NYU Law Interactive currently offers three online courses, which were prepared by leading members of the Law School faculty. Vice Dean Stephen Gillers (’68) and Associate Deans Barry Adler and Brookes Billman (LL.M. ’75) each authored a course: Introduction to Conflicts of Interest; Issues in Bankruptcy Reorganization; and Introduction to Qualified Retirement Plans, respectively. The conflicts of interest and reorganization courses each take about an hour-and-a-half to two hours to complete, while the course on qualified retirement plans (which offers more CLE credits) takes about three hours to complete.

Attorneys who complete each course are eligible for two or three CLE credits (depending on the course) in jurisdictions that allow CLE credits to be earned online. The ability to fulfill CLE requirements online is very appealing to many alumni. Jacqueline Tepper ’90 noted, “For those of us who don’t live or work in New York anymore but are maintaining our status as members of the New York bar, it’s particularly helpful to have this resource online.”

The genesis for the project arose from an exploration of the potential of online education begun during John Sexton’s time as dean and has continued with the enthusiastic support of Dean Richard Revesz. Three online “mini-courses” were developed as a pilot to determine whether there was a role for online learning at the Law School. The three faculty authors, along with a steering committee that included Billman, members of the administration, and two members of the Law School’s board of trustees, Paul Francis ’80 and R. May Lee ’90, worked with the leading instructional design firm Cognitive Arts to develop courses that would be both engaging and academically challenging.

NYU Law Interactive’s rigorous academic content, original format, and interactive design sets it apart from other online legal education and CLE courses, which primarily consist of video stream lectures. NYU Law Interactive sought to make its courses practical, convenient, flexible, and easy to use. Tepper, who completed Introduction to Conflicts of Interest, noted, “The course is as interactive as you want it to be…and is different from CLE seminars where you are lectured to for hours on end. The online course is more interesting, and I’d like to see more offerings.”

The most distinguishing characteristics of the online courses are their interactive nature and their “learning by doing” approach. For Introduction to Qualified Retirement Plans participants play the role of a law firm associate providing advice to a client on a retirement plan by reviewing the client’s draft plan proposal and answering questions about that plan. The legal principles are taught in the context of these assignments, with tutorial feedback provided throughout the course.

For this program, participants are expected to review provisions of a draft retirement plan, identify key legal principles involved in employee benefits law, and evaluate their impact on the client’s business objectives. Participants answer questions posed by both the partner and client, and submit a memo evaluating the draft plan and offering recommendations to the client. In each course, the faculty author provides an introduction to the course by a downloaded audio recording.

Each course presents scenarios in which the participant receives background information about the case and the client and then is asked to answer a series of questions. The questions are arranged in a multiple-choice format, and participants are sometimes prompted to select the reasoning behind each answer choice. For every incorrect answer chosen, the program provides detailed feedback as to why an answer is wrong and presents other issues that the participant should consider. Additional links to questions and answers related to a given inquiry are often provided. The program also provides participants quick access to a plethora of resources like relevant statutes, key cases, and analysis from the faculty authors.

Online participants have been surprised by how comprehensive each course is and the high-level content provided. “The text-based interaction emulates the Socratic method nicely,” said Mary Silver ’92 (above), director of part-time programs and professional skills training at NYU School of Law.

NYU Law Interactive’s three initial courses were designed to be suitable for the CLE market. The Law School has now begun to explore whether it could utilize online education as part of LL.M. and other graduate programs at the Law School. Online learning has proven to be especially appealing to working professionals in many fields, especially those barred by distance from attending traditional classes or who prefer to learn in a self-paced environment. As Gillers remarked, “Interactive media is an ideal way for busy lawyers to keep up with changes in the law and satisfy CLE requirements. The technology allows for guided complexity where even sophisticated concepts can be treated with respect.” It is not expected that online courses will be offered for credit in the J.D. program, although online “learning modules” might be used at some point to supplement classroom work.

Gomez-Velez (above right), who serves as special counsel to Chief Administrative Judge Jonathan Lippman ’68 of the New York State Unified Court System, aptly summed up the spirit of an evening that was defined by the graciousness of its honored guests. Her ties to the Law School are strong — she served as an attorney with the Brennan Center for Justice and taught in the Lawyering Program — and also very personal. Gomez-Velez met her husband, Roberto Velez ’89, in their first-year Civil Procedure class.

Dean Richard Revesz opened this year’s dinner by thanking BLAPA for its contributions to the Law School community. The dean reflected on the Law School’s continued commitment to support students in public service endeavors, detailing the efforts that have been made to sustain the Loan Repayment Assistance Program and to revamp the Public Interest Law Center.

Each year, BLAPA’s alumni honorees are chosen based on their work and contributions to the minority and legal communities. Martha Stark ’86 (above left), commissioner of the New York City Department of Finance, was the first award recipient. Stark has an impressive career in government, especially on the local level. She has written extensively on the New York City property tax and is co-author of an influential Law School study on the high cost of building and renovating housing in the city. Calling herself “Martha the Tax Collector,” Stark said that her father started her on the path to becoming a lawyer and finance commissioner by teaching her how to prepare tax returns as a young teenager.

In reflecting on her upbringing in the projects of Brownsville, Stark expressed her sincere gratitude to BLAPA. “I know where I came from and the role of the Law School in making my attendance here possible,” she said.

The second honoree, Donna Lee ’91 (above center), is a professor in Brooklyn Law School’s Federal Litigation Clinic and formerly taught in the Lawyering Program at NYU School of Law. As a student, she was co-chair of the Asian Pacific American Law Students Association (APALSA) and received the Vanderbilt Medal for her contributions to the Law School community.

Lee took a moment to express what makes BLAPA special. “We don’t just network and share opportunities and information, we socialize together and have fun together,” she said, adding that the award “really belongs to all of you.”

Following the alumni presentation, three students were named to the eighth class of BLAPA Public Service Scholarship recipients. BLAPA Treasurer Patrick Michel (’96) described the scholarships as a way of honoring and assisting students who have made a commitment to public service and continue to do so.

Benita Jain ’03, co-chair of South Asian Law Students Association (SALSA) and a member of the Coalition for Legal Recruiting, was the first recipient. This year, Jain was awarded a Soros Justice Fellowship to provide legal services to immigrant communities after graduation. She expressed special thanks to SALSA and the other minority law student associations for being instrumental in helping students of color.

Hector Linares ’03, an active member of the Latino Law Students Association (LaLSA) executive board, received a scholarship for his public interest contributions, which include his work for the Community Outreach and Education Clinic and his role as a translator for the Immigrant Rights Clinic. He thanked the Law School for providing “safe havens” for public-interest-minded students and students of color. Linares also thanked BLAPA for “recognizing that we still have a long way to go.”

“The gains we have made are not secure,” he said. “Every day people are working to take away what we have achieved.”

Patricia Abreu ’03, who also was awarded a scholarship, has been involved with the Community Outreach and Education Organizing Clinic, the Door’s Legal Services Center, and the Family Defense Clinic in Brooklyn Family Court. After graduation, she plans to return to Brooklyn Family Court as a law guardian. Abreu shared her hope that “in the future, the administration, current students, and alumni can work together to increase diversity at NYU for the benefit of our Law School, the legal community at large, and the clients that we serve.”

The honorees and the scholarship recipients were a source of inspiration for alumna Deanna Grace Logan (’95). “It’s important for me to come back and see who is following in our footsteps because the scholarship was a huge help for me,” said Logan, who was part of the first class to receive BLAPA scholarships. “I try, even being in public service, to make sure that I give back so that others can benefit.”

Other guests at the dinner shared her enthusiasm for BLAPA, the annual dinner, and everything they represent. BLAPA Vice President Michelle Meertens (’97) said that she was struck by the energy in the room and the sense of warmth and family between the alumni and current students. BLAPA class representative Leander Gray (’97) commented that because law is one of the least integrated professions in the country, the annual BLAPA dinner is especially invigorating.

“While the history of Black, Latino, Asian Pacific, and other underrepresented minorities at the Law School is, unfortunately, a short one, it is becoming more enriched every day by the accomplishments of the students and alumni who form the BLAPA family,” said Gray. “Participating in honoring some of them each year is gratifying, as well as inspirational.”

In a passionate expression of his life’s work, Neuborne, the John Norton Pomeroy Professor of Law, detailed ways in which some of our country’s weaknesses can be strengthened. One symptom of our democratic decline is low voter turnout, he suggested. Noting that less than half of all eligible voters in the United States actually vote, Neuborne warned, “The democratic process cannot sustain itself if it cannot get the majority of the people to participate.” Neuborne made a strong case for improving turnout by moving election day to a weekend or a national holiday, like Veterans Day, and by allowing for same-day registration.

Another symptom of democratic decline, Neuborne said, is the difficulty candidates face in gaining access to the ballot and raising the money needed to mount a viable campaign. The United States is ruled by “super-citizens,” wealthy individuals and corporations capable of influencing legislation with campaign contributions, he said.

The third symptom of decline is political gerrymandering. The way in which Congress and the states have created legislative districts “sets the winner before the election,” Neuborne said. Noting a 98 percent reelection rate in the U.S. House of Representatives, Neuborne argued that the system is so rigged in favor of incumbency that seats become nearly impossible to lose. These symptoms of democratic decline keep Neuborne striving for reform and he vowed to continue fighting to improve America’s democratic health.

Speaking to an audience of distinguished Law School alumni spanning seven decades, Neuborne was graciously introduced by Dean Richard Revesz. The dean, who said he would like to clone Neuborne, described Neuborne as an exemplar of the kind of quality educators NYU School of Law has been able to attract. Neuborne recalled his service on the personnel committee that brought Revesz to the Law School, and shared the faculty’s pride in the dean’s rapid rise to national prominence. In attendance at the luncheon were two stalwarts, Rebecca Rolland (’23) and Herbert Hirschhorn (’32, J.S.D. ’34), as well as younger graduates, including recently elected New York State Assemblyman Jonathan Bing (’95).

The lecture was well received by attendees, and several alumni asked the professor questions after his formal remarks concluded. “This keeps me connected to NYU,” said Mansur Nuruddin (’00), an associate at Cravath, Swaine & Moore. “I really enjoyed the lecture. It was extremely interesting. And, it’s great to see early graduates who are still participating in the life of the Law School.”

Neuborne, a recipient of the University’s Distinguished Teaching Award who served as national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, works on issues concerning access to justice, fair courts, voting rights, and criminal justice reform as legal director of the Law School’s Brennan Center for Justice. He also is co-counsel to Senators John McCain and Russell Feingold in their defense of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Finance Act. Described by Stuart Eizenstat, the leader on Holocaust-era issues as special representative of the president and secretary of state during the Clinton administration and currently a partner at Covington & Burling, as “the indispensable person” in both the Swiss and German Holocaust litigation, Neuborne serves as court-appointed lead settlement counsel in the litigation surrounding the involvement of Swiss banks in the Holocaust. He also is one of two U.S. appointees on the board of trustees of the $5.2 billion German Foundation “Remembrance, Responsibility, and the Future,” designed to provide compensation to Holocaust victims.

Barry Scheck of Cardozo School of Law (second from right), a renowned defense attorney whose clients include Louise Woodward and O.J. Simpson, spoke about the Innocence Project, the organization he co-founded in 1992. The project focuses on exonerating prisoners with DNA test results. Scheck said that the FBI has found that in cases in which DNA evidence is made available, the main suspect is excluded 26 percent of the time. In state and local labs, the percentage is even higher—the main suspect is excluded about one-third of the time.

“If you translate this error rate into merely one-half of one percent, thousands of people will be exonerated,” Scheck said.

Peter Neufeld ’75 (far right), also of Cardozo School of Law, co-founded the Innocence Project with Scheck. “What’s special about Innocence is that it allows all of the important players—attorneys, judges, law enforcement—to go back and figure out what went wrong and install systemic reform to ensure this kind of wrong does not happen again,” he said.

Acting Justice Patricia Anne Williams (second from left), of the Supreme Court in Bronx County since 1989, said that justice is served through scientific discovery in a limited number of cases. Williams said that one of the primary reasons that innocent people end up in jail is because of mandatory sentences that give the innocent incentive to plead guilty and avoid a life sentence. She also pointed out that public defense attorneys in New York have not received a raise for more than 16 years, and blamed the media for being a major part of the problem.

“Maybe we have to make the media more responsive to a justice system, rather than selling papers,” she said. “The media is many times the worst enemy.”

Introducing yet another dimension to this issue, Zachary Carter ’75 (far left), formerly U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York and U.S. magistrate judge, who is now a litigation partner at the law firm of Dorsey and Whitney and co-chair of the firm’s white-collar crime group, blamed the jury system.

“One of the problems we face is an unreasonable confidence in the so-called miracle of the jury system,” he said. According to Carter, a Law School trustee, our country’s fervent belief in the jury system has caused us to overlook some blatant flaws, including the fact that so many people are wrongly convicted. He said that judges must stop confusing neutrality with passivity, because it is their responsibility to ensure that the process of trying a defendant is actually a quest for the truth.

Scheck closed the evening by summing up a sentiment shared by all the lecture panelists, and perhaps by the auditorium full of attendees as well: “It really is time to step up to the plate and do something about this problem of the wrongly convicted.”

The question of what, precisely, must be done was left open, but ample evidence, scientific and otherwise, was offered to prove that finding an answer is crucial.