Our History of Student Struggles
The Public Interest Graduation Requirement
After four years of discussion and hot debate, the school adopted a public interest requirement in the spring of 1993. The Public Interest Task Force, created by the Advisory Council to tackle the issue, recommended to the faculty that Northeastern establish an aggressively marketed public interest policy. Its aim was to encourage every student to involve him or herself in some type of public service, law-related project on a voluntary basis before graduating.
The Task Force recommendation came over the dissent of two students who favored a mandatory program. At the faculty meeting where the Task Force presented its recommendation, Karl Klare went further and proposed a mandatory program. After extensive debate among faculty and students at community forums and faculty meetings, the Advisory Council approved a mandatory graduation requirement that can be satisfied by a public interest co-op, 30 hours of pro-bono work, one of the clinical programs, or an independent study. Many consider the Public Interest Coalition’s organizing on the issue as the force that finally passed the requirement. This graduation requirement was first fulfilled by the class of 1997.
LAW, CULTURE AND DIFFERENCE and The Great Walkout of 1991
Frustrated by the gap between Northeastern’s progressive image and the non-progressive reality that they were experiencing, students of color and supportive white students walked out of one of the criminal law classes in February of 1991. This walkout was one piece of a sustained effort on the part of the newly formed Students of Color Coalition to make Northeastern a more diverse school. The walkout followed a series of activities that had begun in the fall of 1990, aimed at encouraging Northeastern to hire more faculty of color and to make the curriculum more inclusive.
At the time of the walkout, many students felt there was a continuing lack of sensitivity to issues of race in the classroom on the part of some first year instructors. Many students felt stifled by their instructors and classmates when they tried to discuss how race and racism are unavoidable and integral parts of our legal system. This surprise walkout served to galvanize the administration into action and made the student body more sensitive to issues of diversity. After the walkout, the Students of Color Coalition entered into negotiations with the administration concerning a list of demands. They asked for a first year course showing how race is an integral part of the law, racial experiential training for the faculty, a grievance committee to deal with students’ complaints against faculty, inclusion of materials that deal with race and diversity in the curriculum of all classes, and better efforts to recruit and admit students of color.
The Law, Culture, and Difference course, building on the earlier “Bridging Days” program, was the direct result of the first demand. Arguably, additional efforts on the part of the school have been made to recruit more students of color. Students, particularly those of color, have in the past offered recruitment proposals to assist in the recruitment effort, but have yet to be taken up on their offers as proposed. Definitive action has yet to be taken on any of the other demands presented that spring. It is only fair to say that compared to other law schools like Harvard, which in a similar student action brought disciplinary charges against the students, the Northeastern administration handled the situation well. The Law, Culture, and Difference course is unique to Northeastern, and now that it has been implemented, it is supported by the institution. Starting in 2001, students received full credit for the course, which was taught by three professors and their Teaching Facilitators. Students were influential at both the curriculum open forum and through their own efforts to ensure that this valuable program was not lost.
CISP is Born
CISP (Co-operative Income Sharing Program) was formed to fund public interest co-op jobs in support of important political struggles, which were not feasible options for students without additional financial support. CISP members held parties and sold bagels (like now) to raise money. First-years supported CISP and progressive co-ops by buying honorary memberships for 50 cents (now first-years join CISP the same way as upper level students: by paying $10 per semester or quarter, or 1% of your co-op salary, whichever is higher). As noted earlier, you can continue to support this noble endeavor by purchasing all your used textbooks and NUSL merchandising gear at CISP. CISP is also a great place to fulfill your work-study hours. In your first days at NUSL you will learn the wonders that coffee and brownies can do for your psyche. CISP also throws a get together at the soon-to-be-all-too-familiar pub, Punters. We’ll see you there!
Fund for the Public Interest
Tuition rates have risen dramatically across the country, and Northeastern is no different. Gone are the days when paid co-op employment could finance an entire year of school. Students are entering the job force with staggering debts. This, coupled with the low wages offered by public interest jobs makes it incredibly difficult for recent grads to do the kind of work that they came to law school to do in the first place. Recognizing this dilemma, students, alumni, and administrators created the Fund for Public Interest. The Fund is the law school’s first program geared toward assisting graduates of Northeastern who pursue careers in public interest law by paying off part of their skyrocketing debt. The Fund couldn’t have appeared at a more critical time. Recent statistics show that only 3% of graduating law students nationwide will accept positions in public interest work — a decline of almost 10% in ten years. Meanwhile, Northeastern still has notably high numbers of students still seeking public interest employment.
Another way that Northeastern tries to help students working low-wage employment is the Loan Deferral/Forgiveness Program. However, the program is more a “bridge” program than a way to get all your loans forgiven. The program assists NUSL grads in low-paying public interest jobs by deferring and eventually (if the alum stays in public interest for a minimum number of years) forgiving a portion of their loans. Loan Forgiveness is discussed in more detail in the Committees section. The bottom line is that the program is tragically under-funded, and the amount of loans indebtedness is rising. In recent years, the program has received applications from a record number of alums that qualified for assistance due to the fact that Northeastern graduates a much higher percentage of public interest lawyers than most law schools. Therefore, the average amount received by each recipient of the program has been going down.
A final thought about working in the public interest. The Loan Deferral/Forgiveness Program has two sides two it: the side of those who benefit from it by receiving money, and the side of those who benefit by giving money to it. There cannot be one without the other. It’s mutual! Now, if you feel like you would not be happy unless you committed your life to working in the public interest, this is hugely valuable to the world. But you won’t make money doing it. On the other hand, you can also do good by doing well. Who you are is not affected by how much you earn. You are not (necessarily) going over to the dark-side by making a nice living (depending on whose hide you’re fleecing) and giving back to your community in cash or in kind, rather than in service.
In 2003, the administration held the first annual “Progressive Lawyering Project” at NUSL, presenting the opportunity for progressives from around the country to discuss different strategies for social, racial, and economic change in this world of globalization. The administration encourages student participation and gives students the day off in order to attend workshops at the conference.
In February
of 2005, organizations
held 3 “teach-ins”: one on the Solomon Amendment,
one on
The Teach-In
on
The organizing teach-in featured a discussion on how the practice of law and organizing can complement each other. The workshop addressed such questions as: How legal advocacy fits it into already existing movements for change, and how we can use law as part of a larger plan, in conjunction with grassroots people's movements, operating in multiple forums.
STUDENT
ORGANIZING
In the early days of the
law school, a major issue was the quality of teaching in Contracts. A
boycott
of the class organized by the National Lawyers Guild was so successful
that
there were days when no one attended. Students met with the
Administration but
received no satisfactory response. As a final resort, students signed
petitions
stating their intention to withhold tuition money if Northeastern did
not
replace the teacher. He was replaced. (Note: This tactic also proved
successful
in the South Africa-divestment campaign, see below.)
The National Lawyers Guild also led an effort to ensure that students elected as representatives to various school committees were actually committed to speaking out on behalf of their constituents. Through an evaluation of the committees’ effectiveness, many Guild members were surprised to learn that the Admissions office utilized a system of “administrative admits”: some students were admitted to Northeastern strictly on the basis of their LSAT score and grade point average. A common practice at other law schools, this process appears to contradict the P.R. rap about how Northeastern considered each applicant on an individual basis. Today, however, the Admissions Committee includes student representatives, and current Director MJ Knoll-Finn has made a valiant effort to involve under-represented communities in the admissions process, and to support these communities as they endeavor to attract applicants. The “administrative admits” system is no longer practiced at Northeastern.
The Constitutional By-Laws Committee and the Governance Charter
Out of a 1999-2000 hiring process grew the understanding that the school must redevelop the by-laws, especially as they touch on student participation in the law school and advisory council. After students pushed, a by-laws committee headed by professor Jane Scarborough with strong, elected student representation was established to address the situation. This committee worked throughout 1999-2000 to develop by-laws for the governance of the law school. In addition to the students who were committee members, many other students got involved in the process of developing new by-laws. After Dean Roger Abrams referred to Advisory Council meetings as “faculty meetings with students,” NURF organized an all- student assembly. Many students were angered by the lessening role that students were allowed in governing the law school over the previous years. Additionally, since the faculty and administration as a whole could not decide whether the school was still following the 1972 charter for governance or if this charter had been abolished in the early 90’s, students feared that without a definite governance document student participation would suffer more. At this meeting students shared their concerns about wanting to have a more formal and significant voice in all areas of school governance.
Numerous meetings were held after the assembly where student concerns in the areas of financial aid, admissions, governance, LD/F, and hiring were compiled. Out of these concerns came a list of action steps some of which student advisory council members presented at the following advisory council meeting. These steps included a detailed interim governance charter and a request for publication of the law school’s budget. Additionally, action steps concerning admissions, financial aid, and LD/F were brought to their respective committees.
Although the advisory council was not ready to adopt the interim governance proposal of the students immediately, an interim by-laws committee was created. This committee, with the help of its three student members, and using the proposal that had been presented by the students as a guide, developed a recommendation for interim governance. The interim by-laws committee presented this recommendation to the advisory council in February 2001. Essentially these recommendations were the same as what the students had developed out of the student assembly. The by-laws were adopted unanimously.
With great help from many students there was an interim governance document (which has since been ratified in full). This document changes the name of the advisory council to the governing council. It also has opened up all governing counsel meetings to anyone in the community who would like to attend. Minutes from these meetings are taken, archived, and are distributed with agendas on the WEBoard.
While students could feel good about their efforts in establishing interim procedures, there was no time to rest-- the issue of a permanent structure had not yet been settled. The last governing council meeting of the year involved the presentation of the recommendations of the by-laws committee. Although the committee had held a community forum to get feedback on the proposed charter, few in the community attended. Not surprisingly, many faculty on the advisory council did not feel ready to vote on this proposed charter at this meeting. Unfortunately, this meant that many students who had been involved with student governance for their three years at the law school would be graduating and would not get the opportunity to see some of their ideas get adopted. Additionally, Dean Abrams wanted to postpone further discussion of the proposed charter until the Fall quarter, claiming that the governing council does not normally meet during the Summer session. Students in school during the summer session sent out emails and logged complaints to the Dean. After pressure from students and Prof. Scarborough to continue the discussion of this proposed charter during the summer, one governing council meeting was held. Discussion of the proposed charter continued and a time line was created culminating in a vote on the charter at the October meeting of the governing council.
The charter was passed in October 2001. Student input could always be greater, but it has at least been formalized and institutionalized with the new document. Each class now has three Council representatives and an alternate, and CAIR has one representative. One argument against expansion of student participation has been that there is not enough student interest to fill the current slots, let alone new slots. You can prove them wrong! Student participation in governance is a great way to learn about the behind-the-scenes of the school, get to know professors, and build leadership experience.
DISABILITY AND HEALTH LAW AWARENESS AT NORTHEASTERN
People with
disabilities (physical, sensory, learning, psychiatric, AIDS,
addiction-related
and otherwise) are making inroads at Northeastern, but it is a slow
process.
Accommodations are made largely under the students’ impetus,
and awareness of
disability as a civil rights issue is generally lacking. The Disability
Law
Caucus waged a successful campaign for inclusion of a disability law
course,
first offered in the Winter 1997-98 quarter. The Co-op Office has added
a
disability access page to the quality questionnaire such that employers
can
detail their facilities. Co-op information is now available on-line, so
as to
be more accessible to people with disabilities and people who want to
get the
information from home or while out on co-op. The Disability Law Caucus
has
written a detailed analysis outlining the responsibility of the Co-op
Office
and employers to provide accommodations while students are on co-op.
For the
administration’s current policy relating to co-op
accommodations, see the
current Student Information Handbook.
In
addition, NUSL now offers a dual-degree JD/Master of Public Health in
connection with the
DIVERSITY, ADMISSIONS, AND THE CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT
In 1973 there were two student organizations on campus: BLSA (Black Law Students Association) and the Women’s Caucus. There were only ten students of color in the first year class. In 1974 the school’s chapter of the National Lawyers Guild was formed. About three-fourths of the students joined. That year the students decided to organize around the issue of increasing student of color enrollment. Students circulated petitions and held meetings with the Administration. The Administration explained that although they accepted a good number of people of color, only a small number chose to come to Northeastern. The admissions process and this rationale are still major issues at Northeastern. Student of color organizations and NURF continue the work of trying to increase their numbers at the law school. These organizations were recently joined by a working group called CAIR – the Committee Against Institutionalized Racism (see below).
There was
also a
lot of action around issues of sexism at the law school in the early
‘70s. A
group of women especially concerned with the sexist presentation of
Torts
performed a “sing-out” in class one day about the
“reasonable man.” Later the
women tried some positive reinforcement by giving out awards for the
most
non-sexist teaching. Student organizing also focused on the
The Birth of the Committee Against Institutional Racism
In 1986 with
increased consciousness about institutionalized racism following the
activism
around
The Strike for Admissions Changes
By 1974 there were only a few students of color among a class of approximately 125 students. The first-year curriculum was fairly similar to the current one, except Legal Practice was limited to Legal Writing and Moot Court. The tuition was high. There was a feeling among students that the permanent faculty lacked the specialties in which students were most interested. While some requested courses such as Welfare Law and Sex-Based Discrimination were eventually offered, they were only offered infrequently, at inconvenient times and the quality was terribly uneven. These problems caused great dissatisfaction among members of the student body.
In 1978 there was a strike by the entire student body in opposition to an “attempted coup” by the faculty. The Administration’s plan was to eliminate the Advisory Council, and the opportunity it provides for student expression, and to remove dissenting faculty members from the Admissions Committee (thereby drastically reducing student power and input in the governing of Northeastern). Although the Advisory Council and the student/faculty administration committee structure had been criticized by students for providing only token roles for student involvement, the students recognized a need to protect what little power they had from the Administration’s threat. The students voted to go out on strike and effectively closed down the school for several days. The Dean appointed Don Berman as a negotiator. Students elected student representatives from each class. Eventually a proposal emerged from their negotiations: an Executive Committee of three faculty members and three students was to make decisions behind closed doors. Many students opposed the closed-door aspect of the plan. Although the Executive Committee’s proposal narrowly survived a student vote, the faculty refused to adopt it. At the same time, the faculty’s plan also fizzled out. Thus, the “coup” was aborted, there was a return to the status quo ante, and the students had preserved their narrow base of power. The viability of the Advisory Council is under debate among some faculty to this very day and there is still some disparity between various recountings of the events of this period.
Verification of Financial Aid and Bias
The Committee Against Institutional Racism became aware early in 1996 that the Financial Aid office was requiring verification of citizenship status for selected financial aid recipients, who were primarily naturalized Asian-American and Latina/o citizens. Some students reported not receiving notice of their need to verify citizenship, and others reported that their verification was rejected or had to be re-confirmed. This frequently resulted in long delays in students obtaining the necessary funds. CAIR has worked with Deans David Hall and Diane Tsoulas, and met with Michael Wildeman in the Financial Aid office, to be sure that the process is limited to that required by the U.S. Department of Education, that proper notice is given with follow-up, and verification is maintained to avoid duplication of effort, and delays avoided. Wildeman suggested quarterly follow-up meetings between the Financial Aid Office and law school students, both to deal with specific issues and to serve as general information forums.
WORKERS SOLIDARITY
This is too long a history to explain briefly, so hopefully it will suffice to say that the University (not the law school) apparently has a history of collective bargaining and unfair labor practice violations. See past editions of this Guide (or probably Karl Klare, too) if you’re interested in hearing more about this. Some cites for your own reference are Northeastern University, 218 N.L.R.B. 246, N.L.R.B. v. Northeastern University, 707 F.2d 15 (1st Cir. 1983), and N.L.R.B. v. Northeastern University, 601 F.2d 1208 (1st Cir. 1979).
Ironically,
although the University has a less than perfect record for workers
rights,
labor enthusiast abound at Northeastern.
Throughout the decades students have mobilized around
workers’ struggles
through many different forums. Most
recently, in the first semester of the 2002-2003 school year
Concerned students organized an open forum, attended by students, faculty, and staff, where striking workers were given an opportunity to speak about their struggle. Inspired and motivated, students began organizing themselves to provide support. Along with undergraduates from the (always industrious) Progressive Students Alliance, law students joined the janitors on their picket at Northeastern and rallied with community members and strikers at various office buildings downtown. In addition, several law students met with university President Richard Freeland, urging the University to send a clear signal that it supports decent wages and conditions for workers on campus. Students and faculty also let Freeland know that they didn’t appreciate the presence of armed campus security during an organizing meeting to which workers were invited. Students sported fresh pro-union t-shirts (designed and produced by students themselves), classes were being kicked off with bargaining updates, and the law school became a site of solidarity and community.
Student organizing climaxed with a student walk-out from LCD. Some of the janitors had been “invited” by students to kick off an earlier class attended by every first-year student. Organizers decided LCD would be the perfect time to walk out, because almost everybody would be on campus. Students made noise-makers, signs, sent out a press release, worked the local media, and five minutes before the walk-out one could hear the sweet sound of a news chopper hovering over the building. To the gratification of the organizers, at least 150 students walked out of class, delivered a set of demands to President Freeland, and rallied with the janitors on Krentzman Quad. Faculty and staff also participated in the walk-out. Students were understandably proud when Labor Law scholar and NUSL professor Karl Klare called that day “the best he had ever had at Northeastern.”
We learned some important lessons about organizing at Northeastern. First, it is vitally important to bring the struggle into the classroom by making announcements and soliciting faculty support. Second, the law school administration is much more sympathetic than the University administration. The University administration sent security to student meetings, attempted to co-opt the walk-out by “offering” to let students meet in the undergraduate student union (out of sight of the media), took down the ID numbers of students protesting a speech by President Freeland, pressed trespass charges against a union organizer who we invited to a meeting, and harassed students attempting to distribute information to students on campus. On top of that, workers and students were monitored by at least one CSC-hired “private dick” (complete with fedora) who would “chat” with students about how misguided the workers were. Finally, students have to communicate well with the media, even the frustrating and sometimes awful Northeastern News. Of course, the most important lesson learned was that talking about justice isn’t nearly as fulfilling as seeking justice.
Northeastern
has
long been involved with activism in
Asylum:
In 1982 Northeastern students
made a great contribution toward gaining political asylum for South
African
anti-apartheid activist and poet Dennis Brutus. In the early 1970s
Brutus’
efforts led to the exclusion of his country from the Olympics because
of its
racist policies. His victories earned him imprisonment on
Divestment:
One of the major victories
of student organizing at Northeastern was the University’s
decision in 1984 to
divest all of its holdings in companies that do business in
The next fall (1985), law students coalesced with several undergraduate organizations and formed the Northeastern University Coalition Against Apartheid (NUCAA). In November a “divest now” rally held in the Quad was attended by over 300 students. (Rumor has it that this was the first rally in ten years to be held on this “apolitical” campus.)
Another
delegation
of students met with the Trustees’ Executive Committee in an
effort to get to
the full Board. A picket of about 60 people was held in the cold rain
outside
the meeting. This time the committee agreed to let the students make a
presentation to the full Board. After this presentation, the Trustees
made
another small step in the right direction: divestment of one third of
the
stocks held in companies that do business in
NUCAA responded to this
decision by
communicating to the Trustees the view that it was insufficient to do
piece-meal divestment when there is a crisis in
Mandela: During the first part of the 1987-88 school year, hundreds of NUSL students lined the halls of our law school. In silence they stood, shoulder to shoulder, each of them holding up goldenrod flyers with the name “Mandela” in bold black letters. After about twenty minutes, the president of the University, John Ryder, came down the stairs. As he made his way to the faculty lounge to a scheduled meeting with the law school faculty, he passed by walls lined on both sides with the student body and members of faculty and staff. No one breathed a word, but the message was deafening: “We support the efforts of Nelson Mandela and demand that our school honor him with a degree at our 1988 graduation ceremonies.”
That silent
protest
was the turning point in the law school community’s campaign
to honor Mr.
Mandela. Throughout the year, students from a cross-section of the law
school
supported by faculty and staff attended meetings and organized actions
such as
the silent protest. For several months the students also hung a huge
black and
gold banner proclaiming “HONOR MANDELA” out of a
Northeastern window facing
heavily trafficked
By January 1988, the Board of Trustees relented, and informed the community that it would honor Mr. Mandela. At that year’s graduation, Professor Denise Carty-Bennia accepted the honorary degree on behalf of Mr. Mandela, and the Trustees announced that they would grant five tuition waivers for incoming law students of color.
Continued
Interest
in
HIV/AIDS Activism
In 2003, with the help of Professor Brook Baker, students formed a law school chapter of the Student Global Access Campaign (SGAC). There are 42 million people living with HIV/AIDS today, the vast majority of whom are denied access to antiretroviral medications which would make a dramatic difference in the lives of people afflicted with the virus. Students at the law school have written letters urging the South African government to promote access to medicine and accept that the HIV virus causes AIDS. Students have also protested the denial of health care to HIV+ Coca-Cola workers by pressing the University administration to stop selling Coca-Cola products until workers are provided medicine. Furthermore, the group convinced CISP to stop selling Coca-Cola products until workers are provided medicine. In the meantime, Coca-Cola has agreed to provide medicine to HIV+ workers but unfortunately failed thus far to follow through on this promise. SGAC also organized several forums at the law school aimed at raising consciousness of AIDS issues, and received a letter of appreciation from the South African Treatment Access Campaign for their solidarity and advocacy. There are a number of important legal issues that students can work on with regards to HIV/AIDS, especially at the intersection of international Human Rights and Intellectual Property regimes.
SGAC was
active
during the past year. In December, to mark Global AIDS Day, members
conducted a
mock debate titled “AIDS Can't Do Coalition”,
featuring “President Bush”, “US
Trade Representative Robert Zoellick”, and a “PhRMA
spokesperson”. The debate
was held in the student commons and drew a nice crowd of fellow
students and
professors. Toward the end of the winter quarter, SGAC put together a
panel
discussion on “Issues of Race, Gender, and Class in the
Global/Local AIDS
Pandemic”. In solidarity with
The protest, calling attention to Bush's empty rhetoric around AIDS, was mentioned in the national media. Plans for the future include establishing links with AIDS groups abroad, compiling a resource bank for NUSL law students interested in pursuing AIDS-related legal work, and building knowledge in the area of intellectual property law.
More Recent Student Activism
I Do Not Consent to a Search
In the security efforts surrounding the DNC, the MBTA (the T) developed a search policy that involved checks of passengers’ bags on subway and commuter trains on a ”random basis” (for example, every 8th person). While the NLG agreed that no one wants to see an act of terrorism on the T, they believed that random searches will not increase our safety. Instead, the T would have been illegally violate the privacy of innocent travelers.
The National Lawyers Guild argued that it was unconstitutional to set up checkpoints at locations people use every day such as subways and trains. They passed out buttons to passengers, held meetings, and press releases. The T policy was met a quick demise – shortly after beginning their searches they realized their ineffectiveness and ceased performing them.
Guild
Trip to
The National
Lawyers Guild regularly sends delegations of law students and lawyers
to
countries around the world to document human rights abuses, including
five
trips to the
The Lebanese government routinely justifies denying Palestinian refugees citizenship on the basis of their national origin, while simultaneously using their statelessness to prevent them from obtaining jobs and education. The NLG delegation met with Palestinian and Lebanese political leaders, UN agency officials, human rights organizations and camp residents to discuss the range of human rights violations, including lack of citizenship, lack of property rights, inadequate housing and poor medical care.
War
in
It’s
difficult to
write about the War in
In the months
leading up to war in Iraq, students were involved in the national and
regional
anti-war movements, organizing in their own communities, attending
demonstrations, and bringing up the impending war in relevant classes.
Students
and faculty began formulating a community response to the invasion, and
formed
the NUSL Anti-War Society, an organization that seeks peaceful and
legal means
to resolve conflict and stands generally against militarism.
The group
organized weekly vigils for peace on
Students also
organized a speaker series, which included talks on the Law of War, the
ethics
of patriotism, international arms control treaties, and the
constitutional case
against the war (our own Margaret Burnham was counsel to a group of
service
members' families and congresspersons who challenged the October war
declaration as unconstitutional). Finally, many students
participated in
protests and rallies in
Particularly during the early days of the war, Republican students enlivened the debate by posting information on their bulletin board, urging the U.S. armed services to “Go Get ‘Em,” showing photographs of Iraqis welcoming American troops, and poking fun at the fact that U.N. weapons inspectors couldn’t seem to find any weapons of mass destruction. Many students were happy to get another point of view, and the bulletin board remained unchanged throughout the summer as a reminder of the reasons many Americans supported the invasion.
In the coming year, the NLG has made a commitment to get involved in counter recruitment in local highschools. NUSL students are looking at ways to broaden the military recruitment debate on campus as well.
Immigrant Rights
Over
the past
two and a half years, the student chapter of NLG has played an integral
role in
the evolution of the Detention Working Group, an immigrant rights
advocacy
project of the Massachusetts National Lawyers Guild.
Mass immigrant detentions occurred in
Together with
other
At a press
conference in the summer of 2005, the Detention Working Group released
a
31-page report publicizing trends revealed by these court observations. The results were shocking: Nearly 20% of the
detainees observed were
lawful permanent residents with an average stay in the
In the
future, the
Detention Working Group plans to increase collaboration with
To read the
full
text of Give Me Your Tired, Your Poor: A Report on Due Process Issues
in the
Handling of Immigration Detainees in
At the Annual Dinner, Northeastern’s Class of 2005 NLG members were honored for the activism, organizing, and dedication they showed throughout their three years of law school. The Guild recognized that while Northeastern typically attracts students who are committed to challenging the traditional notions of what lawyers should be, they still struggle against the harsh reality of law school.
While the
accomplishments of the Class of 2005 are too many to list in their
entirety,
here is an attempt: During their first year, they organized a walk-out
in
solidarity with campus employees trying to organize. The war
in
Not only were
students active within the Northeastern community, but also in their
co-ops and
private lives. Kelly McAnnany joined a Guild delegation to
The NLG Class
of
2005 were a brilliant group of students to have the opportunity to know. Bina Ahmad, James
Alexander, Morgan Baker,
Patrick Banfield, Ryan Borgen, Benjamin Evans, Jonathon Foglia, Mariusz
Kurzyna, Anya Lakner, Amy Marinacci, Kelly McAnnany, Sara Pic, John
Pollock,
Hema Sarangapani, and Cara Wilking, will be sorely missed, but will not
leave
an empty void behind. We welcome you, the class of 2008, to a
community
that is strong and committed to radical social change, and ask you to
lend your
spirit of optimism to our continued struggle.
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
Affirmative
Action
was highlighted in 2003 in the context of the important
QUEER CAUCUS
As the gay,
lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) population grew in the early
days,
Northeastern began to have a stronger and stronger reputation for GLBT
sensitivity and support. By the early ‘90s it began to be
known as one of the
most GLBT friendly law schools in the nation. In its current form as
the Queer
Caucus, the group of NUSL students brings together queer-identified
students
for educational discussions, activist work and social events. Queer
Caucus
campaigned to add a question about sexual orientation to the admissions
application, organized to bring alumna
Mary Bonauto of GLAD to campus to discuss her campaign for
marriage as
lead counsel in the Goodridge gay marriage case, and sends an annual
delegation
to the Boston PRIDE parade. In 2001-02, the Queer Caucus maintained its
high
profile by sponsoring a well-attended panel on the current struggle for
same-sex marriage in
Transgender Rights
NUSL makes
every
effort to ensure that it is a safe place for students to transition,
and the
University’s
During the
summer
of 2000, largely precipitated by students, an ad hoc Transgender Task
Force was
formed to address the needs of transgender students at the
In 2001-02, the Task Force compiled a lengthy memorandum of recent case law, press coverage, and policies from other schools and corporations. The Task Force submitted this memorandum to the University President’s office and met with his “Working Group” (a special group that handles new policy issues) several times in order to advocate for a subtle addition to the university-wide anti-discrimination policy that would benefit transgender people. While President Freeland ultimately refused to amend the University’s nondiscrimination policy to be explicitly trans-inclusive, he did issue a memorandum acknowledging that discrimination based on gender expression may be (it definitely is!) impermissible sex discrimination under state law. Meanwhile, a small grassroots group comprised largely of NUSL students and grads drafted a city ordinance and put it through the city council and across the Mayor's desk. The vote in the City Council was 9-1: not by any stretch an expression of ambivalence or reluctance, but a response to a real and desperate problem. The ordinance is now on the books, and carries a civil penalty if a violation is found by the Boston Human Rights Commission. Dean Spieler signed a letter of support for the public hearing.
While the
Ultimately, a group
of
Same Sex Marriage
You probably
don’t
need an introduction to the same-sex marriage victory in
Military Recruitment and the Solomon Amendment
In 1982, NUSL students mounted a successful campaign to bar military recruiters from the law school and to end military co-ops. Originally, the suggestion was made to bar such recruitment as a protest to militarism, but the issue quickly focused on civil rights. Because of the armed services’ explicit policy concerning discrimination against lesbians and gays, a general policy was drafted to prohibit co-op employment in any agency, law firm, or group that practices discrimination. After much discussion this proposal passed the Advisory Council and became official policy. However, the passage of the Solomon Amendments during 1997 prohibits schools from refusing to host military recruiters, at the risk of losing work/study money.
A number of
concerned students attended a speech given by U.S. Representative
Barney Frank
that was held at
This past year the
law school, in a nation-wide trend, was forced by the Military, with
the help
of Congress via the Solomon Amendment, to violate the
school’s
anti-discrimination policy by increasing military recruiters’
access to law
students on campus even though the military explicitly discriminates on
the
basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. In response,
members of
the Queer Caucus and other concerned members of the Northeastern
community
pushed the Governing Council to adopt a resolution condemning the
"...to the end
that human rights shall be regarded as more sacred
than property interests."