Media Mentions

Donald Trump’s nominee for attorney general, who has a long history of hard-line opposition to marijuana, could unravel the burgeoning recreational marijuana industry across the country, including in Massachusetts. Senator Jeff Sessions, a former federal prosecutor and Alabama attorney general, has been taking on marijuana dealers since the 1970s...The tension between federal law and the law in states where voters have legalized marijuana for recreational use created a practical problem for the Obama administration, said Charles Fried, a former solicitor general of the United States and longtime Harvard Law School professor. The Obama administration has chosen to solve it through nonenforcement, he said. But “somebody who is indicted, prosecuted, and convicted has no defense by saying, ‘It’s legal on the ground in Colorado!’ Now you may have a hard time getting a jury to convict, and it may be extremely unpopular, and it may be a bad idea,” he continued, “but as a legal matter, it’s clear cut.”

On the campaign trail, education often took a backseat to issues like trade and immigration for Donald Trump. He offered few concrete details about his plans, which were often vague and even at odds with what any president has the power to do. Yet the tone of his campaign—and his rhetoric on issues ranging from minorities to climate change—has many educators and academics worried about the future of liberal arts and STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) education. “Donald Trump has shown a contempt for science, a willingness to play fast and loose with the very idea of truth and an absence of intellectual curiosity,” says Laurence Tribe, professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School. “This leaves me with the sinking feeling that he will have a terribly destructive impact on the entire project of making excellent education broadly available.”

An op-ed by Noah Feldman. You never know what you’re going to get on a visit to Jerusalem. The latest addition to the Holy City is -- I kid you not -- a virtual-reality experience at the foot of the Western Wall. Tackiness aside, the virtual tour of an imaginatively reconstructed ancient Israelite temple does carry a worrisome message for the future of peace in the Middle East: The once-radical idea of rebuilding the temple on the site is gradually getting mainstreamed.

An op-ed by Noah Feldman. Amid rising Hindu nationalism, the Supreme Court of India has ordered theaters to play the national anthem before films and directed moviegoers to stand at attention -- no excuses. The Indian Constitution is a wonder of the world, but this decision undercuts free-speech and individual rights at a moment when the country can ill-afford it. The court, which has the final word in interpreting the constitution, can still reverse itself. And it should, because the court’s job is to protect rights, not to impose duties and obligations when the legislature has not done so.

Far from ending with President-elect Trump’s announcement that he will separate himself from the management of his business empire, the constitutional debate about the meaning of the Emoluments Clause — and whether Trump will be violating it — is likely just beginning...Professor Laurence Tribe, the author of the leading treatise on constitutional law, and others said the Emoluments Clause was more sweeping, and mandated a ban on such dealings without congressional approval. Painter now largely agrees, telling ProPublica that no fair market value test would apply to the sale of services (specifically including hotel rooms), and such a test would apply only to the sale of goods. The Trump Organization mostly sells services, such as hotel stays, golf memberships, branding deals and management services.

On Friday, the university announced a new procedure for considering the renaming of university buildings, along with an official reconsideration of the controversial decision last spring to keep the Calhoun name. A new — and final — verdict is expected early next year. That policy requires anyone calling for a renaming to submit a formal application, including a dossier of historical research justifying the renaming according to a set of general principles created by an independent 12-person committee named in August by the university’s president, Peter Salovey, in response to continuing furor over the Calhoun decision...“They did a very good job fleshing out the issues and creating guideposts on how to deal with a question that is probably going to come up again and again,” said Annette Gordon-Reed, a historian at Harvard Law School and a member of a committee that voted last year to scrap that school’s seal, which honored a family of 18th-century slave owners.

Laurence Tribe, Constitutional law scholar at Harvard University, talks with Rachel Maddow about the possibility that companies competing against Donald Trump's business while he is president could sue him for having an unfair advantage.

A constitutional law professor warned that the day Donald Trump takes the oath of office he will be breaking the law, calling the president-elect a “walking, talking violation of the Constitution,” due to his business dealings. Appearing on MSNBC’s Am Joy with host Joy Reid, Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe detailed the many ways Trump and his family’s continuing involvement with his business is expressly forbidden by the law, specifically citing the “emoluments clause” in the Constitution. “It’s called the emoluments clause and it basically says no officer of the United States can be on the receiving end of any kind of benefit, economic benefit, payment, gift, profit, whatever, from a foreign government or its corporations or agents,” Tribe explained before pointing to Trump’s kids having one foot in his administration and the other in Trump’s businesses. “In this case Donald Jr. or Ivanka or Eric — then there would be a close relationship that could never be disentangled by the American public.”

An op-ed by Lawrence Lessig. My friend and colleague Noah Feldman is angry that I would be so “cavalier” about “following the procedures … that shape our constitutional norms.” In my view, however, it is in understanding those procedures that we should be most careful not to be cavalier. I—along with many others—believe the electors were intended to be something more than mere cogs. That they instead were to exercise judgment in deciding how to cast their ballots. Noah disagrees with this conventional view. The college’s “purpose,” he tells us, “is simply to effectuate the results of the electoral system we have.” That certainly is the view among the commentators and pundits. But that claim needs more support if it is to dislodge the view of many scholars, including, for example, our colleague Larry Tribe (“electors are free to vote their conscience”) and the extensive analysis of Columbia Professor Richard Briffault.

When the Constitutional Convention convened in Philadelphia to debate and write a new constitution for the United States, there was a concerted effort to ensure that the new nation would break from the corrupt practices of the Old World....“When he takes the oath to uphold the Constitution he would be lying,” said Laurence Tribe, constitutional law professor at Harvard Law School. “He can’t uphold the Constitution, one of whose central provisions he would be a walking, talking violation of.”

Satellite images show villages burned to the ground. Human rights groups relay allegations of rape and the slaughter of children. Thousands of refugees have fled across the border to Bangladesh, while aid workers have been prevented from reaching the afflicted. As the Myanmar Army unleashes a brutal counterinsurgency campaign against the Rohingya in the north, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar’s leader, has remained nearly silent, putting her status as an exemplar of democratic values and a Nobel Peace Prize laureate in a different light...“Descriptions coming out of there are consistent with decades of abuse by the military against the Karen, Chin and Shan ethnic people,” said Tyler Giannini, a professor at Harvard Law School and a co-director of its International Human Rights Clinic. “That’s why it is beholden on the government to investigate what’s going on against the Rohingya and hold those responsible accountable.”

When businesswoman Lisa von Sturmer gave a sales pitch, she wore a bow in her hair on purpose. “They’d think I was fluffy, that they could probably push me around — and it would surprise them when they discovered who I really am. And it worked!” Von Sturmer, CEO of Growing City, was the keynote speaker for Women’s Entrepreneurship Day (WED) 2016 at Harvard late last month. She was joined by female entrepreneurs from around the world who came to share their expertise on business, success, and navigating the corporate world...The women’s messages evoked a palpable feeling of inspiration and motivation in the audience. “I didn’t think talking about business could be such an entertainment,” said Ashley Fournier, faculty assistant at Harvard Law School.

Both former and current Massachusetts professors are featured on a new website created by a conservative-leaning organization that tracks and documents what it calls “radical” ideas espoused by educators...Mark Tushnet, a Harvard Law School professor, has landed on the list. The website, quoting reports published by The Washington Times and the Independent Journal Review, wrote that Tushnet “asked liberals to begin treating Christians and conservatives like Nazis.” Tushnet told the Globe on Thursday that the reports the group relied on are “misleading both in framing the concern, and in the characterization” of a blog post he wrote. He said critics took what he said “essentially out of context.”

An op-ed by Simon Hedlin `19. Was Hillary Clinton the woman with the best odds of winning a presidential election? Some certainly seem to think so. The Guardian ran a story a few days prior to the election titled, “Did it have to be Hillary Clinton for president? Yes. Here’s why.” That view has an uncomfortable implication—namely that no other woman could have beaten Donald Trump. MSNBC’s Jonathan Alter came to the same conclusion when he claimed that Trump won “because he's a testosterone candidate and men weren't ready for a woman president.” But that seems misguided. Clinton’s supporters were right that she was well qualified for the presidency, even without comparison to her exceedingly unfit opponent. But one must not conflate suitability for the job with strength as a candidate.

...Gladwell: I would actually go further: Players should be limited to 15 of 17 games. Football has lent itself to complication, and two “bye” games for every player just doubles the fun. Also, surely the goal here is to materially decrease the injury burden. Which leads me to my first issue: In mid-November, a group at Harvard University issued a 493-page report on health care in the NFL. Their main recommendation was that the physicians who take care of injured players should no longer report to the clubs. That’s a clear conflict of interest.

With Hillary Clinton’s lead surpassing President-elect Donald Trump by two million in the popular vote, the role of the electoral college is being debated everywhere. Constitutional law scholar and Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig made the case in a recent Washington Post piece that the electors should reflect the people’s choice, and avoid “loophole presidents.” Lessig spoke to Jim Braude and Margery Eagan on Boston Public Radio over the phone while on a trip to Iceland. Highlights below.

An op-ed by Noah Feldman. When a federal judge in Texas last week froze a regulation extending overtime pay to thousands of workers, the holding had an extra sting. The hit to President Barack Obama’s legacy came from his own appointee, not a Bush-era holdover. And the decision will make it much simpler for President-elect Donald Trump’s Labor Department to scrap the regulation than it would have been without the judge’s activist ruling.

Donald Trump also sparked controversy on Tuesday when he made two unconstitutional proposals in a single tweet, writing, "Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag–if they do, there must be consequences–perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!" The Supreme Court has ruled twice that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has also ruled it’s unconstitutional to strip people of citizenship for most crimes, including desertion. We speak to Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig, who once clerked for Antonin Scalia.

There’s a push underway to change the way that most sperm is donated in the United States — which is to say, anonymously. That’s largely because anonymity can prevent donor-conceived kids from getting important information about their genetic heritage, and any predispositions to medical conditions. But a new study suggests that banning anonymous sperm donation could have the unintended effect of dramatically reducing the pool of donors, hiking up prices, and, potentially, forcing sperm banks to become less selective. “Donor-conceived children across the world have clamored for the right to have identifying information on their sperm and egg donors,” said co-author Glenn Cohen, a professor at Harvard Law School, in a press release. “To understand whether systems requiring the sharing of that information are a good policy, we need considerable data on the effects of such law changes and our study fills that gap.”

An op-ed by Cass Sunstein. As the 2016 presidential election made clear, we live in the era of the echo chamber. To escape their own, progressives need to be reading the best conservative thought -- certainly Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman, but also more contemporary figures such as Antonin Scalia and Robert Ellickson. The same is true for conservatives, if they hope to learn from progressives. Here are five books with which they might start.

An op-ed by Noah Feldman. President-elect Donald Trump says he will make “sanctuary cities” help deport immigrants by taking away their federal funding if they don’t change their policies. The good news is that he and Congress can’t do it -- not without violating the Constitution. Two core rules of federalism preclude Trump’s idea: The federal government can’t coerce states (or cities) into action with a financial “gun to the head,” according to Supreme Court precedent developed by Chief Justice John Roberts in the 2012 Affordable Care Act case. And federal officials can’t “commandeer” state officials to do their work for them under a 1997 decision that involved gun purchases under the Brady Act.