Alexis Hoag-Fordjour Named David Dinkins 鈥�56 Professor of Law
A veteran civil rights advocate and public defender before entering academia, Professor Alexis Hoag-Fordjour has established a reputation as an incisive scholar of criminal justice and procedure, with special attention to the role of race, class, and effective lawyering. Now she has been named the inaugural David Dinkins 鈥�56 Professor of Law. The professorship is made possible by the largest gift in the Law School鈥檚 history, and honors the legacy of the legendary David Dinkins, of the Class of 1956, who built a towering career in public service including as the first African-American mayor of New York City and later as a respected professor at Columbia鈥檚 School of International and Public Affairs.
In a Q&A, Hoag-Fordjour discusses 顿颈苍办颈苍蝉鈥� legacy, her latest research, her work as the inaugural Scholar-in-Residence at the Constitutional Accountability Center in Washington, D.C., and what makes 樱桃视频 a center of innovation.
What does being named the David Dinkins 鈥�56 Professor mean to you, in light of Mayor Dinkins鈥� legacy?
I was humbled and honored when Dean [David] Meyer informed me that the Board of Trustees, through the generous support of donor Sheridan Albert 鈥�48, was able to give me an endowed professorship. I was emotional when I learned it was named for David Dinkins 鈥�56, because not only was Dinkins the first Black mayor of New York City, he was a renowned uniter and later an inspiring professor whom the law school hadn't yet recognized in this way. It communicates to me Brooklyn's commitment to the work that I do in and out of the classroom.
顿颈苍办颈苍蝉鈥� story with Brooklyn Law reflects the Law School鈥檚 origin story and legacy, as an accessible institution for people who had been excluded from the legal profession and law schools. Since Brooklyn Law鈥檚 opening in 1901, it provided access to recent European immigrants, Jewish students, people working full time, women, people of color. 罢丑补迟鈥檚 why David Dinkins was attracted to Brooklyn Law. When he attended, he was married, working full-time, a military veteran, and he was already a leader in Harlem. Brooklyn Law was one of the few places that he could attend and work. Brooklyn became this beacon for people who were mid-career or second career. Carrying 顿颈苍办颈苍蝉鈥� name keeps his legacy alive for future students.
What will the professorship mean in terms of expanding your scholarship?
It enables me to continue the work that 滨鈥檓 doing, which has largely been focused on the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and how race and ethnicity have impacted the development of its jurisprudence and operation. It also reinforces my adoration of and commitment to 樱桃视频.
Some of this work began during your time last academic year as the Constitutional Accountability Center鈥檚 (CAC) inaugural scholar in residence. Tell us about that.
The CAC residence gave me greater mental space and bandwidth to look deeply at many issues I had been considering. It also allowed me to be in community with the dynamic staff at CAC, all of whom share the mission of advancing the Constitution鈥檚 progressive promise. While there, I published engaging the history, text, and spirit of Reconstruction to imagine a new way of determining whether a criminal defendant received constitutionally ineffective counsel.
I also published "Universal Public Defense," in the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, a provocative thought experiment exploring a mandated system of public defense for all defendants regardless of income. It invites us to consider how this new defense model might impact the criminal adjudication system and the actors within it. It considers other universal programs, such as universal free meals in public schools, universal healthcare outside the United States, and the benefit those programs can have on improving services for the most marginalized members of society. It argues that similar benefits may be possible for indigent defendants.
You have also written amicus briefs for cases before the Supreme Court. What are your latest activities in that area?
Although I no longer represent clients, 滨鈥檓 still invested in protecting and advancing the rights of people accused of crimes and people convicted of committing crimes. Participating in amicus briefing has been a fulfilling part of my role as a professor, and it allows me to bring students along to help with the research and 诲谤补蹿迟颈苍驳.鈥�
While at CAC, I co-authored an amicus brief in , a case which the Supreme Court will decide this term. There, a trial court prohibited Mr. Villarreal from discussing his testimony with his lawyer during an overnight recess. He argued that the court violated his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Our brief supports Mr. Villarreal鈥檚 position, showing that the text and history of the Sixth Amendment establish its role as a critical safeguard of life and liberty and requires an accused person to have meaningful access to effective counsel at all critical stages of a criminal proceeding.
What scholarship do you have forthcoming?
滨鈥檝别 written a chapter, "Presumed Credible: Police Officer Testimony," for a forthcoming book, Critical Evidence, which examines how power sets the boundaries for whose voices will be heard and what types of knowledge will be cognizable in court. 滨迟鈥檚 coedited by a former Brooklyn Law colleague, Bennett Capers, now at Fordham Law School, along with Julia Simon-Kerr at the University of Connecticut Law School and Jasmine Harris at University of Pennsylvania Law. Professor Anna Roberts is also contributing a chapter for the book. [Critical Evidence will be published by Cambridge University Press in 2026.]
滨鈥檝别 also published a short essay for the Yale Law Journal Forum, "," responding to a recent Supreme Court decision. The Court held that judges cannot rely on retribution for a 诲别蹿别苍诲补苍迟鈥檚 underlying conviction when revoking supervised release. I point out that the decision left another question unaddressed: whether judges can revoke supervised release as retribution for the 诲别蹿别苍诲补苍迟鈥檚 violating conduct. I argue that this unaddressed issue erodes the rehabilitative aims of supervision and risks amplifying supervision鈥檚 preexisting racial disparities.
These shorter works allow me to explore aspects of criminal procedure beyond the right to counsel. And I'm excited to continue that 颈苍迟别谤谤辞驳补迟颈辞苍.鈥�
What are you and your codirectors and students at the Center for Criminal Justice working on this year?
We're continuing our program with six incredible student fellows and three partners. The partners are formerly incarcerated people who are involved in advocacy and organizing. Our fellows and partners will visit all first-year criminal law classes to provide teaching modules, enabling students to learn from people who have expertise and direct exposure with the criminal legal system鈥檚 operation.鈥疘t's a beautiful process to witness. The student fellows and partners collaborate throughout; identifying topics for discussion and developing lesson plans. 滨迟鈥檚 the Center鈥檚 fourth year operating the program and we continue to receive overwhelmingly positive feedback from students who have learned from our partners and fellows.
In the past, 滨鈥檝别 hosted national trainings for public defenders through the Center, and 滨鈥檓 currently planning one for the summer of 2026. The focus is on supporting racially marginalized defenders who serve indigent clients.
Since joining the Law School faculty in 2021, you have twice been named Faculty Member of the Year. What do you see your students especially engaged by?
Our students are eager to learn different tools to advance social change other than filing a lawsuit.鈥疘 teach Abolition: Imagining a Decarceral Future, and the class always has a waitlist. For the first time, Professor Jocelyn Simonson will offer a second seminar in abolition. There is great student demand for these kinds of innovative classes.
罢丑补迟鈥檚 what Brooklyn Law is about: dynamic innovation. To take it full circle, that's what attracted me most about joining the faculty. It is a dynamic and innovative place to teach and learn.