Follow HLS on
The New Yorker
A New Family Feeling on Campus
An op-ed by Jeannie Suk.
I often informally ask my students, at Harvard Law School, what their most important ideals are and how they hope to fulfill them in their lives and careers. In the past several years, I’ve been touched to hear a significant plurality of students name a priority that I didn’t hear much when I began teaching, nearly a decade ago: their close relationships with their parents... Particularly in the way things have unfolded at Yale, students’ social-justice activism has been expressed, in part, as the need for care from authority figures. When they experience the hurt that motivates them to political action, they’re deeply disappointed with parental surrogates for not responding adequately or quickly enough to support and nurture them.
The Wall Street Journal
The Examiners: History Dictates Disclosure of Insider Pay
An op-ed by Mark Roe
. Bankruptcy experience provides good reason for rules requiring disclosure of managers’ compensation for the year before bankruptcy. A longstanding problem for bankruptcy has been to limit transfers that insiders make to themselves and their business associates when the firm fails. It is no surprise that debtors sometimes prefer to see their firm’s value in stockholders’ hands rather than in creditors’ hands. Although most insiders don’t act this way, insider transfers have been enough of a problem over the long-run that bankruptcy has generated rules—some going back for centuries—to police and recover these transfers for creditors’ benefit.
What Obama’s Immigration Lawsuit Is Really About
An op-ed by Cass Sunstein.
When a federal court of appeals struck down a key part of President Barack Obama's immigration reform last week, it wasn't just a blow to the administration's goal of assuring the parents of U.S. citizens that neither they nor their children will be deported. It was a challenge to the way federal agencies operate -- one that could change how future administrations make policy. The central issue in the case has nothing to do with the separation of powers, or with the widespread objection that Obama has “bypassed Congress.” The only question is this: When do executive agencies have to give the public an opportunity to comment on their policies before those policies go into effect?
Islamic State Has More to Gain in Beirut
An op-ed by Noah Feldman.
Beirutis are justifiably frustrated that Friday's attacks in Paris overshadowed the bombings that killed 43 people in their city the day before. But equal respect for human life isn't the only reason Western media should be more focused on Beirut than they have been. The Paris attack succeeded in frightening the West, but the attack on Beirut represents a more important strategic avenue for Islamic State. The Sunni-militant group isn't going to destabilize France. Yet destabilizing Lebanon, a tinderbox at the best of times, is an achievable goal.
The Duke Chronicle
Experts compare Duke lawsuit to other antitrust cases
Experts are uncertain how antitrust law will be applied to the antitrust case involving Duke’s alleged no-poaching agreement for medical faculty. Seaman v. Duke University, et al. is a class action lawsuit filed by Dr. Danielle Seaman, assistant professor of radiology, on behalf of all similarly situated medical faculty at Duke and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill since 2012. Filed June 9, the suit alleges that Duke and UNC entered into an agreement not to hire each other’s staff for parallel positions—an agreement that violates antitrust laws...“There have been many [antitrust cases involving educational institutions], particularly concerning agreements restraining the commercial activities of college sports programs,” wrote Einer Elhauge
, a law professor at Harvard Law School, in an email. Elhauge referred to two cases in particular: NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma—a 1984 Supreme Court case challenging the NCAA’s limitation on the number of television broadcasts permitted for each university—and Law v. NCAA—a 1998 U.S. Court of Appeals case challenging a salary cap for college coaches. Both decisions deemed the NCAA to be in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
The Harvard Crimson
Kagan Discusses Statutory Interpretation at Law School
Supreme Court Associate Justice Elena Kagan discussed what she described as “remarkable” changes in interpretation of statutory law in a conversation with law professor John F. Manning
’82 during an event at the Law School on Tuesday. Law School Dean Martha L. Minow
introduced Kagan, one of her predecessors as dean. She noted that this lecture series is named after Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin G. Scalia, whom Minow described as Kagan’s “sparring partner, hunting partner, and friend.” The talk centered on what Minow called the “revolution” in statutory interpretation over the past several decades that has shifted the focus in the courts from common law to statutory law.
The Hollywood Reporter
CNN Defends Campus Rape Movie That Colleges Call “Inaccurate,” “Misleading”
Amid a growing controversy involving questions of accuracy and fairness, the makers of The Hunting Ground, a documentary indictment of campus sexual assaults, are defending the film, which is set to air on CNN on Nov. 22...On Nov. 19, law professors at Harvard, where another of the film’s documented incidents took place, attacked the filmmakers’ accuracy in a widely publicized joint letter that focused on the victim’s inebriation and the absence of violence in the assault. The professors wrote in a letter that was posted on The Harvard Law Record website that the film gave the impression that the accused student "like others accused in the stories featured in the film, is guilty of sexual assault by force and the use of drugs on his alleged victims, and that he, like the others accused, is a repeat sexual predator.” The professors, including prominent faculty members Jeannie C. Suk
, Laurence Tribe
and Randall Kennedy
, noted that there have been "extensive investigations and proceedings" examining the case against the student -- at Harvard Law School, in a criminal case before the grand jury, and in criminal trial before a jury.