Editorial Board Opinion on Mukasey
EagleionlineAttorney General Mukasey's acceptance to speak at the 2008 Commencement is a tremendous accomplishment for Boston College Law School that evidences the influence and prestige of our institution. However, the fact is that Mukasey is not free from controversy. A growing number of students, faculty and alumni are now expressing well-reasoned concern over his statements regarding torture.
As an organization dedicated to promoting dialogue and students' sense of community at BC Law, Eagleionline respectfully suggests that the administration take a proactive approach to students' concerns by hosting a discussion on the role of the Attorney General in the torture debate. Scuttling the Attorney General's invitation is unrealistic, but as an academic institution devoted to law and justice, the administration now has a duty to address these difficult issues openly, and in a way that gives meaningful voice to BC Law's students, faculty, administration, staff, and alumni. The administration must give those who object a space to be heard.
This is especially important given the sudden and under-inclusive process by which Attorney General Mukasey was selected. A airing of concerns, regrettably post facto, is now the sole avenue available to concerned members of this community.
Eagleionline Editorial Board
Reader Comments (3)
I disagree with EagleI that scuttling the Attorney General's invitation is 'unrealistic.' Much to the contrary, Choate Rosemary Hall,a private high school in Connecticut, was able to generate enough opposition to Karl Rove's selection as commencement speaker that he chose not to go. Although the university did not uninvite him, there was enough opposition to dissuade him from agreeing to go there. We hope the same will happen here at BC.
Lat just blogged about the Mukasey debate on Above the Law:
http://www.abovethelaw.com/2008/02/gay_at_doj_hip_hip_hooray_1.php
Jeralyn from Talk Left, a legal/political blog from a liberal perspective, just posted on Mukasey's decision to ask Congress to block the release of crack offenders currently serving sentences except for first-time, non-violent offenders. The problem is that many drug offenders in prison have prior possession charges, which would bar them from release under the new sentencing guidelines imposed by the Supreme Court.
See Jeralyn's post for more details on Mukasey's draconian sentencing policy:
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/6/14224/50440
Mukasey has his eye on the real enemies of the people, non-violent drug offenders. While this certainly doesn't rise to the level of his tacit approval of torture, it does show a distorted set of priorities, and yet another instance where Mukasey has sided with those who have little concern for human rights.