Media Mentions

An op-ed by Laurence Tribe. As fears mount over President Trump’s mental stability, more lawmakers and public-spirited citizens are turning in desperation to the 25th Amendment as a quick exit. But they should resist the temptation to pull that trigger. Because of the amendment’s complexity and many ambiguities, activating it to sideline Trump could unleash a dangerously destabilizing power struggle over the presidency rather than decisively ousting Trump. Early in Trump’s term, scholars (including me) explained that the amendment was designed for presidents who unexpectedly become mentally or physically incapacitated while in office, not those temperamentally unfit from the very outset. We believed that Trump fell only in the latter category. Yet now we must ask: Should that verdict be changed by the frightening episodes recounted in tell-all books, an anonymous op-ed, and a flood of disturbing press clippings?

An op-ed by Susan Crawford. Last month, Reuters reported that T-Mobile was asking the small operators that resell T-Mobile's excess network capacity to write letters and opinion pieces in support of the company's proposed $36 billion merger with Sprint. T-Mobile's request wasn't unusual. Trumping up support for deals that aren't actually in the public interest is common practice in the swamp we know as U.S. telecom policy. When Comcast was working on its merger with NBCU at the beginning of this decade, supportive comments poured into the FCC from companies across the country who had an interest in keeping Comcast happy. By helpfully suggesting talking points to resellers—or MVNOs, for Mobile Virtual Network Operators—including Mint Mobile, Republic Wireless, and Ting, all of which lease access from the Big Four network operators (Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile) in order to sell phone and data services to customers, T-Mobile is following the usual "air of inevitability" merger playbook.

An op-ed by Daniel Levine-Spound `19. On July 30th, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul announced his support for Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. Although he had initially voiced concerns regarding Kavanaugh’s “record on warrantless bulk collection of data and how that might apply to very important privacy cases,” Paul ultimately backed President Trump’s choice. Whatever one makes of Rand Paul’s waffling on privacy issues, his support for Kavanaugh speaks to an arguably deeper betrayal of his principles: opposition to the United States’ ever-expanding and seemingly interminable “War on Terror.” For few judges have shown themselves less willing to impose limits on American war-making, or more flexible in deferring to the Executive Branch on issues related to armed conflict, than Kavanaugh.

Half a century after Americans began fighting hunger with monthly food stamps, the nation’s physicians and policymakers are focusing more than ever on what’s on each person’s plate. In the 21st century, food is seen as medicine — and a tool to cut health care costs...“Food is medicine is an idea whose day has arrived,” said Robert Greenwald, faculty director of the Harvard Law School’s Center for Health Law and Policy Innovation, one of the experts who testified in January at the launch of the congressional Food is Medicine Working Group, part of the House Hunger Caucus.

National security adviser John Bolton has put the International Criminal Court (ICC) in his crosshairs. In a speech to the conservative Federalist Society on Monday, Bolton pledged the United States would never cooperate with what he called an “illegitimate” court...“There’s almost no doubt that the judges will authorize an investigation of the Taliban, the Afghan government and the U.S. for torture,” said Alex Whiting, a Harvard Law School professor and former ICC prosecutor. “The threshold for getting permission to investigate is quite low.”

An op-ed by Alex Whiting. It is tempting to read or listen to John Bolton’s speech on the International Criminal Court (ICC) and think, we’ve seen this movie before and know its ending. And in many ways, that’s true. In the early years of the George W. Bush administration, Bolton “was honored” (his words) to lead a similar effort to undermine and even destroy the court. That honor did not last. The Bush administration soon retreated from this hostile stance, recognizing that many of the United States’ most important allies were members of the court (of the 29 members of NATO, only the U.S. and Turkey are not) and that the court could serve U.S. interests and policy goals. A major pivot occurred in 2005 when the U.S. assented to the U.N. Security Council referral of Sudan to the court to address the atrocities in Darfur. Obama officials then built on the Bush administration’s revised approach and adopted a policy of constructive engagement with the court, while still not taking any active steps to join.

Democrats are running like it’s 2006 again. That strategy may help them win races in November, but it isn’t risk-free. The revival of the minority party’s anti-lobbying, anti-big-donor messaging, known as the “culture of corruption” mantra from a dozen years ago, speaks to disheartened voters. It also allows Democrats to highlight the persistent ethical and legal troubles, including indictments and guilty verdicts, among those in the Trump orbit...Vilifying lobbyists amounts to “cheap talk,” says Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig, author of “Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress — and a Plan to Stop It.”...Lessig, an advocate of using taxpayer dollars to finance elections, says that risk exists. But the measure of overhaul proposals, he says, should not be whether it’s easy to pass but whether it would have any effect. “Democrats have been trying to do reform on the cheap,” he said. “What really disappoints me is when you see these supposed leaders, even progressives, take the easy way out.”

Harvard Law hopefuls, beware — the number of applicants to the Law School spiked by more than 30 percent this past year, and experts say it’s a trend that’s likely to continue. Harvard Law received 7,578 applications for the Class of 2021, compared to 5,755 for the Class of 2020, representing a 32 percent bump. That increase is significantly higher than the rise in law school applications nationwide, which clocked in at 8.3 percent...Harvard Law School Assistant Dean for Admissions and Chief Admissions Officer Kristi L. Jobson...said she thinks Harvard’s increase has little to do with the national increase. “We don't attribute the 32 percent increase that we saw to a parallel to the national increase because it was much higher,” Jobson said. “We think that our office has engaged in a systemic strategy in knocking down barriers to legal education.” She cited a few tactics in particular: Harvard recently eliminated seat deposits, included video interviews as part of the application process, accepted the GRE as a standardized test, and created a Junior Deferral Program. Still, Jobson believes that the spike is fundamentally due to excitement for the school itself.

Daniel Tarullo, Harvard Law School visiting professor and former Federal Reserve governor, discusses his experience during the financial crisis 10 years ago and the regulatory efforts since to keep it from happening again.

An op-ed by Cass Sunstein. The decision of David Remnick, editor of the New Yorker, to rescind Steve Bannon’s invitation to speak at the magazine’s festival next month has created a storm of protest. Those who abhor Remnick’s decision point to similar controversies on university campuses, where a pervasive question has been whether to host people whose statements or actions seem abhorrent to many people. Disturbingly, most of the controversies involve people whose views are to the right of center.

A landmark decision by the International Criminal Court begins an obstacle course for prosecutors seeking to put Myanmar military commanders on trial for the purge of ethnic Rohingya, while opening the door to other potential cases involving mass exodus, such as Syria...“It’s significant for the Rohingya case because it’s at least a narrow path for some accountability for the crimes committed,” said Alex Whiting, a Harvard Law School professor who previously oversaw investigations for the court.

Deanne Loonin, an advocate for low-income student loan borrowers and an attorney with the Harvard Law School Project on Predatory Student Lending, has a suggestion for the U.S. Congress in response to the federal student loan debt crisis. Policy experts discuss federal student loan defaults. “Discharge it” – all federal loans, not just those in default – in a comprehensive cancellation process “and start all over again” with a system that works better for students and the government, she said during an event Thursday at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), where two research reports were unveiled that examined the national default crisis.

Reopening mercury pollution limits for power plants—over the objections of utilities that have already spent billions to comply—lays groundwork for the EPA to limit its own ability to require more stringent emissions standards in the future....“I think there is a war that current management at EPA is waging against benefits, and we have seen that war being staged at several battlefronts,” Joseph Goffman, executive director of Harvard Law School’s Environmental and Energy Law Program who served as the EPA’s associate assistant administrator for climate and senior counsel in the agency’s air office during the Obama administration.

The National Coalition for Men, a men’s rights organization based in Southern California, has formed the beginnings of an all-volunteer law firm seeking to change legal systems that it claims are discriminatory against men on the state, federal, and even international level. While NCFM’s firm is not the first firm to cater to men’s issues, it may be the first to have grown directly from the men’s rights movement... Asked about the possibility of taking a gender discrimination like that to the United Nations’ judicial arm (aka the International Court of Justice), Harvard Law Professor Gerald Neuman said individuals cannot take cases to the ICJ—only states can. “If that is what they say, they sound very confused,” Neuman said.

In a surprise ruling, judges at the International Criminal Court said Thursday that they could exercise jurisdiction to investigate the deportation of hundreds of thousands of Rohingya Muslims from their homes in Myanmar as a crime against humanity....“This ruling is enormously significant since, until now, this is the only route towards a measure of accountability,” said Alex Whiting, professor of international law at Harvard University. “There will be great challenges, but a challenge in itself is not a reason not to act.”

The Harvard Black Law Students Association announced Thursday afternoon that it is neutral regarding the nomination of Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court after a letter from some group members praising the judge drew notice during his confirmation hearing Wednesday. The letter, addressed to Senators Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chair and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, respectively, praised Kavanaugh for his work with Harvard BLSA. Eight current and former BLSA members — seven of whom graduated from the Law School last year — signed the letter, which referred to an event where Kavanaugh “encouraged” and “mentored” BLSA members. The statement from Harvard BLSA Thursday clarified that the group has neither endorsed nor condemned his nomination.

Harvard Law School Dean John F. Manning ’82 has approved several changes to the school’s Low Income Protection Plan, a program that helps HLS graduates who work in low-paying legal careers pay back their student loans. The enhancements — approved last month — include expansions to certain leaves or periods of unemployment, increases in dependent care allowance and childcare expenses, and a rise in the LIPP Participant Contribution Scale, which determines how much LIPP participants pay towards their student loans according to their incomes. “The LIPP enhancements were the result of many people working together to make reasonable and sustainable changes,” Kenneth Lafler, the Law School's assistant dean for student financial services, wrote in an email. “The proposals ultimately suggested by the Coalition to Improve LIPP were themselves the result of a process of refinement through numerous meetings with the staff of Student Financial Services.”...Rachel Sandalow-Ash ’15, [HLS `20] a second-year Law student and president of the coalition, said the changes form “an important first step” to improving the LIPP program. “It’s clear that the Financial Aid Committee and Dean Manning did really listen to and consider the proposals that the Coalition to Improve LIPP, along with the 38 student groups that supported these proposals, brought to their attention and that they implemented things that are really going to help people,” Sandalow-Ash said.

An op-ed by Noah Feldman. On the surface, it sounds a bit like a coup d’état. An anonymous senior official in Donald Trump’s administration has written an op-ed article for the New York Times saying the official is part of the “resistance” to the president from within. But don’t get taken in by the hype. What the writer describes is a lot like what happens in many, probably most administrations: Officials who share some but not all the president’s goals use bureaucratic tools to avoid or delay implementing presidential initiatives they don’t like. This isn’t a coup. It isn’t unconstitutional. It isn’t even resistance, not really.

An op-ed by Noah Feldman. There is no rule or policy requiring special counsel Robert Mueller to complete his investigation 60 days before the midterm election, despite what the president’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani says. For starters, Donald Trump isn’t on the ballot. Even if he were, there’s no reason that an investigation of him or his 2016 campaign would have to be completed in advance of an election. What is true, however, is that there is a strong unwritten norm for the Department of Justice to avoid taking public prosecutorial action around the time of an election — a period thought to be about 60 or 90 days before it. Mueller and his team are well aware of that norm.

Think the “sell by” or “use by” dates are there to prevent illnesses? Nope. “They’re not based on any safety test,” says Emily Broad Leib, director of the Food Law and Policy Clinic at Harvard Law School. “Most are just manufacturers’ suggestions for quality, and they vary widely.” If you regularly pitch things whose dates say they’ve just expired, you’re probably throwing away foods that are perfectly fine to eat.

Jan Ellen Lewis, a historian whose fascination with Thomas Jefferson and his family led her to organize a groundbreaking conference to reassess his legacy after DNA testing showed that he had fathered children with Sally Hemings, one of his slaves, died on Aug. 28 in Manhattan. She was 69...“The stories that had been told about the women in Jefferson’s life had this almost honeyed, treacly portrayal of his relationship with his daughters and granddaughters,” Annette Gordon-Reed, a professor of law and history at Harvard, said in a telephone interview. “Jan saw there was much more substance to them. Jefferson helped raise them to be his intellectual equals, and he treated them that way.” In her own book “Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings: An American Controversy,” published in 1997, Professor Gordon-Reed wrote that there was strong proof of a relationship between Jefferson and Hemings even before the DNA testing.