James Shipton named executive director of Program on International Financial Systems

Program on International Financial Systems Executive Director James Shipton.

Harvard Law School's Program on International Financial Systems (PIFS) has named James Shipton its new executive director.

“We are thrilled that James has joined PIFS and look forward to working with him as we grow the program in the coming years,” said PIFS Faculty Director Professor Hal S. Scott.

Shipton recently completed a three-year term as a commission member of the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) and was executive director of the SFC's Intermediaries Division that is responsible for licensing and ongoing supervision of capital market firms in Hong Kong. Prior to joining SFC, he worked for Goldman Sachs as a managing director in Goldman's Asian Executive Office and, since 2009, as head of Government & Regulatory Affairs for Asia Pacific, based in Hong Kong.

Scott added that Shipton's experience in the financial services sector and the Asia Pacific region complements the ongoing work of PIFS. Outgoing Deputy Director James Apostol will assume the role of senior advisor to PIFS.

Founded in 1986, PIFS specializes in research, education and programming on issues related to capital market development, financial regulation, and the international financial system. PIFS hosts an acclaimed series of Symposia on Building the Financial System of the Twenty‐first Century that annually convene financial leaders from China, Europe, India, Japan, Latin America and the United States for dialogue on key financial issues and the development of capital markets.

California Governor Signs New Criminal Conviction Requirement For Civil Forfeiture

Evading safeguards for civil liberties, law enforcement agencies have routinely exploited a loophole to seize property.

Something Fishy: GOP Picks Bureaucracy Over Small Business?

The tumult we see inside the Republican Party is beginning to make sense when we see House Leadership choose big government and bureaucracy over taxpayers and small businesses.

Debating democracy itself

Credit: Kris Snibbe/Harvard Staff Photographer Harvard Professor Michael Sandel addressed the Faneuil Forum audience as part of HUBweek. “We're not going to debate about tax policy, Syria, emails, or the wall,” Sandel told the capacity crowd at Faneuil Hall.

Hours before Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump clashed over taxes, trade, and the economy in the first presidential debate Tuesday, a different kind of discussion took place at Boston's historic Faneuil Hall.

Dubbed the debate before the debate, the Faneuil Forum drew hundreds of people who packed the hall, sometimes called the Cradle of Liberty for the role it played during the American Revolution, to take part in a lively civic dialogue led by prominent Harvard Professor Michael Sandel on the future of democracy.

After being introduced by NPR host Robin Young as “the most relevant living professor and philosopher in the world” and a “rock star moralist,” Sandel, who teaches “Justice,” one of the most popular courses at the College, started the discussion by asking the audience to ponder the purpose of democracy.

“We're not going to debate about tax policy, Syria, emails, or the wall,” said Sandel, the Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor of Government in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. “Instead, I'd like to propose that we have a discussion about what democracy is for, with the hope that this discussion can help us begin to figure out how to repair the tattered state of democracy in our country.”

Sandel's lecture is a signature event of HUBweek, Boston's civic festival of ideas and innovation that runs until Oct. 1 and is now in its second year. Founded by Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, The Boston Globe, and Massachusetts General Hospital, the festival showcases scholars and their cutting-edge research during public forums, discussions, hands-on demonstrations, and lectures, all of which celebrate the intersection of science, technology, arts, and ethics.

With thought-provoking questions, Sandel enthralled his listeners, who voiced their opinions in front of a microphone or evinced their agreement or disagreement by raising green or red signs.

Some of the questions he raised explored ethical dilemmas, from vote swapping to “space savers” to buying and selling citizenship, all of which he said illuminate “the big question of what is democracy about, and why does it seem to be ailing these days?”

Credit: Kris Snibbe/Harvard Staff Photographer Michael Sandel talks with Boston Mayor Martin J. Walsh (right) during the Faneuil Forum HUBweek event inside Faneuil Hall Square in Boston.

“Should people be free to buy and sell votes? Should vote swapping be permitted? Should there be a free market for votes?” Sandel asked the audience. And although the audience showed its disapproval of vote swapping, some members favored a free market for votes because it might lead to more voter participation. Others called that a “slippery slope.”

One of the strongest opponents to buying and selling votes was Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, who was in the audience. Asked by Sandel to join him on the stage, Walsh called the proposal “a big mistake.”

“People died for our right to vote,” he said. “It's our obligation to go out and vote. If we have to incentivize people to vote by paying them, I'm not sure their vote is actually worth it in the first place.”

When asked about the “moral dilemma” posed by “space savers,” used by Boston residents in the winter to lay claim to a parking spot they've shoveled out after a storm, Walsh said it's the biggest decision he has to make every winter. Boston's current policy allows people to use space savers for 48 hours after a major snowfall.

“If we can get everyone to work together to shovel out the space and be courteous to each other, we'd have a better society,” he said. “If we can get to a point in which people can respect each other and help each other by shoveling the snow, that's the way to go and the place we need to get to. I don't know if Boston is ready for that now.”

Sandel also delved into immigration, a controversial issue in the presidential race, and probed the morality of selling the right to immigrate and putting a price on citizenship. Most listeners favored the idea of selling the right to immigrate, though some worried that could lead to a less egalitarian system.

Credit: Kris Snibbe/Harvard Staff Photographer Participants overwhelmingly vote in favor of a hypothetical motion during the Faneuil Forum.

“It's quite tricky,” said a woman in the audience. “If you have the money, you can come. If you don't, you exclude a huge number of people who could contribute.”

At the end of the debate, Sandel told the audience to be mindful of embracing a market-driven vision of democracy, in which votes and citizenship can be had for a price, because that cheapens democracy and civic life.

“We only just scratched the surface of the question with which we began,” he said. “What really is democracy for, and what is civic life about? And is it tainted, or corrupted, or diminished, or degraded if it merges with the market? Do we need to separate the markets on the one hand from the activity of buying and selling on the other for democracy to flourish?”

Sandel said he was concerned about the state of democracy and civic life in the United States, where a “certain impoverished understanding of what democracy is for” has taken hold, including the ideas that “democracy is just a way of registering our own economic self-interests every four years” and citizenship “just a matter of being a shareholder in a prosperous society.”

“We've come to think that democracy is economics by other means, and we've come to treat citizenship as a kind of extension of market relations,” Sandel said. “In ancient Athens, Aristotle said the point of political community is not just residence in a common site, it's not just for the sake of easing exchange in economic relations. The point of democracy, he thought, was to create a setting in which citizens will deliberate with one another as equals, and, in deliberating, they would learn something and will become better citizens and better human beings than they would otherwise be.”

Reluctance to adopt a thoroughgoing consumerist conception of citizenship and democracy can only help democracy, said Sandel.

“As we hesitate to embrace a market-driven vision of democracy, we still affirm with part of ourselves, at least, that ancient democratic idea, the idea that the point of democracy is to deliberate together, in common, in gathering places like this, about justice, about the common good, and about what it means to be a citizen.”

---

This article was originally published in the Harvard Gazette on September 27, 2016.

Turner's Pension Plan Bad For Houston Taxpayers

BY CHARLES BLAIN--While Turner's plan is exceedingly hazardous for taxpayers, at the present it is a plan rather than an actual change in policy. Changes will ultimately have to be approved by city council, the pension boards, and state lawmakers.

An Alabama Law Might Hurt Craft Brewers (While Snooping On You)

The proper, constitutionally valid purpose of economic regulations is to protect public health and safety, not to protect selected businesses by curbing competition from others. Alabama's alcohol regulators need to show some sobriety and pour the competition-stifling, suds surveillance plan down the drain.

Sorry, Hillary -- You Can't 'Fix' College With More Federal Meddling

Hillary Clinton's "free college" proposal attacks an imaginary problem (that the US doesn't "produce" enough college graduates) while it would aggravate a real and serious problem, namely that the nation invests too little and as a result produces too few jobs that pay well for college graduates and everyone else.

The Supreme Court's NOT Top 10: October Term 2015 Petitions The Justices Should Have Granted

This Monday the U.S. Supreme Court will conduct its Long Conference, so named for the larger than usual number of certiorari petitions it considers there. With the fate of so many cert petitions hanging in the balance-and the overwhelming majority of them about to be denied-now is an opportune time [...]

Children of All Nations supports work of Child Advocacy Program with $250,000 gift

Credit: Lorin Granger Child and Advocacy Program Faculty Director Elizabeth Bartholet '65, HLS Dean Martha Minow, Children of All Nations President and CEO Snow Wu, and Boston College Associate Professor of Law Paulo Barrozo S.J.D. '09

The Child Advocacy Program (CAP) of Harvard Law School recently received a $250,000 gift from Children of All Nations (CAN). The gift, which will be distributed over five years, will provide funding to CAP to pursue its international human rights work on behalf of unparented children and their right to family. The gift demonstrates the long-standing relationship and commitment of the CAN organization, led by President and Chief Executive Officer Snow Wu, to CAP and its founder and Faculty Director Elizabeth Bartholet '65.

To celebrate the presentation of the gift, Harvard Law School Dean Martha Minow joined the CAP staff, Wu, and other distinguished guests in the Caspersen Room of the Law Library on September 9. After thanking Wu and the CAN organization for their generous gift, Minow noted, “This gift is a testament to the power of partnerships between Harvard Law School and our community organizations. With this partnership, we can expand the work of Betsy Bartholet and CAP, all while continuing to build strong relationships with wonderful organizations like CAN.”

Austin, Texas-based CAN was established in response to the ever-changing needs of orphaned children around the world and the challenges adoptive families face.  CAN, which is operated by Great Wall China Adoption Agency and founded in 1996 by Wu, is dedicated to improving the lives of children by reaching out to nations around the world to place children and give humanitarian aid globally.

Credit: Lorin Granger In the HLS Library's Caspersen Room on Sept. 9, Children of All Nations CEO Snow Wu celebrated the work of Harvard Law School's Child Advocacy Program.

Presenting the first installment of the gift, Wu noted that over her 10-year relationship with Bartholet she has developed a deep admiration for Bartholet's advocacy and persistence in fighting for the rights of unparented children. “Betsy is a tireless fighter for the unparented children and willing to challenge UNICEF, the governments, and political figures who are preventing unparented children from finding homes, even when she is the only voice in the room,” said Wu. “She goes head on with them.” Wu went on to say that this gift signifies the trust that she has in Bartholet's work and in CAP's mission, which is to advance children's interests through facilitating productive interaction between academia and the world of policy and practice, and through training generations of students to contribute in their future careers to law reform and social change. The money will be the beginning of CAN's long partnership with and commitment to CAP and Harvard Law School, said Wu.

Bartholet said, “This gift represents liberation for CAP – enabling us to break free from the constraints of our limited budget to do the work that so needs doing.  This is especially important given the politics of our work – which makes it so very hard to raise funds.”

Boston College Associate Professor of Law Paulo Barrozo S.J.D. '09 and partner in CAP's human rights work, also spoke.  Barrozo identified the situation of millions of unparented children worldwide who are prevented from accessing loving and nurturing families as representing “the largest unrecognized human rights and humanitarian crisis of our time.” “When Professor Bartholet named this group 'unparented children,'” Barrozo said, “she gave a name to their predicament the same way that Raphael Lemkin named some the atrocities of World War II 'genocide.'” “Once we name an evil,” Barrozo continued, “we are one step closer to defeating it.” He believes that the work of CAP is especially important to solve this crisis, saying, “CAP is a critical player in finding homes for children trapped in institutional care situations who are being denied this basic right to family life.”

Also attending the ceremony was new CAP assistant director Crisanne Hazen. She joins CAP after 10 years with the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley in San Jose, Calif. Kathleen Moore, an incoming consultant, was also introduced at the ceremony. Her work will focus on assisting CAP with developing international human rights litigation aimed at breaking down the barriers to international adoption. The new CAN gift has made it possible to add Moore to the CAP team, and thus expand in key ways CAP's international human rights work on behalf of children.

Professor offers basics of bioethics and the law in 90 minutes

Credit: Rose Lincoln/Harvard Staff Photographer Professor Glenn Cohen spoke at the Harvard Ed Portal as part of the Faculty Speaker Series.

Bioethics, the law, and how they pertain to health information technologies, reproduction, and research have raised questions, and often hackles, since humans began to debate the boundaries of life. Should physicians assist in the death of a patient? Or create embryos and destroy them in the service of creating stem cell lines? Under what circumstances should the state be allowed to involuntarily hospitalize individuals, and what procedures are in place to protect the rights of those individuals?

Harvard Law School Professor Glenn Cohen brought those questions, and an approach to consider them, to an interactive, one-night class at the Harvard Ed Portal that delved into the intricacies surrounding the legal, medical, and ethical aspects of bioethics.

The Sept. 13 lecture, attended by nearly 60 people and audited online by more than 100 viewers from all over the world, was held in conjunction with Cohen's HarvardX course,  “Bioethics: The Law, Medicine, and Ethics of Reproductive Technologies and Genetics.”

Bioethics is about testing our intuitions, examining a series of cases that are alike and unalike and then exploring whether the variations affirm or challenge our gut feelings, said Cohen, the faculty director of the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology and Bioethics.

“This is what law professors do, take the premise of what something should be and nudge you toward doubt and self-doubt,” he said. “Especially when educating with material that is both fascinating and terrifying. There is a certain moral panic when thinking about making these decisions.”

Mark Keating, a student from Brooklyn who has been taking Cohen's online course, traveled to Allston to attend the lecture in person. “The first week of the online class was fascinating, looking at odd experiments and tweaking this or that to see if our intuition changes,” he said. “It fostered an environment of debate and discussion for me even outside of the class.”

What is morally significant regarding intuition-in other words, what is the right thing to do?

The discussion included what Cohen referred to as “patients and passports,” or medical travel. Should parents be allowed to take their children abroad for things that are illegal at home, such as abortion? Should laws be extraterritorial? How should we allocate who gets priority on organ transplant waiting lists? What is morally significant regarding intuition - in other words, what is the right thing to do?

Even the obscure, such as who owns the hair customers leave at a barber shop or the blood drawn in a lab, are the types of questions that are examined every day by hospital ethics committees, research ethic boards, classrooms, and courtrooms. The answers, however, will only come through the process of pushing intuitive thinking and nudging the boundaries of discussion across society, Cohen said.

Audience members had plenty to say through the 90-minute lecture.

“This is a field growing in importance and stature,” said Jamie Susskind of Cambridge, Mass., a fellow at the Berkman Klein Center who is writing a book on the future of political ideas.

Credit: Rose Lincoln/Harvard Staff Photographer A live audience listens to Cohen's bioethics lecture at the Harvard Ed Portal while a live stream reaches nearly twice as many people.

“When you are dealing with the law you want a yes or no answer so you can have a precedent, but in this case you almost can't be wrong,” said Carmen Altes of Watertown. “There is no direct answer, so there is no wrong way to arrive at a conclusion.”

Brad Bellows, also a Cambridge resident, said the lecture let the community be part of a Harvard Law School class for one night.

“We don't do enough of these kinds of events. Anything that gets people thinking is a good thing,” said Bellows. “This Allston setting is an important part of Harvard that is often overlooked.”

“This is a wonderful opportunity to both experience and have a discussion with Professor Glenn Cohen,” said Robert A. Lue, faculty director of the Harvard Ed Portal and faculty director of HarvardX. “Glenn is something of a superstar at the Harvard Law School and clearly has a remarkable breadth of intellectual interests and projects.”

The takeaways for the evening were beneficial to both teacher and students. Cohen said he liked seeing how he could adapt his course to the Ed Portal setting and how thoughtful people were in their participation.

“I find this endlessly fascinating,” said Cohen. “I hope I've at least entertained you, if not educated you.”

The lecture was one of the Faculty Speaker Series offered by the Harvard Ed Portal as part of its educational initiative stemming from HarvardX, an online learning resource offering high-quality programs in many disciplines.

This article was originally published in the Harvard Gazette on September 20, 2016.

Should Carmakers Be Liable When A Self-Driving Car Crashes?

Makers of self driving cars should be liable for accidents involving these cars. This would only boost the markets for such technology

Alumni appointed to prestigious judicial positions

Two Harvard Law School alumni were recently appointed to prestigious judicial positions in their homeland. Professor Jau-Yuan Hwang LL.M. '91 S.J.D. '95 was named to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of China (Taiwan) and Professor Gonçalo de Almeida Ribeiro LL.M. '07 S.J.D. '12 was appointed to the Constitutional Court of Portugal.

Ribeiro was elected by the Assembly of the Republic and was installed as a judge of the Constitutional Court of Portugal in July.

Gonçalo de Almeida Ribeiro LL.M. '07 S.J.D. '12 was appointed to the Constitutional Court of Portugal, in July 2016.

An auxiliary professor at the faculty of law of the Universidade Católica Portuguesa (Portuguese Catholic University), Ribeiro teaches jurisprudence, private law theory, and economic analysis of law, and he is a consultant to one of the major law firms in Lisbon PLMJ. He has been joint coordinator of the Lisbon Section of the Católica Research Centre for the Future of Law (2014-2016), and a visiting professor at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium (2013) and the law faculty of the University of in Italy (2014). He has published academic works in Portugal and abroad in the fields of jurisprudence, constitutional theory, and the history of legal thought.

After graduating from the law faculty of the Universidade Nova de Lisboa (UNL, New Lisbon University) in 2006, Ribeiro received his LL.M. and S.J.D. from the Harvard Law School in 2007 and 2012. While at Harvard, he was a teaching fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government from 2009 to 2010 and a Clark Byse Fellow at HLS from 2010 to 2011. He was awarded the Harvard Law School's Mancini Prize for his Ph.D. thesis on “The Decline of Private Law: A Philosophic History of Liberal Legalism” (2013), and the Dean's Award for Excellence in Student Teaching at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government (2010). As an undergraduate, he participated in study groups on Southern African political and economic development as a consultant for the Development Studies Centre of the OECD (Paris) and the Tropical Research Institute (Lisbon).

Jau-Yuan Hwang LL.M. '91 S.J.D. '95 was named to Taiwan's Highest Court.

A professor at the College of Law of National Taiwan University since 1995, Hwang focuses his research interests on constitutional law and international law. After earning his S.J.D. at HLS, Hwang joined NTU, where he teaches Constitutional Law, U.S. Constitutional Law, Comparative Constitutionalism, International Law, and a course concerning the legal status of Taiwan.

Hwang has published articles in many scholarly journals and publications, including “Development of Standards of Review by the Constitutional Court from 1996 to 2011: Reception and Localization of the Proportionality Principle” (National Taiwan University Law Journal, 2013-06-01, (Vol.42, Issue 2), pp.215-258) and “Taiwan's Constitutional Court from 2003 to 2011: New Appointments and Different Performance, Seoul Law Journal, 53 (2):41-63(in English). He is the editor of “Direct Democracy in Asia: a reference guide to the legislation and Practices” (Taipei, Taiwan Foundation for Democracy, 2006), and co-editor of “Constitution: Separation of Powers,” (Taipei, Taiwan, 2008). His Harvard Law School S.J.D. thesis, “Constitutional change and political transition in Taiwan since 1986,” focused on the role of legal institutions during political change in Taiwan, and, in a 2003 National Taiwan University Law Journal article, “Choosing a New System of Judicial Review for Taiwan,” Hwang reflected on the status of Taiwan's Judicial Yuan.

A graduate of National Taiwan University, Hwang received his bachelor degree of laws in 1984 and master degree of laws in 1989. He worked in private practice as an associate attorney at Formosa Transnational Attorneys-at-Law from 1988 to 1990 before attending Harvard Law.

Alumni appointed to international courts

Two Harvard Law School alumni were recently appointed to prestigious judicial positions in their homeland. Professor Jau-Yuan Hwang LL.M. '91 S.J.D. '95 was named to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of China (Taiwan) and Professor Gonçalo de Almeida Ribeiro LL.M. '07 S.J.D. '12 was appointed to the Constitutional Court of Portugal.

Ribeiro was elected by the Assembly of the Republic and was installed as a judge of the Constitutional Court of Portugal in July.

Gonçalo de Almeida Ribeiro LL.M. '07 S.J.D. '12 was appointed to the Constitutional Court of Portugal, in July 2016.

An auxiliary professor at the faculty of law of the Universidade Católica Portuguesa (Portuguese Catholic University), Ribeiro teaches jurisprudence, private law theory, and economic analysis of law, and he is a consultant to one of the major law firms in Lisbon PLMJ. He has been joint coordinator of the Lisbon Section of the Católica Research Centre for the Future of Law (2014-2016), and a visiting professor at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium (2013) and the law faculty of the University of in Italy (2014). He has published academic works in Portugal and abroad in the fields of jurisprudence, constitutional theory, and the history of legal thought.

After graduating from the law faculty of the Universidade Nova de Lisboa (UNL, New Lisbon University) in 2006, Ribeiro received his LL.M. and S.J.D. from the Harvard Law School in 2007 and 2012. While at Harvard, he was a teaching fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government from 2009 to 2010 and a Clark Byse Fellow at HLS from 2010 to 2011. He was awarded the Harvard Law School's Mancini Prize for his Ph.D. thesis on “The Decline of Private Law: A Philosophic History of Liberal Legalism” (2013), and the Dean's Award for Excellence in Student Teaching at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government (2010). As an undergraduate, he participated in study groups on Southern African political and economic development as a consultant for the Development Studies Centre of the OECD (Paris) and the Tropical Research Institute (Lisbon).

Jau-Yuan Hwang LL.M. '91 S.J.D. '95 was named to Taiwan's Highest Court.

A professor at the College of Law of National Taiwan University since 1995, Hwang focuses his research interests on constitutional law and international law. After earning his S.J.D. at HLS, Hwang joined NTU, where he teaches Constitutional Law, U.S. Constitutional Law, Comparative Constitutionalism, International Law, and a course concerning the legal status of Taiwan.

Hwang has published articles in many scholarly journals and publications, including “Development of Standards of Review by the Constitutional Court from 1996 to 2011: Reception and Localization of the Proportionality Principle” (National Taiwan University Law Journal, 2013-06-01, (Vol.42, Issue 2), pp.215-258) and “Taiwan's Constitutional Court from 2003 to 2011: New Appointments and Different Performance, Seoul Law Journal, 53 (2):41-63(in English). He is the editor of “Direct Democracy in Asia: a reference guide to the legislation and Practices” (Taipei, Taiwan Foundation for Democracy, 2006), and co-editor of “Constitution: Separation of Powers,” (Taipei, Taiwan, 2008). His Harvard Law School S.J.D. thesis, “Constitutional change and political transition in Taiwan since 1986,” focused on the role of legal institutions during political change in Taiwan, and, in a 2003 National Taiwan University Law Journal article, “Choosing a New System of Judicial Review for Taiwan,” Hwang reflected on the status of Taiwan's Judicial Yuan.

A graduate of National Taiwan University, Hwang received his bachelor degree of laws in 1984 and master degree of laws in 1989. He worked in private practice as an associate attorney at Formosa Transnational Attorneys-at-Law from 1988 to 1990 before attending Harvard Law.

Obama Isn't Yet Done Regulating

BY JARED MEYER--While the “lame duck” session of Congress receives plenty of attention, midnight regulations are able to fly well below the public's radar. In addition to the increase in economically significant regulations, the decrease in the quality of regulations over the last months of an administration should be a major concern for the public and lawmakers.

How Uber Won in Montreal

This article is coauthored with Jonathan Hamel. Against all odds, Uber just won a major battle in Montreal . Though ridesharing companies have successfully defended themselves against outright bans all over North America, this latest victory was far from guaranteed. Uber had to fight back against Montreal's mayor, Quebec's provincial government, [...]

Library exhibit looks at the history of the former Harvard Law School shield

The Harvard Law School Library has opened a new exhibit-Facing History and Looking Forward: Retiring the Harvard Law School Shield-on the history of the Harvard Law School shield, documenting the shield's ties to the family of Isaac Royall, Jr., the 18th century slaveholder whose bequest established the first professorship of law at Harvard in 1815.

Last year, after those ties were detailed by Professor Daniel Coquillette in his written history of the Law School, a group of law students calling itself Royall Must Fall called for the retirement of the shield, and HLS Dean Martha Minow appointed a special committee of faculty, students and staff to review the history of the shield, solicit views from across the HLS community, and make a recommendation.

In March, the committee-chaired by HLS Professor Bruce Mann-recommended that the shield be abandoned. With Dean Minow's support, the Harvard Corporation accepted the committee's recommendation.

The new exhibit has been mounted in the Caspersen Room of the Langdell Hall and also online, displaying key documents and other items that illustrate the history of the Royall household and the slaves whose labor Royall exploited. Also documented: the history of the adoption of the Royall crest as the Law School's shield in 1936 (when the University mandated that all Harvard schools adopt individual variations of the 'veritas' seal); the debate last year over the call to retire the shield; and the report and recommendation of the Mann Committee (including a separate, dissenting view from Professor Annette Gordon-Reed and law student Annie Rittgers '17).

Credit: Lorin Granger By early April, the shield, which was modeled on the Royall crest, was removed from sites all over campus.

In agreeing to retire the shield last March, Harvard University President Drew Faust and Senior Fellow William F. Lee wrote on behalf of the Corporation: “Modern institutions must acknowledge their past associations with slavery, not to assign guilt, but to understand the pervasiveness of the legacy of slavery and its continuing impact on the world in which we live.” They emphasized that, while they accepted the request to change the shield, “we do so on the understanding the School will actively explore other steps to recognize rather than to suppress the realities of its history, mindful of our shared obligation to honor the past not by seeking to erase it, but rather by bringing it to light and learning from it.”

As one of the first such steps, Dean Minow asked the HLS Library to create and display an exhibit, and to create an online version at the same time.

“The Library has the privilege of preserving the history of the Law School,” said Jocelyn Kennedy, executive director of the Harvard Law School Library. “Our Historical and Special Collections staff were thrilled to work with colleagues on the faculty to identify relevant historical documents, and curate visual representations to illustrate the story of the Royall family, the Law School, and the Shield. We are quite proud of the results of our combined effort to create a physical and virtual exhibit which explores the past, while creating space to imagine the future.”

Tours of the exhibit were included in this year's orientation program for incoming students, and-as Minow has done at every orientation during her deanship-she spoke to new students about the Royall legacy and she cited slavery as an example of something profoundly unjust that was nevertheless lawful for a long time. She urged students to question what may be lawful today, to think critically about the kinds of modern injustices that may nonetheless be “legal,” and to use their skills as lawyers to eradicate injustice wherever they see it.

Officials Keep Whittling Away At Second Amendment Rights

Despite the Supreme Court's ruling that Americans have personal rights under the Second Amendment, rights that are fundamental, government officials keep finding ways to prevent peaceful citizens from acquiring firearms. As is often the case, the Ninth Circuit is complicit in this undermining of the Constitution.

Voting rights, big money and Citizens United: Scholars explore issues in election law

In the fall of 2015 Harvard Law School kicked off a yearlong series of talks focusing on the discipline of Election Law, an area of law said to be concerned with 'the law of politics and the politics of law.' The series, sponsored by the Office of the Dean in conjunction with HLS Professor Charles Fried's seminar on the topic, brought law professors and other academics and lawyers to the law school to present their insights into past, present and future challenges and changes within the discipline. 

With the nation poised to choose its next commander-in-chief in a few short weeks, Harvard Law Today is offering a look back at what each of the slate of scholars from campus and beyond had to say about democracy, and about the challenges, conflicts and conundrums the process poses in the 21st century.

Charles Fried: Voting - A Festival of Democracy

If government is by the people, what justifies any regulation by the government of elections? Professor Charles Fried kicked off the Election Law series by focusing on the connection between democracy, self government and elections.

Spencer Overton: An Emerging Multiracial Electorate

George Washington Law Professor Spencer Overton '93, president of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, spoke about the challenges that lie ahead as the country moves toward an increasingly multiracial society and electorate

Stephen Ansolabehere: 'Bright Lines' and 'Narrow Tailoring'

Stephen Ansolabehere, Harvard government professor, examined protection of minority rights in a time of change. Ansolabehere described the current regime governing protection of minority rights as one that has moved away from the “bright-line rules” of the 1965 Voting Rights Act to one he calls “narrow tailoring.”

Laurence Tribe: The Impact of Citizens United

The landmark Citizens United v. FEC decision, which concluded that the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations and other organizations, has been roundly criticized by reformers who are calling for it to be overturned. But HLS professor Laurence Tribe '66 believes efforts to do that are misguided.

Einer Elhauge: Anti-Competitive Gerrymandering

While a plurality of the Court don't disagree that partisan gerrymandering is incompatible with democratic principles and an excessive injection of politics is unlawful, they are divided about what to do. Einer Elhauge '86 proposes an administrable standard for consideration from antitrust law, which prohibits firms with monopoly power from engaging in exclusionary conduct.

Lawrence Lessig: A Call for 'Bottom-Up' Funding

HLS Professor Lawrence Lessig said that the reliance of legislators on big donors has created an intractable system without the will to reform itself. He argues that a citizens' movement can be mounted to change this system by pushing for a statute he's calling the Citizen Equality Act.

Trevor Potter: Legal Rubble - Law and Politics

Trevor Potter, former commissioner of the Federal Election Commission, said the Citizens United decision was a failure of understanding and imagination, which resulted in the collision of abstract legal theory with reality. He argued a Court more familiar with political practices, administrative process and the difficulties of legislating might have avoided this collision.

Lucian Bebchuk: Shedding Light on Corporate Political Spending

HLS Professor Lucian Bebchuk LL.M. '80 S.J.D. '84, who co-chaired a committee that submitted a rulemaking petition to the SEC, made the case for requiring public companies to disclose political spending. Evidence indicates that substantial spending occurs under investors' radar screens and shareholders have significant interest in that information.

John Coates: Deconstitutionalizing Corporate and Commercial Speech

Companies are now the beneficiaries of cases involving the First Amendment just as often as individuals, said HLS Professor John Coates, and the frequency has been rising since the mid-'70s. He argues that corporate exploitation of the First Amendment is primarily a form of economically wasteful rent seeking.

Government Nannies Take Over Playgrounds and Daycares

The nanny state, consisting of rules that limit personal freedom and promote the government's views on the best way to live, is easy to mock. New York City's infamous attempt to ban 16.1-ounce sodas is a perfect example. Many nanny state policies simply create inconveniences and raise costs slightly, such [...]

Why the internet matters: a talk by Jonathan Zittrain

In a salutation to the newly-named Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, and a salute to the new and old members of the community, co-founder and Harvard Law School professor Jonathan Zittrain asked his audience during a talk last week, “Why does the internet matter?” The answer, it seems, quite fittingly parallels the history, mission and ethos of the Berkman Klein Center at Harvard University.

According to Zittrain, it's a story of weirdos that began with the invention of the internet in the mid-1900s. From its launch, the internet was aimed differently from proprietary networks, which sought to control and wall off their gardens. Instead, the internet was a cobbled-together experiment by a group of academic researchers who rejected regime structures and preserved an experimental spirit that invited sharing and open access.

Credit: Jon Chase

Miraculously, this open environment thrived and generated a crowd of like-minded and playful network nerds, whose energy manifested itself in all layers of the internet. This “generative” spirit, a term used by Zittrain to mean the promotion of innovation and disruption, is in the technological backbone of the internet, which has no central server but instead allows anyone to connect via the nearest node. It's visible in the early groups that helped to maintain and improve the internet. As David Clark once said of the standard-setting Internet Engineering Task Force: “We reject kings, presidents, and voting. We believe in rough consensus and running code.”

According to Zittrain, it's also the same ethos that fostered the invention of Napster, the growth of the personal computer, and the one-man band that founded OpenSSL, a software library that grew to be used by two-thirds of web servers. Such a generative environment is unique, Zittrain has said, because it is built on the collective illusion that the system is never fully complete and there is no central authority. Instead, it's the public that can be trusted to protect, and invent good uses for the new technology.

“So it's weird, the status quo,” said Zittrain. “And that weirdness is in the bones of technology, it's in the engineers who helped make it, and it's in many of the uses of the technology as well.”

Of course, that's not to say that the technology is perfect, Zittrain said. Revelations of bugs, vulnerabilities and human error can challenge the arguments for an open internet, especially as technologies become more centralized.

Nonetheless, openness, weirdness and big-thinking remain vital for innovation and help to shape the past, present and future of research institutions like the Berkman Klein Center.

Pivoting to the Center's work, Zittrain mentioned a few projects along the Center's timeline that have held true to these values. For example, in 2002 after a long-winded battle in the courts that culminated in a Supreme Court decision extending the life of some copyrighted works by 20 years, an early member of the Berkman Klein Center community, Lawrence Lessig, began what is now Creative Commons. The project set about creating the tools that could enable creators to freely share their copyrighted works with the public. Starting with just 50 million Creative Commons-licensed works in 2006, the number burgeoned to 882 million licensed works by 2014.

Global Voices, now a standalone organization, was also once a project begun at the Berkman Center. While the site currently curates, verifies and translates trending news stories in 167 countries around the world into more than 40 languages, it began as a tool for anyone in the world with basic technology to describe their environment. From creating platforms for open dialogue to monitoring the obstacles to an open web, the Berkman Center went on to create the Internet Monitor to track the censorship practices of various countries around the world and the efforts of repressive regimes, corporate firms, and intelligence agencies to filter content on the internet.

These projects, said Zittrain, are only brief illustrations of the kaleidoscopic diversity of work that invigorate the very audience members sitting in the room, and those of the larger Berkman Klein Center community. The role of academia will become increasingly important as the mercurial virtual space becomes our new permanence and proprietary players increasingly dominate. Today, Facebook can predict dating couples before the individuals themselves, and can affect our mood by curating the content on our newsfeeds. The openness of the internet is being replaced by a network of tethered appliances that create an Internet of Things generating piles of data; this system invites not only profit-making institutions to seats of power, but locks the crucial raw data behind closed doors that are inaccessible to data scientists and researchers.

What would happen, asked Zittrain, if the spaces where we talk, work and play are dominated on all layers by proprietary players? Whose responsibility is it to watch the new decisionmakers? As he once wrote in “The Future of the Internet,” the generative pattern is a recurring one. How, then, can we ensure that in the next iteration, the values we hold dear will remain vital to those organizations, corporations, and governments that have the privilege of understanding the data, and shaping our technology?

“A realm in which ideas that seem off-the-wall and contentious might be worth entertaining before dismissal. These are the kinds of things that are worthy of discussion. That's what you have at the Berkman Klein Center.”

For those hoping to understand how the Center is answering Zittrain's question, the Berkman Klein Center will be hosting an Open House on September 23, 2016 at 5:00 pm in Milstein West, Wasserstein Hall.

In July 2016 the Berkman Center for Internet & Society became the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society in recognition of a generous gift from Michael R. Klein LL.M. '67.

Climate change: Has the EPA gone overboard?

Did the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 'go overboard' with its new regulatory mandates in the Clean Power Plan? On Sept. 7, Professor Jody Freeman LL.M. '91 S.J.D. '95 , founding director of the Harvard Law School Environmental Law and Policy Program, participated in an Intelligence Squared debate in front of a live audience in New York City on the EPA's bold initiative to reduce carbon pollution at power plants to address climate change.

Freeman, a former White House climate adviser for President Obama, argued against the motion with Carl Pope, the former executive director and chairman of the Sierra Club. Arguing for the motion were Charles D. McConnell, executive director of Rice University's Energy and Environment Initiative and former assistant secretary of energy at the U.S. Department of Energy in the Obama administration, and Michael Nasi, and environmental and energy lawyer.

A pre-debate poll survey of the live audience showed that 59 percent didn't agree that the EPA went overboard, 18 percent agreed, with 23 percent undecided. After the debate, 72 percent disagreed, while 23 percent agreed with the motion and 5 percent remained undecided. Watch the debate.

---

“Arguing for the Clean Power Plan, former White House climate adviser Jody Freeman won the three-round match.” Read Grenwire's coverage of the debate.

---

Intelligence Squared is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that brings together the world's leading authorities on the most important issues of the day for intelligent discussion grounded in facts and informed by reasoned analysis.

Health Care Needs Effective Reforms, Not The CREATES Act

Shutterstock   Congress is back in session. With the election looming, this means a frenetic dash to pass bills on a number of big ticket items, including the budget and Zika funding. While the legislative fight over these issues will likely dominate the headlines, we cannot forget about other below-the-radar, but nevertheless [...]

Health Care Needs Effective Reforms, Not the CREATES Act

Congress is back in session. With the election looming, this means a frenetic dash to pass bills on a number of big ticket items, including the budget and Zika funding. While the legislative fight over these issues will likely dominate the headlines, we cannot forget about other below-the-radar, but nevertheless [...]

Settlements and Slush Funds

The bill is important . . . It forbids government lawyers to enter into settlements providing for payments to anyone except the government itself unless the payments represent restitution for harm caused directly by the payer.

It's Easier To Become A Bounty Hunter Than A Barber In Idaho

In Idaho, any resident can hunt for bounties-no license required. But cut hair with a pair of scissors? That takes 900 hours of training.

Dishonest Government Report Assumes Marijuana Legalization Has No Benefits

  Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (Photo by Jason Connolly/AFP/Getty Images) During a debate while running for re-election in 2014, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper was asked whether voters in his state had been “reckless” when they approved marijuana legalization two years earlier. “To a certain extent you could say it was reckless,” he [...]

Welcome to HLS

Last week, Harvard Law School welcomed a new class of J.D., LL.M. and S.J.D. students to campus. Orientation for new students included ice cream socials, campus tours, lawn games, a visit from Judge Merrick Garland and section photos, capped off with a welcome by Dean Martha Minow in Sanders Theatre.

A citizen's constitution

Credit: B. Allen/VOA Khizr Khan, the father of an Army captain killed in Iraq, speaking with Voice of America's Urdu service in Washington, D.C., on August 1

On the stage of the Democratic National Convention, one Gold Star father invoked the words of the Founding Fathers, and just like that, a Pakistani-born Muslim-American lawyer led Amazon to sell more pocket Constitutions than ever before. His life has not been the same since.

“Pre-DNC, was a very peaceful, private, quiet life, and I still enjoy that every time I get back to Charlottesville, but this mission is so important,” said Khizr Khan, LL.M. '86, whose son Capt. Humayun Khan was killed in Iraq.

In a speech lasting six minutes and one second, Khan stepped out from behind the curtain of private pain and into public spotlight attracting worldwide attention.

“Donald Trump, you are asking Americans to trust you with our future,” he said from the podium in Philadelphia. “Let me ask you: Have you even read the U.S. Constitution? I will gladly lend you my copy. In this document, look for the words 'liberty' and 'equal protection of law.'”

These remarks propelled Khan headfirst into the 24-hour news cycle. In the weeks following the DNC, Khan appeared on nearly 40 news programs, received invitations to 18-plus speaking engagements for August and September alone, and fielded a growing list of book proposals, including one from Simon & Schuster. A Wikipedia page for him and his wife sprung up. His voicemail inbox beeped with both hateful and heartwarming messages, while his e-mail inbox was flooded with 4,000 messages and counting. Khan says he's about 1,100 emails behind in thanking people, and that he'll respond to every note personally.

“If one scared heart is strengthened by all of this,” said Khan, “it is worth it.”

He noted that his late son would be proud. “To him, one person mattered more than his own safety, more than his own value, anything. The same thing is with me. I get encouragement from his grace.”

Growing Up

Khan, 66, the eldest of 10 children, was born and raised in Punjab, an agrarian area of Pakistan, where his parents farmed poultry.

“We're modest people, hardworking, always believed in education,” Khan reflected. “I wanted to study law from childhood. The reason was that leaders of the subcontinent at that time, all of them, had unanimously studied law, so that had left an imprint on my mind.”

Khan completed his B.A. from Punjab University in Lahore, and later, he attended Punjab University Law College, graduating with an LL.B. in 1973. There he met his future wife, Ghazala, who was pursuing a master's in Persian literature. The two met at a book reading she hosted.

Following a nine-month apprenticeship with a senior attorney, Khan passed the bar and was licensed to practice in Pakistan. The job search led him to Dubai, where he found employment in the legal department of an oil company. There, the couple had their first two sons, Shaharyar and Humayun. The Khans' son Omer would be born later in the United States, after the Khan family immigrated in 1980.

“The dream was that coming to the U.S. would be something to complete my education,” said Khan. “Harvard Law School was kind enough to accept my application and admit me to their LL.M. program,” he said, “and here we are.”

Harvard Lessons

At HLS, Khan was influenced by Abram Chayes '49, his international law professor, and David N. Smith '61, then a lecturer on law and HLS vice dean. Khan recalled robust conversations on global affairs with Chayes, and spent hours with Smith, discussing the professor's groundbreaking book on negotiating contracts in Africa. The two forged a friendship.

Smith, now a practice professor of law at Singapore Management University, says that he remembers Khan with much fondness.

“Khizr stood out and I think it was because of a remarkable combination of qualities: maturity, wisdom, modesty, and generosity of spirit,” he said. “I always came away from discussions with Khizr feeling that I had been in the presence of someone special.  In life we sometimes meet people who teach others a lot just by being, and Khizr is one of those people.”

Khan was recently reminded of the meaning of his Harvard experience, beyond brick buildings and lofty libraries, during the Last Lecture Series, a collection of talks by HLS faculty, offering guidance to the graduating class. In one of the addresses, the professor asked, “What have you learned at Harvard Law School?”

“The only thing that came to my mind, the thing that remains true even today, was that Harvard Law School and Harvard University and its environment gave me the confidence in myself and showed me how little I know and that I should continue to make an effort to know more,” Khan observed. “That is what I carry with me every day.”

Life in the Law

Khan advanced into his legal career, becoming an expert in electronic discovery in commercial civil litigation. Looking back on his practice, two cases stick out in his mind.

The first, Silverstein v. St. Paul, was a behemoth. The central question was: For insurance purposes, did the 9/11 attacks in New York City constitute one occurrence or two? Billions hung in the balance. If it were one, there'd be a payout of $3.5 ; if two, it would be $7 billion. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit concluded that the collapsing of both World Trade Center towers was only one occurrence. Khan says this was the biggest case he ever played a part in.

The second case involved a dispute over the boundaries of Alaska's territorial waters. At the time, now Chief Justice John Roberts, Khan's then colleague at Hogan Lovells, was awaiting his confirmation by the Senate, and he was still consulting on the case. One evening, Khan stepped into Roberts' office, not to discuss issues, but simply to show him the marvels of the maps, which he had loaded onto a CD.

“So I took him that CD, and he said to me, 'Khizr, this is my first technology lesson, so tell me how to open these documents,'” Khan said. “Justice Roberts was being modest and humble by saying that this was his first lesson in legal technology. I very fondly remember that conversation in his office.”

After Roberts left the firm for his seat on the Court, Khan often took his friends to a special spot in the Hogan office building, featuring a plaque mounted prominently on the wall behind a round table. It reads: “Here sat our friend, John Roberts.”

The Moment at the Microphone

Ghazala was in the doorway of the hotel room, ready to head out to the DNC, when a light bulb flashed on in Khan's mind. He was fumbling through his suit jacket, checking that he'd removed any metal from his pockets, because he was told the DNC had tight security. Then he felt it-old faithful-his worn, pocket Constitution.

Khan often kept a copy tucked away into his breast coat pocket. Whenever he'd attend a formal event, he brought his conversation piece along. He also maintained a steady supply of copies at home, where he distributed the 52 pages of American law to whomever he could.

“Whenever cadets would come to pay tribute to Humayun at our house, and other guests as well, I thought it would be a good gesture to give them a copy of the Constitution because in the next day or so, they will be taking an oath on that document to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” Khan said.

So when Khan had dashed out of his hotel room and hailed a cab en route to the convention, the Constitution was all he could think about.

“Why don't I say, 'I will lend you my copy,' and just pull it out?” Khan asked his wife, demonstrating by plucking it from his pocket.

“Look, the way you are pulling it out they can only see the back of it, which is nothing but just a blue page. That wouldn't mean anything,” Ghazala warned. “So make sure when you pull it out, it comes out the right way!”

The rest of the ride, Khan practiced pulling out the prop in a way that they hoped make a powerful point, but not distract from his message: “that the citizens of the United States cannot be discriminated against based on their religious beliefs.”

Following Trump's announcement of a proposed ban on Muslims from entering the United States, a reporter interviewed Khan, who described the 10 brave steps his son took before his death. The Clinton campaign caught wind of this article, and on the campaign trail in Minnesota, the Democratic presidential nominee called Humayun Khan “the best of America.” Shortly thereafter, Democratic Party representatives invited Khan to share his story on the DNC stage.

Credit: Voice of America

The Khans were initially asked to pay tribute to their son, and appear on stage briefly to accept Humayun's honor, as is customary for parents of a fallen soldier. Later, they were asked to share a few words, and Khan wrote a lengthy six-page piece that his wife whittled down to one page, a mere 287 words.

While Khan has read most of Professor Laurence Tribe's constitutional law books cover to cover, he never could have expected he'd emerge as the embodiment of American rule of law. Even still, he's always had the words of the Founding Fathers close to his heart, literally, resting on his chest. And reading Section 1 of the 14 Amendment still moves him to tears.

“I didn't know that I'd get so emotional reading the 'equal protection of law' words in front of people,” Khan recalled. “I had to compose myself. It has such an impact. I know what these words mean, and that is why I get emotional.”

A Civic Mission

One week later in Washington, D.C., Khan assumed the podium again in a packed hotel ballroom at a gathering for the Muslim Pakistani-American Physicians of North America. More than 3,000 doctors and their families arrived, but due to capacity, only 500 could be in the room at a time. People, including young children, spilled into the hallway.

Not a single person left until they took a picture with Khan. The selfies, hugs, and heart-to-heart conversations extended past 2 a.m., with many young people staying up far past their bedtimes, as if to catch a glimpse of history.

“What that tells me is that there is need for encouragement,” Khan said. “My message to them was that, 'Look, in history we stand at a juncture where each and every one of us has to stand up and be the ambassador of good citizenship. That means do your best within your capacity, within your school, within your family, within your community, whatever good you can, a gesture of goodness.” He concluded by encouraging everyone to register to vote and participate in the political process.

With Islam as his North Star, Khan has been inspired to unite people of all faiths, races, and genders, and to amplify the voices of Muslims who have been “misdefined.” Some conservative critics have alleged that Khan has promoted Sharia, or Islamic law, above American law, which Khan denies.

“They need to read the Constitution. It has safeguards,” he said. “Sharia laws that people say are going to be imported to the United States and are a threat to society and all of that, no way.”

“I'm an ordinary Muslim, and I participate in all of my civic duties. I am a protector of the United States… My son gave his life, sacrificed his life in protection of the United States and its soldiers,” Khan continued. “Islam has taught me to be caring, to be kind. My religion is to live peacefully with all other religions and all other peoples.”

In Arlington National Cemetery rests Capt. Humayun Khan's gravestone, carved with the crescent and star of Islam. Encircling the stone is a wreath, with bright bursts of blossoms in red, white, and blue, and to the left, a star-spangled flag.

How Moon Express Launched Commercial Regulations In Space

BY MARK R. WHITTINGTON -- Unanswered questions, like how to arbitrate disputes between private companies in space, cry out for a new space treaty governing commercial activities beyond the earth.

California High Court Continues Its 'Grasping' Personal Jurisdiction Over Nonresident Defendants

California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye talks with Assemblymen Rob Bonta, left, and James Gallagher after she gave her annual state of the Judiciary address before a joint session of the Legislature at the Capitol in Sacramento, Calif., Monday, March 23, 2015. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli) In its seminal 2014 decision [...]

In lives of others, a compass for his own

Credit: Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard Staff Photographer Pedro Spivakovsky-Gonzalez '17, the President of the Harvard Legal Aid Bureau, is spending the summer in East Boston helping residents fight evictions. He is pictured outside the Harvard Legal Aid Bureau office on Everett Street.

It took Pedro Spivakovsky-Gonzalez several years and nearly 10,000 miles, on a journey that included several cities around the world, to find his calling in his hometown.

The son of political refugees from the former Soviet Union and Spain, Spivakovsky-Gonzalez '17, was born in Boston but grew up in Spain and Canada. He studied economics at the University of California at Berkeley, completed a master's in development studies at the University of Cambridge in England, and went to work as a research economist in Washington, D.C.

It was after his stints in Cambridge and Washington that he experienced “the dissonance” of studying poverty and inequality in wealthy institutions, and the limits to making a direct impact on people's lives as a researcher.

As a student attorney with the Harvard Legal Aid Bureau, Spivakovsky-Gonzalez has represented East Boston residents facing eviction in Boston Housing Court, and helped veterans apply for benefits at the Legal Services Center in Jamaica Plain. Both experiences left deep marks on him.

Yearning for a career that resolved that discord, he applied to Harvard Law School. When he was accepted, it felt like a homecoming of sorts. The first house he lived in was three blocks from the Law School.

But the real epiphany came while working at the Harvard Legal Aid Bureau, one of the School's clinical programs and the oldest student-run organization in the United States. The bureau provides free civil legal services to people who cannot afford an attorney. It was there that he found his passion.

“We help people who are often forgotten and live different lives from what we often see either in Washington, D.C., or the Law School,” said Spivakovsky-Gonzalez on a recent morning near Harvard Yard.

Entering his second semester as the bureau's president, he plans to become a public-interest lawyer. As a student attorney with the bureau, he has represented East Boston residents facing eviction in Boston Housing Court, and helped veterans apply for benefits at the Legal Services Center in Jamaica Plain. Both experiences left deep marks on him.

“Before, I felt a little bit removed from a lot of the populations that are most affected by the decisions and policies that are made in Washington,” he said. “Here, I can help people more directly.”

Case in point: In August 2015, Spivakovsky-Gonzalez represented tenants of a four-unit apartment building on Bennington Street in East Boston, who were being forced to either pay twice their past rent or lose their homes. With his legal advice and representation and that of three other students, the cases were settled in favor of the tenants, who stayed put.

“Many people are unaware of the law,” he said. “They think they don't have legal rights but in fact under the law they have rights and leverage to improve their situation.”

Spivakovsky-Gonzalez kept his poise throughout the trial, said instructor Eloise Lawrence, who supervised the students.

“He was the picture of grace under pressure,” said Lawrence. “For example, he kept  his composure even when he was conducting a direct examination and the interpreter was incorrectly translating the witness's testimony-which Pedro knew because he is fluent in Spanish-and the judge was berating him for raising his concerns. When the verdict came down in our client's favor, he would not let any of us smile at counsel table for fear of appearing  that we were gloating.  He's the opposite of today's professional athlete who does a victory dance at a mere good play.”

As the bureau's leader, Spivakovsky-Gonzalez has to uphold its dual mission of providing civic legal aid to low-income residents in the Greater Boston area while giving students a chance to practice housing, family, benefits, and wage and hour law. Students practice under Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Rule 3:03, which allows them to offer legal assistance under the supervision of clinical instructors who are working attorneys.

Students who work on housing issues attend weekly meetings organized by City Life/Vida Urbana, a community group that helps Boston area residents fight eviction, foreclosure, and displacement. That is where they meet potential clients.

The bureau's assistance has proved crucial, said Andres Del Castillo, an organizer with City Life/Vida Urbana, who led a recent meeting in the basement of a church near the Maverick T station. About 30 people were on hand to ask for assistance with problems such as eviction, sudden rent increases, and cockroach infestation.

“We have very limited resources,” said Del Castillo. “It's a miracle what happens here. The law students do their best to help people in the community.”

This summer, as well as attending community meetings in East Boston, Spivakovsky-Gonzalez worked with veterans in Jamaica Plain. Both experiences helped him recognize that public-interest law is his calling, and that giving back to the community is a way to honor his own history. His parents' families built lives in the United States after escaping dictatorships in their home countries.

“It's hard to know where one will end up,” he said of his return to Boston. “But it's nice to be back to the place where I'm originally from to work in public-interest law and give help to people who need it.”

---

This article was originally published in the Harvard Gazette on September 1, 2016.

From A Former Inmate: How Private Prisons Can Protect Inmates

BY CHANDRA BOZELKO -- If private facilities were to be well-run, then market forces might cause a needed shift in how public prisons treat their inmates.