Letter outlining new selection process for law review staff members

Letter from Boston College Law School Dean John Garvey to the Law School Community describing a new selection process for law review staff members, which was implemented in 2008. The purpose of the policy was to increase the diversity of the students selected to join the staff of a law review

Letter addressing objections to the choice of Michael Mukasey as the speaker at the commencement of Boston College Law School

Letter from Boston College Law School Dean John Garvey to the Law School Community addressing objections to the choice of United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey as the speaker at the school\u27s 2008 commencement ceremony. Some faculty, students, and alumni objected to honoring Mukasey because of his refusal during to state a conclusive opinion on the legality of waterboarding, or on whether or not waterboarding constitute torture, during Congressional confirmation hearings

What’s Next After Separationism?

Professor Carl Esbeck argues in his article\u27 that the traditional theory of separationism is giving way to a theory of equality (or more accurately, protection for religious choice). The argument is very astute, and I agree with much of it. I will give my own perspective on the same two points

Two Aspects of Liberty

Liberty in the constitutional sense is always a right against state interference (a “freedom from”). The First Amendment begins by saying that “Congress shall make no law”; it forbids Congress to license or fine or jail people for speaking, or publishing, or assembling. Liberty is also, always, a right to do something (a “freedom to”): to speak, to assemble, to practice religion, to get married, etc. So “freedom from” and “freedom to” are always parts of the same idea, just as “flying from” and “flying to” are aspects of the same airplane trip. Freedom is always the right to do some particular act without government restraint

Book Review: Nazis in Skokie: Freedom, Community, and the First Amendment. by Donald Alexander Downs.

Book review: Nazis in Skokie: Freedom, Community, and the First Amendment. By Donald Alexander Downs. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press. 1985. Pp. xii, 227. Reviewed by: John H. Garvey

Litigation Primer for Standing Dismissals

Professor Carvey examines a very theoretical issue-whether standing objections are jurisdictional, claim-related, or both-to resolve a rery practical problem-hotc to characterize motions to dismiss for lack of standing, As he notes. the choice of characterization under the Federal Rules of Ciril Procedure has important practical consequences for the litigator, involving cridentiary limitations, consolidation requirements, and the resjudcata effcct of dismissal. Professor Carrey suggests. as a solution to the litigator\u27s dilemma, that both rule 12(b k I and rule 121b t16 are appropriate means by which to raise standing objections in the constitutional sense since a determination that the plaintiff lacks standing means both that the court lacks jurisdiction and that the plaintiff has failed to state a claim On the other hand, since prudential standing objections rest on the very considerations that determine whether a court will infer a right of action, they should be treated as entirely claim-related and therefore should be made under rule 12(b 6) only