Durva Trivedi ’17, Boston University School of Law

Durva-TrivediBefore starting my Princeternship with Professor James Fleming *88 at Boston University School of Law, I was a little nervous about having to confess how incredibly undecided I am in terms of academic concentration and career ambition. I have interests in many different fields, law being one of them, and am still exploring my options. Despite my initial nervousness though, with Professor Fleming, I was very pleasantly surprised by how accommodating he was of my career confusion. The Princeternship both reassured me in that respect and gave me a sense of what the life of a lawyer and law professor is really like. I can honestly say that after spending a couple of days with him, I am one step closer to deciding what subjects I hope to study further.

Even though two days is not much time, we had two very busy days. I realized that while Professor Fleming is undoubtedly an esteemed academic scholar, his work is not at all passive. Instead, he is deeply engaged in his writing, teaching and administrating roles. On the first day, he explained his job description to us and how he came to be in the position he is now in. We met many of his colleagues, who talked about the specific fields of law in which they have interests and specific expertise. We attended the class he taught on Constitutional Law and met some of his students. We also sat in on meetings that Professor Fleming had with his students as well as with Dean Maureen Rourke, the dean of the law school. It was interesting to see how involved Professor Fleming was with the details of all his projects, whether it was an upcoming academic conference, the notes his students draft for law review journals or the lectures topics for his Constitutional Law class.

The second day was a little different Trivedi 2but no less busy. We again met with colleagues of Professor Fleming’s to get an idea of what certain specific fields of law are like, attended the class he taught on Constitutional Theory, and sat in on meetings he had with students. In addition, we attended a faculty workshop where one professor presented academic writing and all the other professors offered critique and suggestions for improvement. In the evening, we had dinner with Professor Fleming and his family who very graciously welcomed us into their home.

After our busy two days together, I realized my preconceived notions of detached and passive scholarship were misconceptions and it became evident to me that the world of academia is very hands-on in its own unique way. Although law professors aren’t in the courts litigating, their day-to-day activities are very active and engaged.

While I’m still unsure about whether or not I definitely want to be a lawyer or law professor, I have most definitely gained a new-found respect for law and the work of law professors. Since returning from the Princeternship with Professor Fleming, I’ve shifted my schedule around a bit so that my Princeton coursework can include classes about Constitutional Interpretation and Civil Liberties. I’m now interested in internships and summer opportunities where I can learn more about law and I have even begun researching law schools. I am definitely glad I chose to apply for and complete this Princeternship because it surprised me in some really great ways and helped me to confirm my budding interest in law and politics.


Joshua Roberts ’17, Boston University School of Law

Josh-RobertsDay 1

During my two day Princernship with Professor James Fleming *88, I learned more about law school, legal careers, and academia than I ever thought possible. Our first day started at 9 a.m. in Professor Fleming’s office. Professor Fleming took the time to get to know my fellow Princeterns and me, and we got to know Professor Fleming as well. He told us about his path to becoming a law school professor, which included getting a PhD at Princeton and a JD at Harvard. Although I did not think I was interested in a life in academia before this Princeternship, after talking to Professor Fleming about his academic journey, I realized that it may be something I am interested in pursuing. We also discussed the different types of career possibilities in the field of law, from practicing corporate law to studying constitutional theory.

Next, we sat in on a meeting between the BU School of Law Dean Maureen O’Rourke and Professor Fleming, and we got to see some of the administrative, behind-the-scenes work that is necessary to make a law school run smoothly for all of its students. In addition, we attended Professor Fleming’s Constitutional Law course. He lectured on several monumental court cases in our country’s history, including Bush v. Gore, which was exciting because for me it took place in my home state of Florida.

Day 2

For as much as I learned on theRoberts 1 first day of my Princeternship, I learned even more on the second, which started off similar to the first, meeting in Professor Fleming’s office at 9 a.m. We had meetings with several other professors at BU School of Law, which Professor Fleming set up according to our specific interests. I am interested in International Law and Constitutional Law, and Professor Fleming set up meetings with Professor Rob Sloane and Professor Pnina Lahav, who are experts in those fields. Professor Fleming also met with several of his current students to discuss papers they were writing. It was incredible to see how much time Professor Fleming devoted to guiding his students and how much he genuinely loves teaching. All around his room were tokens of appreciation given to him by his students, and it was clear how much his students like and respect him.

Later in the day, we attended a faculty workshop with Professor Fleming, in which another professor presented an upcoming paper and received feedback from the rest of the staff. It was apparent that the staff had great working relationships with each other, and it was fascinating to see the different professors bounce ideas off of each other about the best way to improve an argument. We also attended another one of Professor Fleming’s courses, Constitutional Theory, and a captivating lecture on the legality of the use of drone warfare under international law.

Finally, after a fun and informative day at the office, Professor Fleming and his wife, Professor Linda McClain, graciously invited us into their home for dinner. The meal consisted of both great food and great conversation, and it was an incredible way to cap off my Princeternship experience.

After reflecting on my Princeternship, I realize how invaluable the experience truly was. Coming in, I did not have a sense of what it would be like to attend law school or what it would be like to become a professor. After spending two days shadowing Professor Fleming, I now have a much better sense of what both law school and becoming a professor would be like. Although I do not yet have to decide which path I will take after graduating from college, when the time comes, I will be able to make a much more informed decision.

Colin Lualdi ’17, Boston University Law School

Colin-LualdiDriving into Boston on I-90 on the morning of Wednesday, January 29th, I spotted the familiar Boston skyline that I had missed so much over the fall semester; it was wonderful to be back in the Boston that I knew and loved. However, this was no ordinary visit to the Hub.

Instead, I was fortunate to have the opportunity to participate in a Princeternship with Professor James Fleming *88 at the Boston University Law School. Ever since I took U.S. Government in high school I knew I had an interest in Law and Government (in addition to Economics, Computer Science, and Physics!), but I did not have the opportunity to explore these disciplines at Princeton yet, and was curious about what law school might have to offer. Luckily, this Princeternship presented itself as the perfect opportunity to discover a few answers to my questions.

Entering Professor’s Fleming’s officeLualdi 2 at 9:00 am sharp, I was immediately greeted by him and my two fellow Princeterns, Josh Roberts and Durva Trivedi. We began with introductions, and Professor Fleming told us a little about his background. He graduated with a B.A. in Political Science from the University of Missouri, and received his Ph.D. in Politics from Princeton, and his J.D. from Harvard. After working for a couple of years as a corporate lawyer, he became a law professor at Fordham University, and joined the B.U. Law School in 2007. His specialties are Constitutional Law and Theory.

He is currently the Associate Dean of Intellectual Life at the Law School, which means he is responsible for fostering the intellectual community at the school. To accomplish this, he organizes a number of events, among other projects, which bring law professors from within the University and from other institutions together to discuss trending legal issues.

Interestingly, one of the first things that I noticed about his office, aside from his gigantic bookshelf, was how purple it was; a deep, merry purple. There was a purple stool, purple mugs and purple pens. Purple shirts were on hangers and behind his door he even had a rack of purple ties. The professor himself was wearing a purple sweater. It turns out that purple is his favorite color, and every year a few students give him new purple items to add to his collection! I wonder what color I would choose if I become a professor, hmm.

Later that morning, we joined Professor Fleming for one of his periodic meetings with the dean of the law school, Maureen O’Rourke. Professor Fleming shared some ideas for the upcoming conference on the Constitutional War Powers that he is organizing, and then we all chatted with Dean O’Rourke about law school in general as well as our own personal college experiences.

Afterwards, we met with Professor Naomi Mann, who teaches in the disability clinic, and had a very interesting conversation about her experiences in disability law, with a focus on disability education laws. I thought I might be interested in disability law and advocacy, being Deaf myself, and was quite thrilled that Professor Fleming was able to introduce me to Professor Mann.

After Professor Mann bid us farewell, one of Professor Fleming’s students, Chris Mercurio, stopped by for a meeting to discuss a paper topic for a seminar in the Constitutional Theory class that Professor Fleming teaches. Initially, I was slightly frightened by the scope of Mercurio’s paper, but then I really enjoyed watching how the professor and the student played around with various ideas and suggestions. The opportunity to have such an in-depth one-on-one discussion between a professor and a student is truly special.

Lualdi 4In the afternoon, we all enjoyed a good discussion about studying law and Professor Fleming shared a lot of advice from his own student experiences and from what he has learned as a law professor. We then headed to his Constitutional Law class where the discussion focused on the concept of the right to vote and how it relates to the Constitution (fun fact: the right to vote is not explicitly stated in the Constitution!). Professor Fleming brought up three significant cases regarding voting rights: Reynolds v. Sims (one person one vote), Harper v. Virginia (invalidating a poll tax – we branched off a bit to discuss the current controversy regarding voter-ID laws), and Bush v. Gore. I especially enjoyed learning about the latter as I never fully realized the constitutional controversy that surrounded that election; I had previously thought that most of the issues stemmed from voting equipment malfunctions in Florida.

We then called it a day, and headed home.

The next day we met in Professor Fleming’s office again, and talked a bit about future prospects for law students and pursuing a career in law. There are actually many diverse career opportunities within the field of law: one can practice many different kinds of law, teach law, or branch off into something else!

We then had pleasant meetings with a few additional law professors on the faculty. Professor Mike Harper spoke to us about employment discrimination law in general, and then, responding to my request, touched on disability employment discrimination laws. Professor Daniela Caruso, another expert in disability law, shared her experiences working to ensure appropriate education for the autistic. Professors Rob Sloane and Pnina Lahav discussed topics in international law, the Constitution, and foreign affairs, which my fellow Princeterns were interested in.

For lunch we attended a very interesting faculty workshop where the entire law school faculty came together to eat and listen to Professor Gary Lawson present an ongoing paper on Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s legal beliefs, “The Rule of Law as a Law of Law (Except When It Is a Law of Diminishing Returns Instead).” After Professor Lawson shared his thoughts on his project, various faculty members made comments and suggestions for refining the paper. It was one of the few times I had the opportunity to observe firsthand an actual discourse between professors, and it was fascinating to see the law experts share their thoughts and debate at such an advanced level.

At the conclusion of the workshop, we headed to another of Professor Fleming’s classes: Constitutional Theory. Unlike the Constitutional Law class on Wednesday which was relatively large, this class numbered about ten students and was more of a seminar than a lecture. For most of the two-hour class, the professor engaged the students with direct questions, which made for a very interesting discourse. The main discussion points were on the renowned law expert James Thayer’s argument regarding courts deferring to the processes of representative democracy along with Ely’s famous beliefs that courts should reinforce the processes of representation, especially in the context of the well-known United States v. Carolene Products case.

Afterwards we attended a short lecture on the legal questions surrounding the use of military drones in Middle Eastern conflicts, and ended the day joining Professor Fleming’s family at his home for a delicious meal. We had an interesting conversation over dinner with Professor Fleming’s wife, Professor Linda McClain (who also teaches at the BU Law School) about feminist legal theory, gender issues, and clashes between religious liberty and antidiscrimination norms. We also spent a fair portion of the dinner trying to convince one of Professor Fleming’s daughters, a junior in high school, to attend Princeton!

I feel very fortunate to have had this opportunity to experience firsthand a view into the vast discipline of law. My conversations with the many law professionals whom I met and my attendance of a couple of law classes granted by the experience of this Princeternship, have confirmed my initial interest in law. While it seems early for me to decide on a specific area of law to study, I have come to realize that law is definitely something that I would like to pursue further as I discovered that it combines my interests in history, government, and policy. I am also very glad to discover that law is a very broad field; I have diverse interests, and I know I will be happiest if my chosen career is in a field that would permit me to incorporate my various interests into my work. The Princeternship Program has given me a wonderful opportunity to further explore an area of interest.  I would strongly encourage all students to consider applying for a Princeternship. It was certainly an invaluable experience for me.


Sarah Jeong ’15, Pace Law School

Sarah-JeongI spent my Princeternship shadowing Elizabeth Corwin ’89, who is the Associate Director of Academic Success at Pace Law School.  A sense of environmental duty pervades Pace Law School’s campus, and I was happily surprised by the intimacy of the community. Although many students and faculty members attend large campus events like the Environmental Law Open House, everyone seemed to know each other, and all the students seemed to be volunteering or working for at least one professor. Pace emphasizes hands-on learning more than my experience with undergraduate studies, and students received class credit for interning with the Environmental Protection Agency and law firms.

I was also surprised by the variety of reasons for which people attend the law school. As one of the students with whom I had lunch said, people attend Pace for three reasons: they are passionate about the environment and see law as a means through which they can create change, they are passionate about law and enjoy the tasks required of a lawyer, or they are unsure of what they want to do and think law would be interesting to try. Most of the students in the environmental law program fit in the first category, and it was exciting to speak with fellow environmentalists and learn that environmental law can be applied to policy, management, and public administration issues.

Several students I interacted with said that the discussions with their peers are among the most valuable aspects of law school. I sat in a comparative environmental law seminar with Professor Harmon and four other students. They were from Brazil, China, Saudi Arabia, and Australia, and all shared a concern for natural resource overuse that they felt their communities back home did not prioritize enough. In a class with students of such interestingly diverse backgrounds, I felt that a valuable part of the course was comparing moral environmental issues from around the world. In this course, I rediscovered how much I enjoyed a Socratic style of teaching, where the desks are arranged in a circle that encourages students to share their opinions.

The most rewarding part of this Jeong 1experience was talking to students, learning what motivated them to choose environmental law as a means through which they hoped to tackle environmental issues, and what they were already doing to enact change. My immediate post-college plans of working for an environmental organization or volunteering abroad have not changed. However, if I feel I need more credibility later in an environmental career, I see law as an ideal way to equip me for a future in environmental policy.

Jacob Donnelly ’17, Novack and Macey LLP

Jacob-DonnellyI had a wonderful time participating in a Princeternship at Novack and Macey LLP, a boutique commercial litigation firm in Chicago, and learned a lot. I was given copies of actual complaints on which their office was working before I arrived and familiarized myself with them so as to be able to discuss them with the staff. (It was made very clear that as an employee of the office for two days, I was under the obligations of attorney-client privilege.) From the get-go, they included me in the operations of their office, whether it was reviewing interrogatories (sets of questions that one party is able to ask the other in a lawsuit), presenting my analysis on the strengths and weaknesses of a recently filed appeals brief from an opposing party, interviewing expert witnesses, attending county and federal court sessions (including the proceedings of a federal jury trial), attending a law school class, or having lunch with the partners and associates and discussing everything from legal history to, of course, Princeton. The firm was so warm and welcoming, always explaining very thoroughly the legal issues that they were confronting despite the demands on their time. I was saddened not to have more time to spend with this fine group of men and women, although I now consider myself to have a wonderful group of friends in Chicago whenever I return to that city.

When I first decided to do a Princeternship, I was unsure whether I was interested in the field of law. Stereotypes die hard, and I pictured lawyers as only minimally creative and mostly as glorified paper-pushers. Novack and Macey showed me that law can be so much more. Associates met with partners and received valuable feedback on challenging concepts while at the same time maintaining the merits of their position, not unlike a precept at Princeton. The partners explained to me countless issues of litigation strategy, which made the law seem like an exciting chess match, complete with issues of foresight, mutual dependency on your opponent, and end-game, as well as ethics, emphasizing the multiple ways in which the integrity of the courts and legal profession depends on the continuing cooperation of the men and women who practice. Perhaps most importantly, the partners and associates all seemed to genuinely enjoy their jobs and seemed excited to come to work every day to tackle new intellectual, strategic, and practical challenges in the process of representing those who had been wronged by one party or another. I arrived in Chicago indifferent to the legal profession and left very excited about its prospects and possibilities.

Overall, this Princeternship was a wonderful experience, and I would highly encourage anyone contemplating one simply to do it. I had never been able to envision myself in any particular career so strongly before I did this Princeternship, and this clarity will be valuable to me as I move forward in the years to come here at Princeton and beyond. I just want to thank everyone at Novack and Macey and Career Services again for making this wonderful experience possible!

Chany Kim ’16, Pace Law School

Chany-KimDuring my spring break, I had the opportunity to participate in a Princeternship with Professor Elizabeth Corwin ’89 of Pace Law School (White Plains, New York). I had chosen to apply for this program because I was thinking about going to law school, but had no idea what a legal education entails. Now, I have a better idea of what law school is and what it means to be a law student.

Monday, 3/17/2014

My day started with a class called “International Human Rights” by Professor McDonnell. The class was somewhat different from the ones at Princeton, because I noticed that the professor was constantly calling on students to answer his questions. It was interesting because the professor asked thought-provoking questions like, “Why did 9/11 happen?” We also looked at the roots of the anti-American sentiment, focusing on the history of persecution and discrimination of certain racial groups. Fortunately, I had the opportunity to participate in small group discussions with the law school students, and their conversations were very engaging.

Later in the day, I went to the admissions office to ask the admissions officer about how to prepare for law school. I had already prepared a list of questions, and I had all of my questions answered!

Tuesday, 3/18/2014

Prior to starting my Princeternship, Elizabeth had asked me if I would like to talk to any representatives from student organizations. So today, I had the opportunity to chat with Eddie, an officer from the Asian American Law Students Association. The conversation lasted an hour, but it could have lasted much longer. The conversation I had with him was extremely helpful because I asked him questions that I would not have been able to ask a counselor or an admissions officer. He gave me very honest answers and gave me invaluable insights about law school.

After the conversation, I attended a class called “Critical Race Theory” by Professors Anderson and Crawford. The class was structured like a precept, as students shared their personal stories and interpretations of the readings. Then, I went on a tour of the law school.

My day ended with a meeting with students who externed at the UN Headquarters in New York. This meeting was especially memorable because I am taking a course called “The Politics of Development” this semester, so I could somewhat relate to what the students and the professors were discussing.

Wednesday, 3/19/2014

I attended a small seminar on international law focusing on the sale of goods. It introduced me to the problem-solving aspect of law, for the students were continuously working with hypothetical cases and trying to come up with the best solutions to contract violations.

My favorite part of the Princeternship was the last session that I attended: an immigration clinic. There, 3L students acted as legal advisers to Haitian immigrants, under the supervision of their law professor. This was the first time that I was able to observe law put to practical use, since I had only attended lectures and discussion groups during my time at Pace.

Overall, I enjoyed this experience, but I liked talking to professors and students more than attending classes. The only regret that I have about this Princeternship that I did not have the opportunity to sit in any 1L classes, but I was able to talk to 1L students about their first year at law school. Now that I’ve participated in this Princeternship, I am going to seriously consider preparing for law school. If you are thinking about law school, this Princeternship is for you.

Warren Crandall ’15, BP America

Warren-CrandallI spent my Princeternship at BP America’s Naperville, IL campus, shadowing two Princeton alumni working as environmental lawyers.  As someone who has long been interested in law, this shadowing opportunity was a chance to see firsthand what an in-house corporate lawyer’s job entailed.  My dad practiced environmental law for many years as a plaintiff’s lawyer often working against big companies so I was keen on experiencing a day in the life of the “other side” of environmental law.  Even more importantly it was an opportunity to examine corporate legal work as a possible future career path.  My Princeternship experience accomplished all of this and more.

When I arrived at BP I was immediately taken in by the size of its campus.  There are five or so buildings spread out around numerous parking lots and a man-made lake.  It’s quite the facility.  The legal team’s building, meanwhile, is a converted production factory so it’s quite large and open with a huge amount of natural lighting (a far cry from the comparatively cramped cubicles I took to be the norm at most law offices).  The atmosphere mirrored the office space in which they worked: open, collegial, and collaborative.

After my tour of the office space I met with Doug Reinhart ’89, a Senior Attorney and the first of my Princeternship hosts.  After brief introductions we got down to business almost immediately.  I sat in on a conference call between a variety of lawyers representing different businesses. They were discussing an old municipal landfill where the owners hadn’t disposed of waste properly.  Now BP was involved in helping fund an environmental investigation of the contaminated land.  The conference call participants were partitioning the costs of the investigation amongst themselves.  It was interesting to hear the perspectives of a variety of lawyers representing vastly different clients – from huge corporations to small mom-and-pop companies – all negotiating at the same table.

After the call I talked with Doug extensively about his chosen career path.  What are the day-to-day operations of a corporate attorney? How does the legal role change when it is operating from within a corporation? What sort of life and career journeys could take one to this position? Doug told me about his post-Princeton experience teaching middle school math – before he went to law school – emphasizing how important he felt it to be to take a break between college and additional post-graduate education.  He said that this time is critical in allowing one to truly decide whether or not they want to continue their education and then appreciate it if they choose to go there.

I spent the latter part of the day with Jessica Gonzalez ’95, my other Princeternship host.  I began my time with Jessica watching her work one-on-one with a paralegal who was researching BP’s contractual history at a former gas station where BP still maintained responsibility for the land’s environmental issues even though it no longer owned the property.  As Jessica and her colleague scoured over numerous contracts, it was fascinating to see how a company deals with risk and liability that arises (and almost never goes away) with regard to sites that have long since left its possession.  We then moved on to a conference call regarding BP’s relationship with a fellow company.  The call taught me much about inter-corporation relationships and what they mean for a company’s lawyers – not only do such relationships involve the law, but they also require an intuitive understanding of the way businesses function and what they value.

At the end of the day I left BP exhausted, enlightened, and, most of all, excited.  I’d witnessed legal life in a business environment and I had gained exposure to the daily practice of corporate law, exposure that is often difficult for undergraduates to explore.  My time at BP showed me the wide breadth of knowledge a corporate lawyer must possess – not only does such a lawyer need to know the ins and outs of the law, but he or she must also have an in-depth grasp of the company’s history and philosophy.  It’s a potent mix of skills and knowledge that I’m very interested in pursuing.  With the help of Jessica, Doug, and the Princeternship program, I can say with confidence that corporate law is an enticing future possibility for me.

Joanna Mieczkowska ’16, U.S. Attorney’s Office Department of Justice

Joanna-MieczkowskaThrough the Princeternship program, I had the unique opportunity to spend a day with Ms. Sabrina Comizzoli ’92 and see the interworking of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey.  This experience expanded my knowledge of law careers in the public sector and also gave me the amazing opportunity to speak with several Assistant U.S. Attorneys.  Throughout the day, I received many points of advice that ultimately reinforced my interest in a law career.

When I arrived at the United States Attorney’s Office, Ms. Sabrina Comizzoli, the Executive Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, greeted me in the waiting area. She gave me a tour of the offices, introduced me to her coworkers and walked me through the agenda for the day. After spending some time speaking with Ms. Comizzoli in her office, I attended four meetings with Assistant U.S. Attorneys that Ms. Comizzoli planned for me.  During the 20 minutes I spent with each attorney, I was able to ask any questions I had and each person I met was very willing to share his/her experiences, current work responsibilities and points of advice. After my four meetings, Ms. Sabrina Comizzoli and I walked to the U.S. Courthouse where we sat in on an initial hearing in a current federal drug case.

For lunch, Ms. Comizzoli and I went to a local pizzeria where we spoke not only about her job but also about family, Princeton and careers.  In the afternoon, I met with four more Assistant U.S. Attorneys.  Just as in the morning, during each personal meeting I was able to ask any questions I had about the law field, their specific divisions and advice for prospective law students.

In general, this experience Joanna M 1has been very rewarding, and I learned more about the legal field than I expected I would in just one day!  I met many talented and successful attorneys, who were all very welcoming and willing to share their experiences and points of advice. One aspect that really stood out for me at the U.S. Attorney’s Office was the welcoming and friendly work environment. Even though the U.S. Attorney’s Office extends over many divisions and several floors, all of the attorneys and staff knew each other and each person I met seemed genuinely happy to be working there.

I would like to especially thank Ms. Comizzoli for this great opportunity because this Princeternship experience would not have been possible without her and the time she dedicated to setting up this eventful day.  I would also like to thank the eight Assistant U.S. Attorneys who took time out of their busy schedules to meet with me throughout the day and answer any questions I had. I recommend anyone who is interested in law to apply for this Princeternship in the future.

Michelle Molner ’16, Johnson & Johnson Janssen Therapeutics, General Counsel

My one-day Princeternship at Janssen Therapeutics with Vice President and Assistant General Counsel Lawyer Lisa Jenkins ‘80 offered me an intriguing insight to the field of health law.

Lisa and I (Cropped)On the day of the Princeternship, I was dropped off at the Janssen Therapeutics office in Titusville, NJ. The medical complex, though large, was not particularly striking in appearance, but it seemed to give off a certain warmth in the piercing January weather. After having casually chatted with several employees at the door and front desk, I proceeded to sit in the lobby and prepare myself for what I anticipated to be a high-pressure, don’t-mess-anything-up encounter with Mrs. Jenkins. Instead, a petite woman with beautiful dark curls and an inviting smile introduced herself to me as “Lisa.” Okay, Lisa it was, then.

The two of us walked down the hall as she pointed out several of her favorite things about the complex, in particular, the cabinets acquired from an old apothecary which lined these halls and were filled with old powders and serums of every kind. They were quirky and intriguing, things like dried elderberry flowers and even opium, and I could see why she lit up just talking about it.

We then grabbed some coffee, to which she sweetly insisted on treating me, and scurried down another hall to our first meeting of the day. A collaborative team of Janssen employees regularly meets for what has been deemed “copy,” in which each piece of promotional material is thoroughly reviewed for accuracy, aesthetics, discrepancies, etc. This was my first taste of a true workday, with not only all of its exciting components but all the mundane ones as well.

Following a long session of copy review, Lisa and I sat down for a long lunch that, in retrospect, was honestly the most influential portion of my day. For two hours, we talked about family and heritage, about our life histories and future life plans, about passions and desires. It was during these two hours that Mrs. Lisa Jenkins uncovered many of the personal details that made up her character, and I returned the favor. I noted with slight surprise how easily everything seemed to just come flowing out. It was at this point in the day that I began to see Lisa not as a professional who I was expected to impress but rather as a friend and personal mentor.

We were finally obligated to tear ourselves away from the captivating conversation and head back to the office for a 2:30 pm consultation with one of Janssen Therapeutics’ Medical Science Liaisons, who had come to Lisa for legal advice on how to go about discussing a certain drug with interested physicians. Despite the confidential nature of this consultation, the Medical Science Liaison and Lisa both seemed very eager for me to sit in on the discussion. The consultation was followed by another sensitive conversation between Lisa and one of Janssen’s other lawyers regarding the legal boundaries of use of one of Janssen Therapeutics’ products. Again, both were excited for me to listen in. It was quite reassuring to see such eagerness from all the Janssen Therapeutics employees to offer me any learning opportunity they could. Toward the end of the day, a man on the Janssen marketing team whom I had met earlier that day even stopped by specifically with the purpose of inviting me to sit in on a meeting with several other agents the next day.

By somewhere around 4:00 pm, Lisa and I began wrapping up the day, making our final lap around the office so that I could meet as many Janssen employees and see the industry from as many different perspectives as possible. As Lisa and I slowly made our way down the hall toward the exit, out the door, and across the parking lot to her vehicle (earlier, she had insisted on driving me back to campus), I expressed just how grateful I was for this experience and for her benevolence and generosity. She responded humbly that it was no problem at all and that this would not be our last correspondence; she invited me to a meeting sometime in the spring which all of the Janssen Therapeutics lawyers would attend to discuss the company’s legal matters. As a prospective law student, this invitation seemed like an incredible opportunity to see the industry from a more intense legal perspective and to interact with some of the greatest minds in health law. Attempting (and probably failing) to suppress the huge stupid grin on my face, I graciously accepted the invitation.

While I was fairly confident in my volition to attend law school following undergraduate studies and eventually work in the legal field, this Princeternship has solidified my desire to pursue health law in particular over other fields like international law or corporate law. I find the field not only interesting and exciting but also quite rewarding, and look forward to further exploring this as an open door in my future. Thanks to this Princeternship, I now see the industry of health law as a truly viable career option for my future.

I would like to thank Mrs. Lisa Jenkins for offering this valuable learning experience, as well as each of the Janssen Therapeutics employees who took time out of their busy schedules to make sure my Princeternship was an enlightening and encouraging experience I may use to move forward in finding a career path about which I am truly passionate. Thank you to all, and I hope we come across each other’s paths in the future.


Katrina Bushko ’14, Maryland Disability Law Center

Katrina-BushkoFor three days at the end of January 2014, I had the pleasure of shadowing Ms. Leslie Seid Margolis ’82 at the Maryland Disability Law Center in Baltimore, Maryland. Ms. Margolis is a Managing Attorney at the MDLC, which is a nonprofit legal services and advocacy organization for persons with disabilities.

Day 1

I had an early start on the first day of my Princeternship. I arrived at MDLC before 9 AM and was able to ask Ms. Margolis about her job. After answering my questions and giving me a brief tour of the office, Ms. Margolis and I met with a school nurse who is passionate about disability services and has trained teachers and school staff about Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. Although this meeting was really about what she and Ms. Margolis were to discuss at a future conference, it was a great introduction to disability policy. I learned that a 504 Plan is used to ensure that students with disabilities have the same education opportunities as their non-disabled peers, and that the Maryland State Department of Education has recently released a fact sheet on school suspensions, which clarifies a policy for these students.

After this enlightening meeting, Ms. Margolis and I drove to a Baltimore County elementary school to attend an Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) meeting for a student with ADHD. If a student requires specialized instruction because of his or her disability, the school is obligated to develop a program that will cater to the student’s needs, at the parents’ request. This meeting included the student’s mother, the IEP team chair (in this case, the vice principal), the school counselor, the student’s special and general education teachers, his case manager, and a representative from the county Office of Special Education. The team first worked together to reassess the student’s disability, then they reviewed his IEP to better address his specific educational areas of need. It was really inspiring to see so many people collaborating to provide a quality education for this student.

Day 2

The next day, I got to shadow two MDLC paralegals, Mr. John Wheeler and Ms. Tacha Marshall, who are intake specialists. Their jobs consist of responding to the calls and emails of potential clients: this could be either referring them to other organizations or private attorneys to better suit their needs, or giving their case to a MDLC attorney. Mr. Wheeler does general intake, which is short and sweet, while Ms. Marshall does educational intake that takes a much longer time. I was able to listen in on a call from a parent of a child with a disability and got to see just how complex and important the intake process is.

Afterwards, I briefly got to meet Tatyana McFadden, a Paralympic star whom MDLC represented while she was in high school. Not only is Ms. McFadden a decorated athlete, but she is also an incredible advocate for disability rights. By pursuing a lawsuit against the state of Maryland in regards to access to school athletics for persons with disabilities, Ms. McFadden was able to initiate the Fitness and Athletics Equity for Students with Disabilities Act, which was passed by the Maryland State Legislature in 2008.

In the afternoon, Ms. Margolis and I drove to the Maryland State Department of Education in downtown Baltimore to attend a State Board of Education meeting. There, one of Assistant Superintendent for Special Education and Early intervention Services for MSDE gave a presentation on the education services for children with disabilities in the state of Maryland. I learned so much about disability educational services that my state offers, including the fact that Maryland is one of the leading states in disabled rights.

Day 3

My last day at MDLC was quite eventful. We attended a meeting with a consultant for V-LINC. Ms. Margolis is a board member of V-LINC, which is an organization that strives to improve the independence and quality of life for Marylanders with disabilities through technological assistance.

Next, we went to another IEP Bushko 1meeting at a middle school in Baltimore County. This student was a more difficult case, as he has a TBI and misses a lot of school because of it. In addition to the usual team members, the student’s neurologist and occupational therapist were on a conference call and were able to contribute to the discussion of how best to help this student. My favorite part of the entire Princeternship experience was getting to meet this student. I enjoyed sitting in on the IEP meeting, but it was really inspiring to meet the boy whom everyone loved so much. Being able to put a face to a name was very powerful, and I instantly understood why Ms. Margolis loves to represent children with disabilities.

Back at the office, I closed out my Princeternship by talking to a Senior Attorney, Mr. Bob Berlow. Although he primarily works with Ms. Margolis on education issues, it was fascinating to hear about his other work with the Maryland TBI Advisory Board and outreach to military families. I feel like this was an especially important discussion for me because it gave me a better understanding of the vast array of services that MDLC provides.

I would like to thank the Princeternship Program, Ms. Margolis, and all the staff at MDLC for this wonderful opportunity to learn about disability law. It was an incredible chance for me to see law in the context of special education and disability services—something to which I had never before been exposed. This experience has certainly influenced in a positive way my decision of pursing public interest law in the future!