Interview: Frank Murray MPA ’13

Frank Murray MPA ’13 is a dual-degree student who earned his JD from Boston College in 2012 and is completing his studies in USP at Columbia SIPA this year. He recently published an article in Notre Dame Law School’s Journal of College and University Law, one that he began writing during his time at law school and finished while at SIPA.

Writing about the controversy surrounding the Belfast Project, a scholarly effort begun at BC in 2001 to chronicle the violent conflicts in Northern Ireland commonly called “The Troubles,” Murray surveyed the legal landscape of academic privilege regarding First Amendment rights. In the Belfast Project case, interviewees had been promised confidentiality until death — until British authorities requested that the U.S. Department of Justice subpoena certain recordings from the project. Murray spoke with Doyeun Kim MIA ’14 of SIPA News about the article, SIPA vs. law school, and more.

What is the article about?

The article argues for a constitutionally rooted privilege to protect academia from subpoenas and other government investigations. It analyzes this issue through a legal battle that Boston College recently fought to protect an oral history archive from a subpoena issued by the United States Attorney's Office, Department of Justice, on behalf of the United Kingdom. The [Belfast Project’s] oral history archive included many interviews given by IRA [Irish Republican Army] members under condition of anonymity. Boston College argued that the interviews should be privileged due to First Amendment concerns regarding the free exchange of ideas and information as well as academic freedom, but ultimately failed to protect the entire archive from subpoena.

My piece looks at the history of this privilege, or lack thereof, in American law. It also contrasts the American approach with that of other nations and international bodies, namely the European Court of Human Rights. That court, as it turns out, has taken a markedly different approach, casting a strong foundation for a researcher privilege in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights — their version of our First Amendment.

Ultimately the article concludes that the preferred solution to this problem is the recognition by the Supreme Court of the United States of a qualified-privilege rooted in the First Amendment. The social value at stake, especially in late modern society where “truth” is constantly manipulated by free enterprise, justifies a major recalculation in the law. I also present a legal path the Supreme Court could take if it decides to revisit the issue.

How did the opportunity to write a law review article come about?

I accepted an invitation to write on Boston College Law School's International and Comparative Law Review in the summer of 2011 after my first year in law school. Part of the experience of writing on a law journal involves producing a “Law Review Note,” which in essence is a scholarly contribution focused on a narrow area of the law. When it came time to select my topic, this case and the controversy surrounding it caught my attention. A decision in the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts had just been issued, and CNN was putting together a special report on the controversy. I always enjoyed First Amendment jurisprudence, and the fact that it involved my university at the time was an added bonus. I'm also of Irish descent! The piece was a bit of a moving target as multiple appeals necessitated several updates. I finished it toward the end of my first year at SIPA.

Does this tie into what you’re studying at SIPA?

It actually does. During my time at SIPA, particularly in the IMAC [International Media, Advocacy and Communications] program, I was exposed to various topics regarding new media and recent events in the Middle East that highlight the importance of the free flow of information, the unfettered exchange of ideas, and “ascertainable truth.” I would also add that the general exposure you get at SIPA to people from other countries was helpful. I went back to the article after speaking to some of my classmates, did more research, and strengthened the piece to go beyond the Euro-American contrast I had originally relied upon. It turns out that there’s a fairly long — and surprising — list of nations with stronger protections than those offered by American law. SIPA encouraged me to broaden my perspective in a piece that was already internationally focused.

What was it like to go from two years of law school to SIPA?

(Laughs) It was a bit of a culture shock. SIPA is an incredible educational experience, because of the opportunity to meet people from everywhere and trade ideas. In law school it’s more homogenous, whereas SIPA couldn’t be more diverse. It was a good way to round off my formal education.

With a law degree in hand and an MPA on the way, what are your goals for the future?

I feel very fortunate to have had the opportunity to study the law and public policy. Both fields are intimately related and dependent on one another, so much so that to be truly effective in one area often requires mastery of the other. I've recently accepted an offer to clerk in the United States District Court, Middle District of Florida. I would like to one day serve my country as an assistant U.S. attorney. Further down the road, I'd also love to have the opportunity to work in some policymaking/governmental function to fight for a more progressive future for the United States. I am particularly sensitive to social and distributive injustice in America, and studying social policy and political philosophy at Boston College and Columbia has heightened this sensitivity.

link to full article (may require login):
"Boston College's Defense of the Belfast Project: A Renewed Call for a Researcher's Privilege to Protect Academia"

— Doyeun Kim MIA ’14