Harvard Law School

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick Addresses the ACS Chapter at Harvard Law School

webmaster — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 12:12:54 -0400

Harvard Law School

Criminal Procedure Stories: Challenges in Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Past Present and Future

admin — Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:30:07 -0400

On April 21-22, ACS’ Constitution in the 21st Century project co-sponsored (in partnership with the Arnold D. Roseman Fund) a Criminal Justice conference at Harvard Law School to launch a new Foundation Press book edited by Professor Carol S. Steiker, entitled Criminal Procedure Stories: Challenges in Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Past Present and Future. Prof. Steiker is a Co-Chair of the American Constitution Society's Criminal Justice Issue Group.

Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan opened the conference, and Professor Steiker gave welcoming remarks. The Conference featured authors of the chapters in Prof. Steiker's book that tell the detailed behind-the-scene stories about the people involved in high profile cases on criminal procedure. Expert commentators took the discussion of each topic to the next level, often identifying the present-day implications of the cases discussed.

Harvard Law School

First Amendment Moot Court-Randall v. Sorrell

harvard — Mon, 27 Feb 2006 06:30:03 -0500

On February 28, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Randall v. Sorrell, a First Amendment challenge to Vermont's aggressive campaign finance law. Last Thursday, HLS students were treated to a preview of the case, in a moot court sponsored by the Supreme Court Advocacy Project, a joint collaboration of Dean Kagan, The Federalist Society, and the American Constitution Society.

James Bopp, General Counsel for the James Madison Center for Free Speech, who will be representing petitioners in front of the Court, presented an oral argument challenging the Vermont statute. Bopp appeared before a distinguished panel of judges: Professor Rick Pildes of NYU who is visiting at HLS this semester; Benjamin Ginsburg, National Counsel for the Bush Campaign in 2000 and 2004, and partner at Patton Boggs; Professor Frederick Schauer, a First Amendment expert at the Kennedy School; and Professor Brad Smith, former Commissioner and Chairman of the Federal Election Commission.

The case presents fundamental questions about how courts should balance First Amendment rights against the need to prevent corruption in the political process. The Vermont law includes strict limits on campaign contributions and expenditures. The expenditure limits are particularly controversial given the Court's 1976 decision in Buckley v. Valeo, which drew a distinction between contributions and expenditures, holding the latter to a stricter standard of review.

Harvard Law School

Fried, Goldstein and Sunstein on the Alito Nomination and the Future of the Court and Judical Nominations

admin — Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:54:12 -0500

Last week, the Harvard Law School chapters of ACS and the newly formed Law Students Against Alito (LSAA) hosted a panel discussion on the “Alito Nomination and the Roberts Court.” The panel, moderated by Prof. Michelman, featured Profs. Cass Sunstein, Charles Fried and Tom Goldstein reflecting on the Supreme Court confirmation process, judicial nominations generally and specifically their thoughts and views on Judge Samuel Alito’s nomination. Michelman opened the discussion by throwing out a variety topics open for discussion ranging from impressions about the nominee, to the objective criteria that a Senator might use in justifying her vote, to the type of confirmation process that might or should expect (note that this panel took place prior to the start of Alito’s confirmation hearings). The panelists ran with each of these topics and provided some very insightful thoughts into the nominee, the confirmation process, and the future of American Jurisprudence.

Harvard Law School