court

Will FCC v. Consumers’ Research Revive the Nondelegation Doctrine?

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

The idea behind the nondelegation doctrine is sound: Congress should not delegate legislative power to executive branch agencies. But its implementation leaves much to be desired. Nearly every nondelegation case acknowledges there’s a theoretical boundary but then finds that Congress hasn’t crossed it here. Only twice has the Supreme Court found a law violated the nondelegation doctrine, in 1935, both involving a statute that literally allowed President Roosevelt to cartelize the entire economy and make rules at whim. The modern rule allows Congress to give agencies significant authority as long as it includes an “intelligible principle” to guide exercise of that authority. Perhaps more than any other doctrine, this toothless standard has permitted the modern atrophy of our legislative branch, concentrated power in unelected bureaucrats, and enabled the imperial presidencies of the 21st century.

Continue reading →

Design Mandate Proposals Threaten American AI Leadership

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

Scholars often cite the 1984 Betamax case as a pivotal moment in the development of modern American tech policy. The entertainment industry sought to prohibit Sony from selling its videocassette recorder, because it could be—and largely was—used by consumers for copyright infringement. But the Court declined, finding that the device was “capable of substantial noninfringing use” and limiting the studios to identifying and suing those who actually used the product illegally.

Continue reading →

Protecting Kids and Adults Online: Device-Level Age Authentication

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

Recently, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, which involves a constitutional challenge to a Texas age verification law for websites containing sexually explicit material. The case offers the Court the opportunity to revisit two cases decided at the dawn of the Internet Age finding such requirements violated the First Amendment. This post looks at the legal and practical arguments against the law, and asks whether shifting verification from websites to devices might alleviate some of those concerns.

Continue reading →

After Net Neutrality: The Return of the States

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

I recently discussed the Sixth Circuit decision classifying broadband as a Title I information service and effectively eliminating the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) general power to regulate broadband. But like nature, regulators abhor a vacuum. While closing the door to federal regulators, the decision also creates opportunities for states to act. This post examines the present and potential future of state-level broadband regulation.

Historically, state regulators were key players in the telecommunications space. The Communications Act of 1934 divided the telecommunications world into two neat hemispheres: The FCC regulated interstate long-distance service, while state commissions regulated local and intrastate long distance. This division of authority made sense in a world where 98 percent of calls were local, and long-distance calls were a luxury. But the Telecommunications Act of 1996 dramatically rearranged the balance of power between the federal government and the states. Meanwhile, local telephone service largely disappeared as a separate market, before communication shifted from the telephone to broadband networks. As a result, most states shuttered their telecommunications regulators early in the 21st century.

Continue reading →

Building the Case: The Thrill of Mock Trial

/ Alex Mostaghimi / Leave a comment

BC Law’s Mock Trial competition has been an exhilarating part of my law school experience. This year, 22 teams litigated the fictional case State of Lone Star v. Justice Jackson, where the defendant was suspected of felony theft and burglary in a late-night smash and grab of the boutique clothing store, Fox + Cat Vintage.

Our team had to dive deep into the case materials, examining every detail—from the eyewitness testimony to the intricacies of the fingerprint evidence on a pipe allegedly used in the crime. We practiced creating opening and closing statements, each word carefully chosen to create a smooth, coherent, and convincing story. 

While each round involved the same case materials, the endings always varied. The name of the game is admitting evidence that benefits you while trying to exclude evidence that harms you. Different teams have different case theories. One team of prosecutors may think an exhibit is crucial to proving their case, while another team may think the same exhibit is irrelevant or bad for their case.

One memorable part of the Mock Trial competition is questioning witnesses. With each cross-examination, it’s crucial to expose inconsistencies in the story or reveal new facets of a witness’s personality or reliability. For example, I questioned Angel Nguyen, the defendant’s ex-wife and main alibi witness who said the two were watching The Bachelor together at the time the burglary occurred. While you can prepare to your heart’s content, you can never fully anticipate exactly what the witness’s responses will be. Witnesses will squirm and try their hardest to avoid the traps the cross-examining attorney is laying in front of them. That’s the fun of the game.

That process was a mix of adrenaline rushes and critical thinking. It’s public speaking, trial practice, evidence, and thinking-on-your-feet all wrapped into one. Things will go fast and you have to act faster. If you don’t make a timely objection, the judge will tell you, “the horse has already left the barn.” For that reason, knowing the material and concepts well enough to invoke their substance and argue it on the spot is crucial. At the very least, you won’t be bored.

If participating as an attorney isn’t your thing, I’d strongly recommend being a mock trial witness. Not only is embodying a character fun, but there is also a skill component in helping evoke the story your side wants to tell, while making it as hard as possible for the other side to do the same.

I’d like to thank Caleb Brady, Noah DeRossi, and Christian Bilgrien for co-chairing the tournament. Without them, it simply wouldn’t be possible. They put on great presentations teaching the basics of trial advocacy and brought in fantastic judges who provided invaluable advice to our young legal minds, giving us a glimpse on what the real courtroom looks like.

Alex Mostaghimi is a second-year student at BC Law. Contact him at mostagha@bc.edu.

TikTok’s No Good, Very Bad Day in Court

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

I have previously discussed the First Amendment implications of a potential TikTok ban. Removing TikTok from US markets implicates not just the speech rights of TikTok US—an American subsidiary of China-based ByteDance—but also those of its 170 million American users, many of whom actively create content on the platform. To prevail, the government must demonstrate that the ban furthers an important governmental interest unrelated to free expression and that it does not substantially burden more speech than necessary to achieve that interest. The latter is particularly challenging, which is why courts enjoined earlier bans on TikTok and WeChat.

Continue reading →

Law School in Action: Amicus Brief Clinic

/ Tess Halpern / Leave a comment

Boston College Law School gives its students a wide range of classes to take that are taught by some of the best scholars in the field. Yet, while learning about the law in a classroom is crucial to becoming a successful attorney, nothing prepares you for day-to-day practice more than getting hands-on experience before graduating. That’s where BC Law’s clinics come in.

Law students in their second and third years of study can apply for coveted spots in any of the school’s fifteen clinics. No matter what someone’s legal interest is, there’s a clinic for them! To help students better understand the opportunities available to them, the BC Law Impact Blog is highlighting each of these clinics this semester. Here is our interview with the director of the Amicus Brief Clinic, Tom Carey.

Continue reading →

A Glimpse into the Human Side of Justice: Visiting District Court

/ Christopher Tan / Leave a comment

The sky wears a cloak of gray. Snow falls, then melts. Indoors, the instant coffee offers warm sips of solace. Heaters hum in a clunky staccato. It is winter in Boston, and the start of the spring semester. 

This week, on another familiarly cloudy day, my criminal justice class and I visited the Worcester District Court where we had the privilege to speak with a judge and observe her presiding over arraignments. The building’s drab architecture echoed the nature of its solemnity. Inside, people spoke in hushed tones, only interrupted by claps of footsteps on marble and the occasional beep of a metal detector. We sat in the back of courtroom 14. Here, the air felt thick, with a sense of gravity and respect.

Continue reading →

The Deeper Meaning of Labor Day

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

A personal reminiscence, or how I unexpectedly (re) met my grandfather at law school

By Michael B. Goldenkranz ’78

For many Americans, Labor Day means a final trip to the ocean or lake at summer’s end or a barbeque closer to home. For me, though, the September holiday brings to mind my maternal grandfather’s important role in securing rights for union members victimized by corrupt or abusive union leaders. For me (and my children), it shapes our values and spawns our volunteerism and pursuit of access to justice.

Yet I may have never known that aspect of my grandfather’s life, had it not been for an unexpected event in 1978, during my last year of law school, on the first day of labor law class, when I (re) met my own grandfather in a very different context.

As a child, I puzzled an eternity about a sign in my grandfather’s shoe box-size den. The room was like a magnet and a mystery to me—cluttered with old books, important-looking papers, and a narrow but fascinating nameplate-like sign that perched above his old metallic desk. It clearly read, “ThiMk before you speak.”

Continue reading →

What Does the Dean’s Distinguished Lecture and #FreeBritney Have in Common?

/ Devon Sanders / Leave a comment

Big news!

Last week, BC Law announced the 2022 Dean’s Distinguished Lecturer, Mathew Rosengart.

Rosengart has risen to substantial acclaim in the past few months due to his representation of Britney Spears. The BC Law alumnus was selected by Spears and eventually led the charge to end Spears’s 14-year conservatorship (for those living under a rock, #FreeBritney trended through much of the last summer and fall and became an international movement among millions of the singer’s fans).

Beyond his work with Spears, Rosengart has had an illustrious career. In the past few years, he has focused his practice on entertainment law and white-collar litigation, representing other huge names like Sean Penn, Winona Ryder, Steven Spielberg, Eddie Vedder, Keanu Reeves, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, and Miami Heat guard Jimmy Butler, as well as corporations Verizon and Facebook. (Side note–one of Rosengart’s clients, Sean Penn, described Rosengart as a “tough as nails street fighter with a big brain and bigger principles”). Rosengart also has an impressive record in public service, having served as a federal prosecutor and a clerk for Justice David Souter on the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

The speech is slated for February 22 at noon. Before then, you can check out BC Law Magazine’s article about Rosengart to learn more about this year’s Distinguished Lecturer.

Devon Sanders is a third-year student at BC Law and president of the Impact blog. Reach her at sanderdd@bc.edu.