Beginning in 1981 and continuing into the mid-1990s, The Alledger was the student newspaper of the Boston College Law School. The Alledger published both serious and satirical articles on topics related to student life at the law school. Frequent topics include the arrival and departure of faculty members, profiles of candidates for leadership positions in student government, and previews of lectures given by noteworthy speakers.

The publication consistently poked fun at the law student experience, making professors and classmates alike the targets of good-natured parody. The Alledger featured an annual April Fool’s Day issue which consisted entirely of satirical articles.

The Alledger is a record of the school’s history, offering evidence of an increasingly competitive environment for law schools in the form of extensive coverage of a 1995 dispute related to the U.S. News and World Report law school rankings. The newspaper also recorded changes in the demographics of the student body, as well as frequent discussion of tuition increases and the financial relationship of the law school to the university. Moreover, the humorous and frank tone of The Alledger provides real insight into the lives of law students in the 1980s and 1990s.

The Alledger was digitized from the collection of the Boston College Law School Library. Issues missing from this collection are not owned by the law library; due to frequent inconsistencies in the numbering of issues, the law library is not sure how many issues are missing from this collection.

The Alledger

Boston College Law Review is Boston College Law School's flagship scholarly publication.

The Review, ranked in the top 25 law journals by Washington & Lee, publishes eight issues each year featuring articles and essays by prominent authors addressing legal issues of national interest.

In addition to articles written by outside academics, the Review prints the work of its student staff, many of whom publish notes during their third year. The Review’s second-year staff members also prepare short comments on recent federal circuit court decisions, which may be published in the Review's Electronic Supplement.

Visit the Boston College Law Review website at <a href="http://bclawreview.bc.edu">bclawreview.bc.edu</a>.


Boston College Law Review

Boston College Law Library collects the publications of Law School faculty, and, when possible, makes them available through this collection. Organized by year and tagged with authors and subject areas, this resource reflects the school and the library’s commitment to open access while at the same time serving as a valuable institutional record.

Boston College Law School Faculty Papers

Boston College Law School Lectures and Presentations

Side effects of COVID-19 or other vaccinations may affect an individual’s safety, ability to work or care for self or others, and/or willingness to be vaccinated. Identifying modifiable factors that influence these side effects may increase the number of people vaccinated. In this observational study, data were from individuals who received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine between December 2020 and April 2021 and responded to at least one post-vaccination symptoms survey that was sent daily for three days after each vaccination. We excluded those with a COVID-19 diagnosis or positive SARS-CoV2 test within one week after their vaccination because of the overlap of symptoms. We used machine learning techniques to analyze the data after the first vaccination. Data from 50,484 individuals (73% female, 18 to 95 years old) were included in the primary analysis. Demographics, history of an epinephrine autoinjector prescription, allergy history category (e.g., food, vaccine, medication, insect sting, seasonal), prior COVID-19 diagnosis or positive test, and vaccine manufacturer were identified as factors associated with allergic and non-allergic side effects; vaccination time 6:00–10:59 was associated with more non-allergic side effects. Randomized controlled trials should be conducted to quantify the relative effect of modifiable factors, such as time of vaccination.

CC BY 4.0 Attribution

Identifying Modifiable Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects: A Machine Learning Approach

Recent revisions to ABA accreditation standards provide yet another exciting opportunity for faculty teaching lawyering skills to position our courses as central to preparing students for excellence in professional practice, particularly in terms of offering opportunities for professional identity formation in the first-year curriculum.

ABA Standard 303(b)(3) now formally requires that law schools provide “substantial opportunities” to law students for “the development of a professional identity.” Interpretation 303-5 provides that professional identity “focuses on what it means to be a lawyer and the special obligations lawyers have to their clients and society. The development of professional identity should involve an intentional exploration of the values, guiding principles, and well-being practices considered foundational to successful legal practice.” Importantly, the Interpretation counsels that this practice requires “requires reflection and growth over time,” including frequent opportunities for development “during each year of law school” and “in a variety of courses . . . and activities.”

Like many of our colleagues across the country even prior to the February 2022 standards revision, the first-year lawyering skills faculty at Boston College Law School has integrated professional identity formation into our teaching in a variety of ways. This article briefly describes our comprehensive, experiential lawyering skills curriculum that specifically incorporates professional identity formation into its learning outcomes. Then, it offers the “oral report to a supervising attorney” module as an example of a traditional skills exercise that we’ve reframed to offer a specific opportunity for professional identity formation which incorporates the perspectives of practicing lawyers and judges, including BC Law alumni, and allows students to better envision themselves as lawyers in a wide range of professional practices. Finally, the piece offers suggestions for faculty seeking to recreate the exercise at other schools and reflects on enhancements we will make to the activity going forward. 

Integrating the Perspectives of Alumni Practitioners into the Oral Report Module to Provide an Opportunity for Professional Identity Formation Early in the First Year

Despite the evolution of no-fault divorces, which were intended to remove certain barriers to divorce and essentially make any divorce filed inevitable, many jurisdictions prescribe a waiting period before eligibility for divorce, during which there must be a demonstrable period of separation. In support of findings of facts and conclusions of law about whether the divorcing couple has established a separation, some jurisdictions will ask whether the couple has lived in the same abode and, if so, will inquire about the divorcing couple’s roles and choices vis-à-vis one another—for example, preparing meals for one another or engaging socially with one another. Other jurisdictions will make explicit inquiries into whether a couple has had sex with one another. Probing into families’ living arrangements and adults’ sexual choices does real and particular harm to marginalized social groups, and doing so defies the liberty and privacy interests of families and couples. In explicating this litany of critiques, this project attempts to avoid the trap that family law scholarship can too easily fall into; namely, criticizing doctrine “on a low level of abstraction” and rushing to a proposed reform. This piece, therefore, offers a taxonomy of the harm that separate and apart requirements cause—paying particular attention to the ways in which these laws are classist, heteronormative, gendered, and racially charged—and illuminates how constitutionally precarious such laws are. The project is ambitious as it attempts to situate and expose the deep-seated problems of separate and apart requirements as reflective of the deep-seated flaws in family law jurisprudence generally. The piece offers a comprehensive analysis and investigation of separate and apart requirements, and it serves as an invitation to further conversation and exploration of the themes raised herein.

Based on the author’s practice experience as much as her scholarship, the proposal insists that where couples are struggling deep in the heart of the matter about their choices—the good ones and the mistakes—they do not need or desire a judicial officer to ask them to wait or to organize their life a certain way before allowing them to divorce. Nothing and no one is served by insisting on some normative view about what the end of a marriage looks like and requiring some time period for performance of that view. The proposal in this piece joins a growing chorus of practitioners, judges, and scholars talking about administrative divorces. The distinct voice in this piece advocates for administrative divorce as a procedural decoupling of divorce from any underlying or attendant economic and custody issues. The piece motivates this argument based on the premise that allowing families to proceed thusly will enhance the self-determination of families in transition and promote use of the courts when, and only when, the families determine that court involvement in matters of children and economics will improve their stability.

Fifty Ways to Leave Your Lover: Doing Away with Separation Requirements for Divorce

Reflecting back a decade later, what is the enduring significance of the Trayvon Martin case—a Black teenager whose life is violently cut short, and a legal system that accepted his death without consequence? The poet Elizabeth Alexander speaks of “The Trayvon Generation” of Black youth who have grown up in the haunting shadow of his killing, and the anguished parents who cannot protect their children from such a fate. America’s first Black president spoke for them: “When I think about this boy, I think about my own kids. If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon,” Barack Obama told the nation. 

In its historical context, Martin’s fate fits squarely in the American tradition of legalized White vigilantism, embraced by a generous definition of self-defense in such cases, and most recently by Stand Your Ground laws greenlighting a “shoot first and ask questions later” response to a perceived (but not necessarily actual) threat. 

Neighborhood crime watch captain George Zimmerman identified the 158-pound dark-skinned high school junior leaving a convenience store with snacks as an intruder in his gated community. The ensuing confrontation ended when Zimmerman shot a single bullet in Trayvon’s heart from his semi-automatic handgun. As implausible as Zimmerman’s self-defense story was, it resonated with the all-White female jurors, who acquitted him of all charges—a verdict that can only be understood against the backdrop of the implicit bias, unconscious stereotyping, and deference to White-on-Black violence that insidiously infects our society.

The Legacy of Trayvon Martin—Neighborhood Watches, Vigilantes, Race, and Our Law of Self-Defense

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to rage on in much of the world, severely affecting the health of millions. But citizens of high-income nations have accepted the pandemic to be over. The key to ending the pandemic globally across all nations is equal and efficient access to necessary COVID-19 therapeutics, including vaccines. This Article argues that least developed nations and their access to COVID-19 therapeutics, including vaccines, is negatively impacted by the TRIPS Agreement. International human rights law and the TRIPS Agreement remain incompatible, leading to disproportionate access of necessary therapeutics as systemic racism is perpetuated. Along with considering short term solutions, this Article urges that the TRIPS Agreement needs to be overhauled.

Welcome to LIRA@BC Law!

Featured Collections

The Alledger

Boston College Law Review

Boston College Law School Faculty Papers

Boston College Law School Lectures and Presentations

Recent Additions

Identifying Modifiable Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects: A Machine Learning Approach

Integrating the Perspectives of Alumni Practitioners into the Oral Report Module to Provide an Opportunity for Professional Identity Formation Early i...

Fifty Ways to Leave Your Lover: Doing Away with Separation Requirements for Divorce

The Legacy of Trayvon Martin—Neighborhood Watches, Vigilantes, Race, and Our Law of Self-Defense

A Trip to Inequity: How the TRIPS Agreement Hinders Access to Needed COVID-19 Therapeutics

Front Matter

Welcome to LIRA@BC Law!

Featured Collections

.repo-96qggn{color:inherit;text-align:left;font-weight:500;line-height:2.3rem;font-size:1.8rem;overflow-wrap:break-word;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-line-clamp:4;overflow:hidden;hyphens:auto;}.repo-96qggn:hover{color:inherit;}The Alledger

Recent Additions

The Alledger