“. . . what we do depends on what we are; but it is necessary to add also that we are, to a certain extent, what we do, and that we are creating ourselves continually.”

- Henri Bergson

Class to-Do’s

 

TUES., 4/20

THE FIRST JOB: POSTGRADUATE FELLOWSHIPS, HONORS PROGRAMS, ENTRY-LEVEL WORK | All semester we’ve been talking to public service attorneys about their work and how they got started in their careers. In this class, we’ll start putting this all together by focusing on the three most common routes to getting the first public service job out of law school: postgraduate fellowships, government honors programs, and entry-level hiring for criminal law positions. During class, you’ll have a chance to select an affinity group breakout session for further brainstorming.

Our readings for this class are eclectic! I created a detailed overview of 3L public service hiring, including information about UVA Law-specific fellowships, to give you an overview of how public service hiring generally works for positions right after graduation. The article from Attorneyatwork.com is a great, quick overview of why Big Law recruitment—which drives our normative thinking about how the legal job search process should look—is a million-dollar industry in itself. The article by our own UVA Law faculty, Prof. John Monahan, provides a fascinating snapshot of how our own graduates have viewed their careers (and satisfaction with them) over 20, 30 years. While your own careers will no doubt look pretty different from theirs, this is a great resource for thinking about the life span of your career.

Finally, the podcast episode featuring Brene Brown is a quick dive into cultivating the self-awareness and compassion that we need in order to set out on any career path, but particularly the harder and thornier public service path. What does it mean to be fixated on knowing everything and trying to prove one’s worth versus being open to learning and failing?

READ BEFORE CLASS

 

THURS., 4/22

DIVING INTO POLICY MAKING: CASE STUDY | Before you head into writing policy briefs and developing different advocacy strategies to propose, we’ll delve into a case study exercise on bail laws in Riverside, California. Read the detailed case study, along with your team assignment, and prepare for our simulated public hearing during class by completing a short discussion post assignment.

DUE BEFORE CLASS

  • Zero Bail Case Study - Team Discussion Post due by Thursday morning at 10am (I’ve created a separate group discussion for each of the 8 teams. You should receive a Canvas alert that you’ve been assigned a discussion. If you don’t, contact me.)


READ BEFORE CLASS

TUES., 4/27 & THURS., 4/29

POLICY BRIEF QUICK TALKS | During our last two classes we’ll focus on preparing for the final work you’ll produce this semester: your policy briefs. With your pre-writing reflections in hand, I’ll be assigning you to small teams in which you’ll each share quick overviews of your work-in-progress and have time to ask questions that will help you shape your work.

Several students will do quick talks about their briefs at the start of each class so that all of us can benefit from hearing about a wider range of work. Please plan to listen attentively and provide supportive questions and comments in response.

In addition to reading each others’ reflections, you’ll be reading a chapter from Deborah Stone’s Policy Paradox. I’d recommend this book in its entirety to anyone who’s interested in getting a better feel for the intricacies of policy-making on the ground—the strategies, complexities, and, yes, paradoxes. I’ve assigned the “Decisions” chapter to help us think more broadly about advocacy strategies and, ultimately, solutions. As you read this chapter, think about the following—we’ll touch on these in class:

  • If Stone is correct that decision-makers in the polis are not engaging in classical rational analysis but, rather, using “framing” techniques to justify their pre-determined policy decisions, what does that mean for the kinds of strategies that public interest advocates should use?

  • Stone’s hip replacement surgery hypothetical raises an interesting point: for many policy decisions, someone might benefit and someone might be harmed. Think about the proposed solutions in your policy brief: who benefits and who gets harmed?

  • The “Moving Mountains” case study Stone describes on page 263 didn’t involve a single lawsuit or new legislation. How would you characterize the advocacy used by Drs. Farmer and Kim? What can we learn from these advocacy approaches that might be helpful when targeting problems that seem like traditional candidates for litigation or legislative fixes?

DUE BEFORE CLASS

READ BEFORE CLASS

Screen Shot 2021-01-30 at 2.35.16 PM.png

ARCHIVED CLASS TO-DO’S

thurs., 4/15

REPRESENTING THE GOVERNMENT PART III: LOCAL GOVERNMENT | In this last unit on government lawyering, we’ll dive into the work of local government attorneys, both their traditional, in-house functions and affirmative enforcement. Kimberly Fayette is a 2020-21 Public Rights Project/Justice Catalyst Fellow working on investigations and policy to combat racial discrimination at the New York City Commission on Human Rights. Denise Letendre ‘13 is an assistant county attorney at the Henrico County Attorney’s Office who focuses on representing county agencies in a wide range of practice areas, including ordinance and policy drafting.

READ BEFORE CLASS

tues., 4/13

BEYOND THE BORDERS PART II: PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW | Although the field of international human rights—and, more broadly, public international law—is too vast to explore in a single class, we’ll be diving into two ways in which domestic attorneys work on issues of international scope. In the work of Katherine Reynolds ‘12, Director of Humanitarian Immigration Law Clinic and Assistant Professor of Law, Elon Law, we’ll be discussing protections for refugees under the U.S. Refugee Act. Both nonprofits and federal agencies, such as the Department of State, exercise responsibilities for refugee resettlement, as HIAS, Inc. v. Trump illustrates. Amy Stern ‘12, on the other hand, as an Attorney-adviser at the U.S. Department of State Office of Legal Adviser, currently focuses on international maritime issues and will be spending her next rotation as legal adviser for U.S. Mission to the European Union in Brussels.

READ BEFORE CLASS

tues., 4/6

BEYOND THE BORDERS, PART I: NATIONAL SECURITY | One of the most unique opportunities for government lawyers is working with client agencies on national security and intelligence law issues. Whether it’s protecting classified information from disclosure or advising on cybersecurity issues, national security attorneys work both as advisors and litigators. They also often work at the intersection of criminal law and national security law. Our readings provide a quick overview of the various agencies that comprise the “IC”—the Intelligence Community within the United States—as well as glimpses of some common legal issues that have arisen for our speakers: Classified Information Act (“CIPA”) litigation and cybersecurity threats.

We’re lucky to be joined by Mike Buchwald ‘06, U.S. DOJ, National Security Division, Office of Law and Policy, formerly at the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and Kate Naseef ‘14, U.S. DOJ, Criminal Division, Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Section, formerly at the Central Intelligence Agency.

DUE BEFORE CLASS

READ BEFORE CLASS

thurs., 4/1

CLINICS & EXTERNSHIPS INTRODUCTION | Working with clients on real cases is one of the most important experiences public service students can gain during law school. Since understanding the array of clinical and externship offerings at the Law School can be difficult, this class will be devoted to providing a practical and interactive exposure to several of UVA Law’s clinics that might be most relevant to your interests.

2L and 3L students will share overviews of their experiences in the Child Advocacy, Civil Rights, Criminal Defense, Immigration, Innocence Project, and International Human Rights clinics and in externships. After brief introductions, students will have a chance to select two clinics to investigate more deeply in small breakout sessions.

READ BEFORE CLASS

  • No readings required — work on your policy briefs and practitioner interviews.

  • OPTIONAL: Read about clinics of interest on UVA Law’s Clinics page and about Externships.

Tues., 3/30

PUBLIC/PUBLIC AND PUBLIC/PRIVATE CAREER TRANSITIONS | Throughout this semester we’ve talked with public service attorneys who’ve made interesting career transitions—sometimes from direct services work to impact work, or between criminal and civil law practices—and you’ve started to consider your own, long-term career interests. This class will focus exclusively on professional transitions.

Chris Wilkinson ‘91, currently senior counsel at Perkins Coie in DC, spent 16 years as a trial attorney and counsel at the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of the Solicitor, Civil Rights and Labor-Management Division, after starting his career in private practice.

Rachel Kincaid ‘15 began her career clerking for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit before becoming a federal civil rights prosecutor, first at the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Criminal Section, then as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of West Virginia. She is now a staff attorney at the civil rights nonprofit Mountain State Justice and about to start a career as a law professor.

READ BEFORE CLASS

thurs., 3/25

REPRESENTING THE GOVERNMENT PART II: THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH | The roles of government attorneys representing the executive branch are almost too diverse to cover in a single class—they range from litigating to rule-making to client counseling and closing deals. In this second part of our Representing the Government unit, we start by looking in depth at the “attorney advisor” role played by attorneys at all levels of the government in my interview with Sarah Johns ‘12, Assistant Attorney General for Virginia, and counsel for VCU.

Our readings focus on the special professional and ethical duties that government attorneys perform because they owe a duty, however abstract, to serve the people.

In class, we’ll be joined by four alumni working at a range of federal agencies performing basically every type of government attorney role. After brief introductions, you’ll have a chance to select 2 breakout room sessions with individual attorneys based on your interest in their agencies/work:

  • Laura Akowuah ‘12, Food and Drug Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, formerly a clerk for the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division

  • Sarah Buckley ‘14, U.S. Department of Justice, Environment and Natural Resources Division, formerly a clerk for the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division

  • Yan Gao ‘15, Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Competition

  • Teddy Toyozaki ‘16, Department of Energy, Office of General Counsel

READ BEFORE CLASS

TUES., 3/23

REPRESENTING THE GOVERNMENT PART I: THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH |
What is it like to work for one of the powerful committees in the Senate? How does one’s legal practice on the Hill differ from traditional practice at an agency or nonprofit? Our co-speakers for this class, two recent graduates who started their practice on the Hill early in their careers, will provide us a uniquely bipartisan perspective on the work of legislative attorneys and how they pursue justice, with a special focus on judicial and executive nominations:

Joe Charlet ‘18, U.S. Senate Committee for the Judiciary, Sen. Richard Durbin (D)
Hannah Fraher ‘19, U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy (R)

Our readings relate directly to the work of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the proceedings leading up to the confirmation of Justice Barrett and Attorney General Garland.

READ BEFORE CLASS

Thurs., 3/18

FINANCING YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE CAREER | Determining whether a public service career is financially feasible can seem overwhelming. This class is designed to help you better understand what new public service attorneys are earning and how programs like UVA’s Virginia Loan Forgiveness Program and the federal Public Service Loan Forgiveness support your financial plans. The heads of UVA Law’s Financial Aid Office, Director of Financial Aid Jennifer Hulvey and Associate Director Helen Dugger, will demystify these loan assistance/forgiveness programs and answer questions.

READ BEFORE CLASS


TUES., 3/16

IMPACT WORK IN THE GOVERNMENT, PART II | As the leaders of appellate practice and litigation defense in matters that create precedent and shape statewide policy, solicitors general wield great authority. Their opportunities to engage in forward-looking, consequentialist approaches to justice are many. We are fortunate to have as our two speakers Toby Heytens, Solicitor General for the Commonwealth of Virginia and Loren AliKhan, Solicitor General for the District of Columbia. Our two SGs have partnered with each other in multi-state actions and with SGs across the country.

DUE BEFORE CLASS

READ BEFORE CLASS


THURS., 3/11

IMPACT WORK IN THE GOVERNMENT, PART I | Now that we’ve studied how attorneys work on both direct representation and systemic advocacy in nonprofit settings, we’ll be turning our attention to how public service attorneys tackle injustices within the government. While government attorneys work within a wide range of practice areas, we’ll be focusing in this class on how they engage in affirmative, public interest-oriented enforcement and litigation.

Our readings from the EPI and the Massachusetts Attorney General highlight two areas of public interest law which we may not always associate with government agencies: fighting for workers’ rights and combatting systemic racism in public health programs. Our two press releases (and associated complaints) from the Virginia OAG and the U.S. DOJ Civil Rights Division will give you a specific glimpse into affirmative litigation being handled by our two speakers—Stephen Sovinsky ‘13 and Sejal Jhaveri ‘15—and their agencies.

DUE BEFORE CLASS - **Canceled this assignment - please just watch the Friday talk!

READ BEFORE CLASS


thurs., 3/4

COMMUNITY LAWYERING | What does it mean to practice community lawyering? Our brief readings for this class will give us the starting point for thinking about how public interest attorneys can work alongside, within, and for, their communities.

Bread for the City’s Advocacy Director Aja Taylor and Community Lawyering Program senior attorney Taylor Healy will guide us through some key principles and values in community lawyering. Bread for the City, unlike most of the organizations we’ve encountered so far this semester, isn’t primarily about legal services. Its mission is to provide residents of the District of Columbia “food, clothing, medical care, and legal and social services to reduce the burden of poverty.”

READ BEFORE CLASS


tues., 3/2

IMPACT WORK, PART III: STRENGTHENING THE PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEM | Strengthening the right to counsel for individuals who suffer from limited access to their attorneys, who often lack the time and resources to represent them as fully as they’d like, is another important aspect of criminal justice reform. Building on the talks of Goel & Gerstein from Friday’s session, we’ll explore in class ways in which the current public defender system might be strengthened as we start thinking about the policy papers you’ll be writing.

DUE BEFORE CLASS

READ BEFORE CLASS


Thurs., 2/25

IMPACT WORK, PART II: CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM | Now that we’ve dipped our toes into the river, let’s take a deep dive into systemic advocacy efforts to reform the criminal justice system. Our readings for this class focus on bail reform and advocacy against the overly harsh sentencing of juveniles—two areas in which our speakers have worked. Abolitionist and bail fund innovator Elisabeth Epps ‘11, Colorado Freedom Fund & Smart Organizer for ACLU of Colorado, and Alison Mollman, staff attorney at Equal Justice Initiative, will share insights from their work.

READ BEFORE CLASS


thurs., 2/18

IMPACT WORK, PART I - IMMIGRATION | In our first unit exploring systemic advocacy (or “impact”) work by public interest attorneys, we’ll focus on defending the rights of immigrant women at the intersection of criminal and immigration law.

Brescia’s law review article gives us a quick introduction to some of the multifaceted strategies that movement lawyers use. The op-eds by our two speakers—Leslye Orloff, director of the National Immigrant Women’s Advocacy Project, and Sabrina Talukder ‘14, a staff attorney at the Legal Aid Society in the Bronx and former Equal Justice Works Fellow—showcase some of the written advocacy they’ve engaged in. In class, Orloff (a lead drafter of the Violence Against Women Act) will discuss legislative and other policy advocacy strategies, for which it will be helpful to have skimmed the Community Toolkit chapter on legislative advocacy.

READ BEFORE CLASS


Tues., 2/16

RESPONDING TO INJUSTICE PART 1: THINKING ABOUT YOUR PUBLIC INTEREST WORK PREFERENCES | Now that we’ve explored three types of public interest lawyering that provide direct legal services — while also engaging broader reforms — you may be asking yourself, Is this right for me? What is? These questions can seem overwhelming as a law student, especially if we look at the first job out of law school as the only job. (Spoiler alert: It isn’t.)

Our readings for this class are designed to help you place your career decision-making in context. Unanue and the Pew Research Center’s studies give us some social science and survey context for thinking broadly about careers and satisfaction. Petersen’s article shines a light on the particular difficulties Millennials face when confronting their ideas about work. Finally, the optional personality types quiz (based largely on the Myers-Briggs inventory) is a fun exercise for those who are curious about how their interests might be analyzed by others. Unfortunately, there’s no one inventory or personality test that can truly help law students determine what kind of legal career would be best for them. Finding that fit tends to be a long and iterative process of talking, researching, doing, and reflecting. Fortunately, we’ll build some time in our class for just that!

DUE BEFORE CLASS:


READ BEFORE CLASS:


thurs., 2/11

CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIRECT SERVICES - PUBLIC DEFENDERS & PROSECUTORS, PART II | Nearly 60 years after Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963), our national system of public defenders remains a patchwork of poorly funded state and local systems. At the same time, huge gains have been made through the rise of holistic defender agencies and the strengthening of traditional defenders that champion both individual representation and work toward criminal justice reform.

Our speakers for class represent both types of defenders. Aisha McWeay is the Executive Director of Still She Rises, a holistic defender dedicated to representing indigent mothers in Oklahoma (started by Robin Steinberg of The Bronx Defenders), and Liz Murtagh is the Public Defender for Charlottesville-Albemarle, a small but zealous defender in our own community.

Readings from Steinberg and The Nation explore both the historical origins—and some of the main problems with—our public defender structure. Stevenson, Baćak and Allison-Natale take up some of the core reasons why public defenders love their work and fight the good fight.

READ BEFORE CLASS


tues., 2/9

CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIRECT SERVICES - PUBLIC DEFENDERS & PROSECUTORS, PART I | Progressive prosecution, as a movement, has gained unprecedented traction in the past few years. At its core lie concerns about reducing mass and wrongful incarceration and eliminating unequal justice under the law due to policing & prosecution policies. In practice, progressive prosecutors scrutinize each of the critical phases of prosecution from charging (as well as declining to charge or diverting), pretrial detention and bail requests, discovery, plea bargaining, and, of course, sentencing recommendations.

Our speakers for class will help us understand what this means in everyday prosecution work: Bryan Porter, Alexandria Commonwealth’s Attorney, and April Russo, a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, formerly in the Eastern District of Michigan.

Our readings by Sklansky, Nguyen and Davis offer both moderate and more progressive perspectives on what progressive prosecutors should prioritize. The chapter from former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Preet Bharara’s book takes a close look at how federal prosecutors struggled to reach a just recommendation for sentencing. The excerpt from Bryan Stevensons’s book asks us to think past normal retributive justice concerns and ordinary conceptions of what victims want.

DUE BEFORE CLASS:

READ BEFORE CLASS:


Thurs., 2/4

POVERTY & INEQUALITY: CIVIL DIRECT LEGAL SERVICES, PART II | The rise (and failures) of the welfare state, along with the movement toward a civil Gideon, frame our readings for this class. Taylor gives an eye-opening historical account of how the War on Poverty sparked and failed, and how the Black resistance of the late 1960s gave way to colorblind conservative policies in the 1970s. The 2020 welfare system report from the Heritage Foundation gives us a contemporary example of colorblind policy-proposing and provides conservative perspectives on distributive justice. It reminds us, as well, that welfare spending isn’t curing the problems of poverty.

Tonya Brito’s article argues for a broad right to civil counsel, taking up some of the questions raised in Tuesday’s reading about the NYC universal legal access law: Counsel for whom and when? With what infrastructure in place?

In class, we’ll discuss how legal aid attorneys on the front lines play a role in the War on Poverty and how we might start to tackle the difficult policy questions raised by inadequate access to justice.

READ BEFORE CLASS:


Tues., 2/2

POVERTY & INEQUALITY: CIVIL LEGAL DIRECT SERVICES, PART I | The unequal distribution of resources to citizens in our country—particularly to BIPOC individuals—lies at the heart of so many injustices we seek to counter as public interest attorneys. Our speakers for this class, Chinh Le ‘01 (Legal Aid Society for DC) and Emily Ponder Williams ‘15 (Neighborhood Defender Services of Harlem), who head up the civil practices at two major legal aid organizations, will share their insights about how legal aid attorneys try to combat these injustices and the challenges they face.

Our first reading this week, the EPI report, gives a quick snapshot of poverty in this country 50 years after the Kerner Commission, which was created by President Lyndon Johnson in 1968 after a series of civil uprisings protesting untenable economic conditions, discrimination, and violent policing practices in Black communities. The two law review articles provide background for thinking about the role of legal aid organizations in the continuing war on poverty, including efforts to implement the newly created right to counsel in housing cases in New York.

Finally, American University’s excellent civil legal aid resources site showcases the many ways in which civil legal aid attorneys are making an impact. The issue briefs also model ways in which we can advocate for poverty law funding in terms of broader economic interests.

DUE BEFORE CLASS:

READ BEFORE CLASS:


Thurs., 1/28

THEORIES OF JUSTICE | We often talk about justice without attempting to define it or consider how different principles of justice might apply to particular situations. Our three theoretical readings for this class will give us a working vocabulary for talking about justice throughout the semester, though I’m sure we’ll supplement these as we go along.

  • Distributive justice principles apply to a wide range of legal considerations—the distribution of welfare benefits, stimulus checks under the CARES Act, paths to citizenship under the INA, and defunding the police vs. funding community public health measures, to name a few.

  • Retributive justice principles apply most obviously to criminal law at the indictment, guilt and sentencing phases. But they also apply to civil statutes and common law torts that permit punitive and treble damages, for instance.

Our readings about Breonna Taylor—prosecutorial misconduct regarding the grand jury, calls for justice, and legislative efforts—will help us ground this discussion and, hopefully, raise new questions.

READ BEFORE CLASS:


Tues., 1/26

Who are we? What are our goals for this course? In our first class, we’ll spend time getting to know each other and laying the groundwork for the semester.

DUE BEFORE CLASS:

  • Class Survey (asking for your group work preferences & other information)

  • Personality Photo (discussion post on Canvas)

  • Start voting for your favorite photos (we’ll finish voting during class)

READ BEFORE CLASS:

  • Syllabus (see Syllabus tab on this site)

  • Course Schedule (see Course Schedule tab on this site)

  • Skim your classmates’ Personality Photos to get ready for in-class voting

*Unless otherwise noted, all assignments are due in Canvas on Monday and/or Wednesday nights before class by 11:59pm EST.
See the course schedule for a full-semester view of what we’ll be doing.