To Seek Refuge in Texas

In law school casebooks, every point has its counterpoint. One judicial opinion establishes a particular doctrine. The next case rests on a diametrically opposed rule.

The lesson: every rule is open to interpretation, limitations, exceptions, and points of distinction. Lawyers are trained to find the counterargument. There is always space to advocate for the other side. Or so we are taught.

This Spring I spent a week offering pro bono legal help to asylum-seekers near the Mexican border. And I can only reach one conclusion: Trump’s attempt to extinguish the right to asylum is indefensible. There can be no legal, moral, or practical argument to support it.

Keeping that view (and my audience of fellow law students) in mind, I shared reflections on my trip on Harvard’s blog. You can read it here.