Morning Edition...David Harris
...is African-American and managing director of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice at Harvard Law School.
It’s Fine for Supreme Court Justices to Speak Their Minds
An op-ed by Noah Feldman.
Doesn’t everyone have an outspoken Jewish grandmother? That was my thought on reading the indignant commentary on Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s unflattering assessment of Donald Trump in an interview with the New York Times. To put the point more seriously, there’s nothing wrong with a sitting Supreme Court justice expressing her personal political views when they don’t implicate any case that’s currently before the court.
Sharia Is Nothing to Fear
“Western civilization is in a war,” former Republican presidential candidate (and now former Trump-VP hopeful) Newt Gingrich said during a live FOX News interview with Sean Hannity, hours after a man drove a truck into a crowd in Nice, France, and killed 84, while injuring 202...This is not the first time that Newt Gingrich has proven that he knows nothing about Islam and our United States Constitution. ..“In fact, for most of its history, Islamic law offered the most liberal and humane legal principles available anywhere in the world,” Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman
once proclaimed in a New York Times Magazine article on the anti-sharia hysteria sweeping across the Republican party today...any mainstream Islamic religious scholar will tell you that there is no single monolithic definition of Sharia as it exists today anywhere in the world. Very generally speaking, the concept of Sharia has come to be defined as “the ideal law of God according to Islamic tradition,” according to Professor Intisar Rabb
, director of the Islamic Legal Studies Program at Harvard Law School. But as Professor Rabb has also made clear: “Sharia has tremendous diversity..."
Food Debate Shows Congress Is Really Bad at Regulating
An op-ed by Cass Sunstein
. In recent years, Republicans have argued that Congress is a more responsible policymaker than the executive branch. But when it comes to regulation, Congress is often much worse, and for just one reason: Executive agencies almost always focus on both costs and benefits, and Congress usually doesn’t. As a case in point, consider the Senate’s recent vote, by a margin of 63-30, in favor of a new law to require national labels for foods containing genetically modified organisms. The House is expected to pass the bill in the near future. However popular it might be, the coming law would almost certainly fail the minimal requirements that American presidents -- from Ronald Reagan to Barack Obama -- have imposed on federal regulators before they can finalize similar rules.
We talked to legal experts who explained why the FBI didn’t urge charges against Clinton — and why some think that was a mistake
In a rather confusing and seemingly contradictory statement, FBI Director James Comey announced Tuesday that the agency would not recommend bringing charges against Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server while she served as secretary of state..."There are lots of statutes that deal with the mishandling of classified information, but what they all have in common is that it's intentionally or knowingly reckless, not careless," Nancy Gertner
, a Harvard Law School lecturer who specializes in criminal law, told Business Insider. "If carelessness were sufficient, we would have indicted half the government."
A Senate candidate in Arizona copied an old Mitt Romney ad to attack John McCain. It did not go well.
Mitt Romney is sitting out the 2016 election cycle, but that doesn’t necessarily mean his campaign isn’t running ads. Or, more accurately, that his campaign ads aren’t being run. Kelli Ward, a former Arizona state senator challenging Sen. John McCain, apparently ripped a 2008 Romney campaign ad to use in her Republican primary campaign this year...Harvard Law School professor and copyright law expert Larry Lessig
told Boston.com that many campaigns make video footage freely available online as a work around to allow super PACs, which are prohibited from coordinating with campaigns, to legally use the material. However, he said that did not appear to be the case here, in which the Ward campaign used nearly an exact duplicate of an ad the Romney campaign pushed online itself in 2008. “I don’t think it’s fair use,” Lessig said, reiterating the view of the Romney camp.
The Christian Science Monitor
Influencers: Antihacking law obstructs security research
Passcode’s group of digital security and privacy experts say the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) – meant to prevent illicit trespassing on computer systems – is written far too broadly and often results in punishments that are too harsh for the infractions. ...The broad legal boundaries of the CFAA have also allowed prosecutions of computer crimes to proceed if hackers are found to have violated a website’s terms-of-service agreement, some Influencers say. “That overreading should be soundly rejected,” says Jonathan Zittrain
, a professor at Harvard Law School.
Cloud-Storage Ruling for Microsoft Helps Criminals, Not Privacy
An op-ed by Noah Feldman.
In an important decision with immense consequences for data storage services and law enforcement, a federal appeals court has quashed a warrant for e-mails that Microsoft was storing on a server in Ireland. Unless Congress changes the relevant law, this ruling creates the incentive for criminals -- or anyone else who wants privacy protection from government surveillance -- to make sure their data is held outside the borders of the U.S. The reasoning of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan arguably followed from Supreme Court precedent -- but it was probably a mistake nonetheless, and it isn’t really a win for privacy rights.
For affluent blacks, wealth doesn’t stop racial profiling
When Ronald S. Sullivan
starts teaching his class at Harvard Law School each semester, he asks his students how many of them have been spread eagle over a police car. Every year, it's the same answer: Two or three black students and maybe one other person of color raises their hand. "These are the kids who made it to Harvard Law at the top of their class," Sullivan said. "The common denominator is color." Many of the high-profile killings of black men at the hands of police, including Eric Garner, Alton Sterling and Philando Castile, have involved minor infractions like driving with a broken taillight or selling loose cigarettes. Most of these men have also been poor or working class. But high-earning professional black men say, they too, face challenges when dealing with police -- though sometimes the slights are less violent and more subtle. Wealth "helps, but its not a complete insulator," Sullivan said. "Race is still seen as a proxy for criminality."
Crime Scenes and Weapons of War
An op-ed by Noah Feldman
. Given the horror of the murder of the five police officers in Dallas last Thursday, it may seem absurd or distasteful to ask whether it was a good idea to kill the sniper with a bomb mounted on a robot. Surely anything that stopped the carnage was justified in the moment, and the police seem to have had no clear shot at the sniper. But the issue is more complicated, and it deserves to be considered carefully. There’s a legal difference between targeting a crime suspect and targeting a wartime enemy. There’s also a difference between using a weapon that can be aimed and using one that puts bystanders at greater risk. And a precedent set under emergency conditions can easily expand in future cases. The step from the robot bomb to a drone strike is barely even incremental: morally and technologically, they’re basically the same.
Donald Trump Versus Ruth Bader Ginsburg (audio)
, a Harvard law school professor and Bloomberg view columnist, and Steven Sanders, a professor at Indiana University Maurer School of Law, discuss the escalating feud between presumptive republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, and Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The conflict has escalated over the last week as Ginsburg doubled down on her anti-Trump views in three interviews, with CNN, the AP and the New York Times, and is leaving legal experts divided on the political place of the Supreme Court. They speak with Bloomberg Law hosts June Grasso and Greg Stohr on Bloomberg Radio’s "Bloomberg Law."