The AI Revolution Raises Terrifying Questions about Virtual Child Pornography

Today’s post by BC Law professor and associate dean for academic affairs Daniel Lyons originally appeared on the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) AEIdeas blog. You can view the post here.


By Daniel Lyons

It was probably inevitable that the artificial intelligence (AI) discourse would eventually turn to virtual pornography. Earlier this week, CBS News noted that increasingly sophisticated AI editing programs can exacerbate the problem of “deepfake” porn: images and videos digitally altered to appear to be someone else. This article came on the heels of a Twitter discussion Matty Yglesias prompted about whether AI-generated pornography could disrupt the adult industry by removing the need for real people to be involved.

But underlying this discussion is an even more frightening concern: the prospect of virtual child sexual abuse material (CSAM). (Hat tip to Kate Klonick.) It may surprise you that Congress was way ahead of the curve on this issue: A quarter-century ago, it banned so-called virtual child pornography, computer-generated imagery designed to look like CSAM. It may further surprise you that the Supreme Court struck down this law as unconstitutional. But the evolution of technology in the decades since suggests that it is time to revisit this problematic decision.

Continue reading

Korematsu v. United States Trial Re-Enactment

What makes law school worth it, in my opinion, is not the time spent with our noses buried in our textbooks or the late nights spent outlining for exams. It’s the everyday interactions you have with the people around you, and the spaces curated for you by fellow students who want to see you thrive and succeed in a comfortable environment. One such space is APALSA.

I have had the honor of being President of APALSA for the past school year. APALSA is the affinity group dedicated for law students who are of Asian-American and Pacific Island (AAPI) descent, yet it is so much more than that. APALSA provides a safe space for AAPI students to bond and socialize over mutual interests and backgrounds. In a predominantly white institution, it is easy to feel out of place as a student of color. APALSA aims to provide a welcoming environment where students can feel comfortable asking questions and having conversations that may be otherwise difficult to have with non-APALSA students. We pride ourselves on being an inclusive community, with most of our events being open to the general public so that they can share and partake in bits of our culture that we grew up on, whether through the delicious food we serve at general body meetings, the advice we offer during our attorney panels, or the social events we organize for students. 

This year, APALSA undertook a project like no other: a trial re-enactment of Korematsu v. United States.

Continue reading

What to Do About TikTok?

Today’s post by BC Law professor and associate dean for academic affairs Daniel Lyons originally appeared on the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) AEIdeas blog. You can view the post here.


By Daniel Lyons

TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew recently testified before Congress in a hearing ostensibly asking “How Congress Can Safeguard American Data Privacy and Protect Children from Online Harms.” In reality, the five-hour session more closely resembled Grandpa Simpson shaking his fist at clouds than a nuanced discussion of cybersecurity. There appears to be a growing, bipartisan consensus that Congress should do something about the popular social media platform. But before deciding what should be done, legislators must discern what precisely are the unique policy challenges that TikTok presents.

Continue reading

Crossing the Street: the Long Walk to BC Law

I grew up in Techwood, a housing project of inner-city Atlanta. Until it was razed in preparation for the ’96 Summer Olympics, Techwood was widely regarded as one of the most dangerous projects of any city in the country. Bodies in gutters and on gurneys, overdoses, gang violence, drive-bys. I saw it all. I still do, from time to time. So I escaped. Left it all behind. And I didn’t need a Wardrobe or a Tardis or a tricked-out DeLorean. All I had to do was press the ‘walk’ button, wait for the light to change, and walk across the street. It was just that easy. And when I stepped on the far sidewalk, as if by magic, the world changed from the pitted, blood-stained sidewalks of Techwood to the manicured lawns of Georgia Tech. That was my Narnia, my middle-Earth, my galaxy far far away. Use whatever metaphors and similes you can find. But the campus of Georgia Tech was as magical and mystical as any of those fantasy lands, except that this one was real. And it was mine.

Continue reading

On Innocence, Factual and Moral

One of the first lessons taught in the year-long Boston College Innocence Clinic concerns the concept of “factual innocence.” It is closely related to the concept of “actual innocence,” though different jurisdictions may refer to one or the other, and the substance and application of those terms can vary. Regardless of which term is deployed, it’s a bit of a head-scratcher when clinic students learn that the legal concept of “actual innocence” entails its own discrete body of thought and doctrine within criminal law. Doesn’t the determination of actual innocence suffuse the entire criminal-legal process?

It turns out it does not, and factual innocence is largely a claim raised in the post-conviction setting to overturn a wrongful conviction. That claim often finds little legal purchase. In Herrera v. Collins, for instance, the Supreme Court held that a claim of actual innocence does not entitle a person to federal habeas corpus relief under the 8th Amendment’s proscription of cruel and unusual punishment. Constitutionally and procedurally intact convictions can remain undisturbed by the truth. In Herrera’s case, a capital case, the Court ruled it was not cruel and unusual to execute an innocent man. That kind of antiseptic, procedural logic is one striking example of how the banality of evil manifests itself within the criminal legal system.

Continue reading

Students Respond to Dobbs V. Jackson: Part Two

Student organizations have issued two joint letters in response to the recent leaked SCOTUS draft opinion. BC Law Impact has agreed to publish these letters in the interest of continuing a respectful dialogue within our community on this important issue. The following letter was issued by the organizations listed below.


By now you have probably seen the student statement regarding the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Inc. draft opinion from the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, this statement may create the impression that it represents our entire community. It does not.

While we understand many students feel strongly opposed to the draft opinion, we are also aware that pro-life students are just as much a part of the BC Law community. BC Law has always been a place where people with different ideas and beliefs can learn from and befriend one another.

We hope it is made clear that not all student leaders agree to the statement put out earlier today through the Law Student Association email account. As the most recent Diversity and Inclusion Statement notes, we acknowledge and welcome a range of viewpoints. Those with principled disagreements can still share the same community. Diversity of thought makes our community strong. We are confident that tradition will continue.

The draft opinion represents a major victory for our democracy. In 1973, the Supreme Court ended debate on the contentious issue of abortion. They hoped then, and later in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, that the issue would be settled. Despite perhaps good intentions, they were wrong. Abortion raises significant moral questions about a woman’s liberty, medical care, and the rights of the unborn. Since abortion was erroneously crystallized as a constitutional right, court battles have led jurists with no expertise to attempt to determine when life begins. Many believe that this question should be answered by us and our representatives, not the judiciary.

As law students, we know that the courts are powerful. When properly constrained, regular people are free to decide through their elected officials what values our law will reflect. We encourage all students to respectfully speak their minds on this issue. We applaud the effort to return this important topic to the people. We agree with our classmates that this dispute is far from over. Should the draft opinion be adopted by the Court, the debate would only just begin.

At BC Law, we sincerely hope that an exchange of different ideas and beliefs continues respectfully.

Signed,
BC Law Republicans
International Law Society

Students Respond to Dobbs v. Jackson: Part One

Student organizations have issued two joint letters in response to the recent leaked SCOTUS draft opinion. BC Law Impact has agreed to publish these letters in the interest of continuing a respectful dialogue within our community on this important issue. The following letter was issued by the organizations listed below.


By now you have heard of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Inc. draft opinion leaked from the Supreme Court overturning the decisions in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. The draft, written by Justice Alito, sets the stage for millions of Americans to lose their constitutionally protected right to a legal and safe abortion. 

While the authenticity of the draft was confirmed, we still do not know whether this is the Court’s final opinion. Today, abortion is still legal in all 50 states. But if this is the Court’s opinion, it soon will not be. States have already been empowered to pass increasingly draconian and restrictive abortion bans in recent years. Twelve states have trigger bans that immediately go into effect if Roe and Casey fall. Some states have pre-existing anti-abortion laws still on the books. In all, abortion will be protected in less than half of U.S. states and territories if Roe and Casey are overturned. We also acknowledge that while Roe and Casey reified the right to abortion, access to this fundamental reproductive freedom is not accessible for all, especially low-income women of color, trans men, other pregnant people, and those living at the intersection of marginalized identities. Furthermore, coinciding with the uptick in laws modeled after Texas’ S.B.8, this decision opens the door to surveillance and criminalization of pregnant people and those who perform abortions.  In a criminal judicial system that has been built on systemic oppression, it is no surprise that the increased targeting of pregnant people will disproportionately criminalize Black, Brown and Indigenous people. Those who are disenfranchised in this country will experience the greatest impact from this decision. 

We also recognize that many people may fear the broader implications of this decision and what precedents may be overturned next. While people throw out the names of cases like Lawrence and Obergefell to illustrate the potential catastrophic consequences of the Court’s actions in Dobbs, the fear that many people have that their liberties and identities are threatened is very real. Even without the decision in Dobbs, the rights of LGBTQ youth and adults have been in peril–from “Don’t Say Gay,” to attacks on transgender youth, the community has a lot to fear. The Court’s decision–which will also inevitably impact trans pregnant people seeking healthcare at a higher rate– only adds to that. We stand in solidarity with our LGBTQ communities and communities of color.

As student leaders we realize the role we have to offer comfort, information, and solidarity in moments such as these. We want to acknowledge the deep sadness, anger, and fear many students–particularly those assigned female at birth–are feeling right now. We recognize that this comes at a very stressful time in the semester, making the news even harder to stomach. We will aim to create spaces to understand the intellectual and emotional implications in the fall and over the summer. Your community at BC Law is here to support you. 

As law students, we know the law is malleable, ever-changing, and a way to influence society. We encourage those of you who feel disempowered or frustrated by these decisions to use your power as a law student to effectuate changes you want to see. Whether that means donating to abortion funds or legal defense funds, explaining doctrine to others, engaging in legislative advocacy in your home state or at the federal level, or even joining the profession as a reproductive rights/justice advocate, this fight is far from over. 

Signed, 

American Constitution Society 
If/When/How: Law Students for Reproductive Justice
Law Students Association (LSA)
Asian Pacific American Law Students Association (APALSA)
Black Law Students Association (BLSA)
Boston College Law Democrats
Disability Law Students Association
Health Law Society
Holocaust/Human Rights Project
Immigration Law Group
Lambda Law Students Association 
Latin American Law Students Association (LALSA)
Middle Eastern Law Students Association (MELSA)
Public Interest Law Foundation (PILF)
Women’s Law Center

We Need More Blood Donors: The FDA Ban on MSM Donations Must End

Tomorrow, Boston College Law School holds its last blood drive of the year at a time when the nation’s blood supply is critically low. Due to the disruption of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Red Cross had to declare its first-ever national blood crisis in January. Even prior to the pandemic, meeting the country’s needs was a challenge; 4.5 million Americans require a blood transfusion each year, but less than forty percent of the U.S. population is eligible to donate blood. And less than ten percent donate annually. The BC Law community includes many people who have committed themselves to lives in service of others. But the prospect of donating blood remains a significant psychological hurdle for many. We have had to conduct constant outreach to fill the blood drive schedule. In fact, we still need more donors. If you are able, please sign up to donate here: Boston College Law Blood Drive Registration Page.

Given this state of affairs, it is all the more frustrating that we have had to turn away gay or bisexual men who are eager to donate blood. Despite the urgent need for blood and the difficulty of finding donors, we have had to tell friends, colleagues, and classmates that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is responsible for regulatory oversight of the U.S. blood supply, prohibits donations from “Men who have sex with Men” (MSM). The FDA instituted a lifetime ban on blood donations from MSM in 1985. This was early in the HIV/AIDS epidemic, when the incidence of HIV among gay men was high, the virus was poorly understood, and there were no available screening methods for donated blood.

Continue reading

She believed she could, and she did. Now we can: The Impact of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson

On April 7, 2022, the United States Senate confirmed Ketanji Brown Jackson as the next Justice of the Supreme Court, marking a historic step in the nation’s tortuous history with race and gender. For the first time, a Black woman will serve on the US Supreme Court.

Regardless of political affiliation, it is impossible to ignore the significance of this moment. While Justice Brown Jackson’s judicial impact remains an open question, her personal impact, particularly on Black women, is undeniable: a resounding affirmation and inspiration. Here are a few reflections from members of the Boston College Law School community.

Continue reading

Relationships and the Law

“Don’t let it go to your head.” 

These words were spoken to me by someone older and wiser than myself a week after I started law school. Like most people, the weeks before school starts, especially law school, and particularly 1L, are a very stressful time of worry and expectations.

But after just a week, I came to realize I actually really enjoyed BC Law, that law school isn’t actually that scary, and I began to share a lot about my new experiences with others. There’s an undeniable cache, swagger, and cultural fixation with the law and notions of prestige in popular culture. To some, like myself, it can become a bit noxious. To others though, it is addictive—all-consuming—and can change people, even those we regard highly and befriend, and in some cases come to love, for the worse.

Frequently in law school I’ve gotten a glimpse of something that is not quite part of the law, but more specifically part of the cost of being a member of its practice—its impact on personal relationships, particularly relationships with those who are themselves in the legal field. In pop culture, films like Legally Blonde and the wide array of television, blogs, and other mediums that provide commentary on the legal mind paint a picture of toxic stress and personalities, politics and pomposity, and a commitment at all costs to one’s career and climbing the rungs of the corporate and bureaucratic ladder.

Continue reading