Follow HLS on
An article by Samuel Moyn
. On the death of Sigmund Freud, W.H. Auden memorably observed that he was “no more a person now but a whole climate of opinion.” And this was 1939—he had seen nothing yet of Freud’s influence. Across the North Atlantic, Freud’s new science of psychoanalysis transformed common sense and was itself transformed in a host of new applications. In the humanistic disciplines, and especially in literary study, engagement with psychoanalysis became almost obligatory. The general public was equally enthralled by Freud’s ideas. His books circulated widely, on college campuses especially, and his thought traversed popular culture from fiction to film... In light of such wide influence, it is rather shocking how swiftly, if just beyond conscious notice, Freud’s relevance has waned in the past two decades.
Putting his money where his mouth is
...“The Massachusetts ballot measure is poised to be the single most progressive piece of farmed animal protection legislation ever passed in the United States,” said Christopher Green
, executive director of Harvard Law School’s Animal Law & Policy Program. “Having this happen in our backyard as our program gets off the ground has allowed us to analyze the process in the classroom and given our students the opportunity to gain invaluable experience working directly on the campaign.” Thomas has found a welcome partner in the HLS program. With his recent gift of $1 million and a subsequent matching gift of $500,000 to support individual donations of up to $50,000 through December, he is hoping to make farm animals central to animal cruelty prevention. It’s a shared concern...The program’s work reaches well beyond U.S. borders. Its faculty director, Kristen Stilt
, is collaborating with Harvard’s South Asia Institute to examine animal agriculture from the Middle East to Asia.
The Harvard Crimson
A Two-Way Street
...In one way or another, Harvard Law professors helped shape Obama’s legacy. But the relationship between the Law School and the next president has yet to be defined. A trove of emails from Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta, leaked by Wikileaks in October, show that a few Law professors have caught the campaign’s attention. And Clinton’s campaign has contacted at least one about serving in her administration if she wins next Tuesday. There is no indication that Trump’s campaign has contacted any Law professors. “I think law is about policy choices so by definition we are always involved in policy choices,” Law professor Christine A. Desan
said, referring to her fellow faculty members...fewer Law School faculty members are actively and openly advising either candidate in this election—a noticeable shift from previous elections, said Law Professor and former U.S. Solicitor General Charles Fried
The Harvard Crimson
Regardless of Question 4 Vote, Harvard Likely to Keep Marijuana Ban On Campus
Harvard students excited for the possibility of legalized marijuana in Massachusetts may find it sobering that, if Harvard follows the paths of other universities, the drug will likely remain banned on campus even if Massachusetts Ballot Question 4 passes...Legalizing marijuana on a campus that receives federal funds could potentially jeopardize those funds, according to Harvard Law School professor Charles R. Nesson
. Nesson recently lectured at the Harvard Ed Portal in Allston on Question 4. “The operative question I think is whether this acts as an in terrorem effect,” Nesson said, referring to Harvard’s federal funding as a deterrent to permitting cannabis. “I just can’t imagine Harvard taking any step but the most conservative one: go the slowest, stay the closest to the ground.”
Cellphone Radiation Warning Sign Sparks First Amendment Battle
In the back of the Apple Store in Berkeley, California, at the end of the bar where those “geniuses” repair iPhones and MacBooks, is a placard with this warning: “If you carry or use your phone in a pants or shirt pocket or tucked into a bra when the phone is ON and connected to a wireless network, you may exceed the federal guidelines for exposure to RF radiation.” Read the safety instructions in the manual, it tells consumers. Or else. The Apple Store posted the notice to comply with a Berkeley city ordinance—the first in the nation—requiring retailers to alert consumers to the federal guidelines for safe cellphone use...Berkeley is represented by Lawrence Lessig
, a Harvard law professor and cyberlaw expert who last year ran for president as a Democrat to push for an overhaul of campaign finance. The two are now jousting over the Berkeley ordinance in federal court. Lessig, who helped craft the Berkeley ordinance in a way that he hoped would withstand a cellphone industry lawsuit, is not charging the city for his services. He volunteered because he believes corporations discourage governments from imposing regulations by filing First Amendment lawsuits that are prohibitively expensive to defend, he tells Newsweek
. “I’m a constitutional scholar, and I am very concerned,” he says.
You Have the Right to Give Someone the Finger
An op-ed by Noah Feldman
. Is the middle-finger gesture obscene? Not in Pennsylvania, according to a state appellate decision filed this week reversing a man’s conviction for giving his ex-wife the finger. Decided in the shadow of the First Amendment, the decision raises the ever-intriguing question of what counts as obscenity. It also calls into question the old idea that obscene speech is exempt from the constitutional rules governing freedom of speech.
The Boston Globe
Is it time to lay down the law about cybersecurity?
Who’s up for government regulation of the Internet? Yes, my skin is crawling at the thought, just like yours. Still, some kind of government action seems inevitable. Online vandals, thieves, and spies are running wild on the global network. Tougher, smarter laws may offer our only hope of fending them off...Bruce Schneier
, a fellow at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society, said that only a similar response by the government will bring the Internet under control. “The market can’t do this,” Schneier said. “What we have here is a market failure.” Schneier wants mandatory security standards for all IoT devices sold in the United States. For instance, a manufacturer could not sell an Internet router that didn’t require the user to set up a strong password. It’s hardly a foolproof cure. Passwords can still be beaten. But today, many devices don’t require passwords at all, making them open gateways for criminals.