Law & Society

Sidebar: A Jesuit Primer on Developing an Inner Life

/ Alex Mostaghimi / Leave a comment

An intriguing opportunity landed in my inbox on an otherwise unremarkable summer day: an all-expenses paid retreat at BC’s Connors Center in Dover, Massachusetts, one that promised a reprieve from the travails of law school and an introduction to the Jesuit precepts which drive the institution’s educational mission. It sounded interesting, so I took the plunge and signed up.

With an upbringing where religion was largely absent, I came to the event with an open mind and a strong sense of curiosity. Growing up in an environment where many of my peers had relationships with spiritual institutions always left me perplexed at the margins. Whether they complained about the rigidity of their Church’s traditions and scripture or took the Gospel as truth, it always fascinated me how complicated a relationship people can have with God.

Of course, anyone acting with a degree of self awareness is conscious of the arbitrariness of their existence. We are cosmically confined, set in perpetual motion from an unknowable event that long preceded us and placed here by our ancestors, who were caught up in the same predicament. It’s hardly surprising that most of us are left questioning why we are here and how we should conduct our lives.

Continue reading →

Four Ways ‘Suits’ Breaks ABA Rules

/ kristievhoang / Leave a comment

This summer, I binge watched eight seasons of “Suits.”

I’m in company alongside millions of others who tallied over 12.8 billion minutes of streaming the Big Law drama across Netflix and Peacock. “Suits” earned a record-breaking second-life this past summer, becoming the most-watched acquired title in Nielson history from June 26 to July 2. It also became the first show to amass over 3 billion minutes watched for seven straight weeks.

It’s slightly sadistic for me to obsess over “Suits” after clocking in hours as a summer associate. But perhaps what’s worse is drawing analogies between “Suits” episodes and Moral Professional Responsibility hypotheticals.

Continue reading →

Breathe

/ Justin Sells / Leave a comment

“When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful.”

Those words, spoken by motivational speaker Eric Thomas, inspired me after I was rejected by The United States Military Academy at West Point when I first applied as a high school senior. Nevertheless, I did not lose my focus, my resolve, or my commitment to attend West Point because I wanted to serve our country and to fight for the rights and freedoms of others. Following the route of General George S. Patton, who attended West Point after a year at the Virginia Military Institute (VMI), I went to VMI.

VMI is an institution known for its challenging first-year experience, known as the “Rat Line,” its sexist history (United States v. Virginia et al., 1996), and its military support of the Confederacy during the American Civil War. As an African-American cadet, I had to come to terms with VMI’s past and the constant reminders on its campus that glorified supporters of slavery. For example, as a “rat” (a freshman who has not yet earned the title of “cadet” by completing a crucible known as “Breakout”), I was required to salute the statue of Lieutenant General Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson—a Confederate officer who taught at VMI and who believed that African-Americans were incapable of becoming disciplined soldiers—prior to the statue’s subsequent removal on December 7, 2020. I was also required to participate in an annual celebration of the ten VMI cadets who died for the Confederacy during the Battle of New Market on May 15, 1864. At this celebration, my classmates and I were ordered to reenact a Confederate charge and seizure of a hill that was occupied by Union artillery forces, which I did with disdain.

Continue reading →

Theft by Another Name: It’s Time To Fight Back Against Civil Forfeiture

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

Third-year student Jillian Jacobson recently had an op-ed published in Newsweek Magazine. Check it out below!

3L student Jillian Jacobson

Rochester, New York, resident Cristal Starling was diligently saving money to turn her hot dog stand into a full-fledged food truck business when local police raided her home and confiscated her savings. The reason? Her then-boyfriend was suspected of dealing drugs. The agents found no evidence of her boyfriend’s alleged drug dealing, but they did find more than $8,000 of Starling’s hard-earned money—which they took and never returned to her, even after her then boyfriend was acquitted on all charges.

Like many other Americans, Starling is a victim of civil asset forfeiture, a practice that allows law enforcement agencies to seize personal property on the mere suspicion that it was involved in criminal activity. After a lengthy appeal, a federal appellate court in New York has given her a shot at getting her personal property back. In addition, the court set a more just standard for victims of civil forfeiture who attempt to regain their property. This is a big win—both for Starling and for other Americans whose property is unjustly seized every year.

Since 2000, the government has seized more than $68.8 billion from Americans through civil forfeiture. When law enforcement suspects personal property is connected to a criminal act—whether the property is cash, jewelry, a car, home, or business—the agency seizes it and a prosecutor later moves for the state to keep it permanently.

Read the rest of Jillian’s op-ed on Newsweek.com

The AI Revolution Raises Terrifying Questions about Virtual Child Pornography

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

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

/ Seung Hye Yang / 1 Comment

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?

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

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

/ Michael Deere / Leave a comment

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

/ ianramseynorth / Leave a comment

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

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

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