Blog powered by TypePad

HIRING AND PROMOTIONS

  • The tenured faculty of the William S. Boyd School of Law at UNLV voted unanimously to recommend the tenure and promotion of Leticia Saucedo.
  • send them in so we can post!

GUEST BLOGISTAS

July 10, 2009

more on Law School 4.0

Legal Profession Blog

Law School 4.0: Are Law Schools Relevant to the Future of Law?

[posted by Bill Henderson, crossposted to ELS Blog]



READ THE FLL POST HERE

.......
Recently, the editors of Above-the Law surveyed the changes within the legal job market and asked two good questions:  (1) if the Howrey/Drinker Biddle/Frost Brown Todd apprenticeship model gains traction, is it appropriate to shorten law school to two years? And (2) if law school salaries are going down, should law schools be expected to "share in the pain" by figuring out ways to reduce tuition?  Unless the job market significantly improves during the next 12 months, it is going to get much more difficult for us to ignore these issues. For a realistic cost analysis of the current system, see Edward Rubin, Should Law Schools Support Faculty Research, 17 J. Comtemp. Leg. Issues 139 (2008).

I don't want this post to be a screed.  I am looking for next steps that will produce concrete and sustainable forward progress.  But I have read enough history on the growth and evolution of U.S. legal education to have a realistic view on institutional change.  Here are my two primary rules:

Rule #1:  Great ideas are not enough.  As a result, bold initiatives by professional organizations like the AALS or the ABA rarely have staying power.   Law professors are intellectuals; hence, we fall in love with our own ideas.  But all-to0-often, we fail to do a coherent institutional analysis that explains why others will adopt our ideas.   Skipping this step is one of the privileges (and hazards) of the ivory tower.  For a more elaborate discussion of this point, see Why I Worry About the Carnegie Report: Four Data Points (Dec. 7, 2007).

Rule #2:  Sustainable ideas within any industry are always accompanied by institutional self-interest--legal education is no exception.  In other words, the people who execute on the idea have to be made better off, e.g., through financial gains, professional reputation, leisure, economic security, or (at the individual level) self-actualization.   This was secret sauce behind the Langdell case model:  It was more effective than self-study yet it facilitated large enough class sizes to generate a perennial economic surplus.  In turn, lawyers-turned-law-professors were freed from the commercial pressures of practice and could advance their careers as experts.  The university, professors, and students were all made better off.  As a second order effect, so was the legal profession.   Of course, this revolution occurred 100 years ago.  It is time for a new legal education formula that fits the 21st century.

July 09, 2009

JOBS: D.C. LAW STUDENTS IN COURT PROGRAM, INC.

American University · The Catholic University of America · The George Washington University · Georgetown University · Howard University

June 29, 2009

 

Position: D.C. Law Students in Court Program seeks an experienced attorney, licensed in the District of Columbia, for its Civil Division. Start date: ASAP. This is a new announcement. Please do not apply if you have submitted a resume within the past six months.

 

Program Description: D.C. Law Students in Court Program is a non-profit legal education/legal services program associated with five major District of Columbia law schools: American, Catholic, Howard, Georgetown and George Washington. LSIC provides free legal services to low-income clients with cases arising in D.C. courts and agencies, and provides third-year law students with a high-quality introduction to the skills of lawyering and advocacy. The program represents and/or assists approximately 5,000 people each year in its Civil and Criminal Divisions. Civil Division cases involve mainly housing, landlord-tenant and consumer issues.

 

Responsibilities: The position in the Civil Division involves supervising law students on their cases, planning and teaching classes in lawyering and advocacy skills, overseeing intake, and litigating cases in the areas of housing and consumer law during times between student sessions. Related duties include participating in student recruitment, semester planning activities, weekly staff meetings, outreach to community groups, and mentoring of pro bono attorneys.

 

Qualifications: Must be a member of the D.C. Bar, have prior litigation experience, excellent writing and communication skills. Prior teaching, legal services background and/or litigation experience in the landlord-tenant/housing and consumer law areas a plus. Ability to speak Spanish highly desirable though not required.

 

Salary/Benefits: Salary to be based on experience and qualifications within LSIC's salary range. Liberal annual leave, health and other benefits.

 

Contact:

Mary Brittingham, Executive Director

D.C. Law Students in Court Program, Inc.

616 H Street, N.W. Suite 500

Washington DC 20001

Phone: 202/638-4798     Fax: 202/638-0304        

E-mail: mbrittingham@dclawstudents.org

Please include a resume, cover letter, writing sample and 3 professional references.

 

Closing Date: Until filled.

JOBS: U Conn. IP Clinic

Assistant/Associate Clinical Professor of Law


University of Connecticut School of Law
Search 2008575



The University of Connecticut School of Law solicits applications for an assistant/ associate clinical professor of law to serve as a supervising attorney in the Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship Law Clinic beginning January 1, 2010.  The position is subject to the Law School's policy on long-term renewable contracts for clinical faculty, which complies with ABA Standard 405(c).

An excellent academic record, significant law practice and/or clinical teaching experience, demonstrated research and writing ability, and membership in the Connecticut bar or the ability to become a member within one year of hire, are required. The ideal candidate will also have significant intellectual property experience, some transactional business-lawyering experience, and be a member of the Patent Bar.  Salary and rank are commensurate with qualifications and experience.

Potential candidates with questions regarding the position itself, their qualifications, or any related matter are encouraged to contact Associate Professor Hillary Greene, Director of the Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship Law Clinic at hillary.greene@law.uconn.edu, (860) 570-5211.  

Applicants should send a letter of interest and resume to Ms. Kathleen Lombardi, Program Coordinator, Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship Law Clinic, at kathleen.lombardi@law.uconn.edu, (860) 728-2104.      

SSRN: Law Student Learning Styles

"Law Students are Different from the General Population: Empirical Findings Regarding Learning Styles" Free Download


Perspectives: Teaching Legal Research and Writing, Vol. 17, No. 3, p. 153, 2009
St. John's Legal Studies Research Paper No. 09-0173

ROBIN BOYLE, St. John's University School of Law
Email: BoyleR@stjohns.edu
JEFFREY MINNETI,
Stetson University College of Law
Email: minneti@law.stetson.edu
ANDREA HONIGSFELD,
Molloy College
Email: ahonigsfeld@molloy.edu

The authors conducted an empirical study comparing the learning styles of law students with young adults at other educational institutions. The law school sample population came from St. John's University School of Law in New York and Stetson University College of Law in Florida. The law school data were compared with the learning styles of a random sample of college and graduate students, provided by Performance Concepts International. All subjects assessed their learning styles by using Building Excellence ("BE"). BE is an on-line assessment tool.

The BE profiles used in this study resembled the class learning-style profiles taken at the respective law schools in prior years. Thus the consistent BE profiles of law school students confirmed that the law school data set was reliable.

The Dunn and Dunn Model was used because it of its comprehensive design. The Model currently includes 26 learning-style elements. Data for this study included results of these elements.

In this study, the results showed that the learning styles of law students differed significantly from college and graduate students for 14 different elements of the 26 elements studies. To have significant findings for 14 categories, and to have each with this level of significance, is unusual. Some of the learning-style preferences of law students comport with our commonly held understanding, such as having a stronger preference for Verbal Kinesthetic tendencies (they learn by speaking while simultaneously listening). However, the general student population was more tactual, as opposed to the law population, despite the proliferation of laptops in the law school classroom.

The findings confirm observations that professors may have about law students, but some findings are surprising.

July 08, 2009

CALL FOR PAPERS: University of Baltimore Feminist Legal Theory Conference - Applied Feminism and Marginalized Communities

CALL FOR PAPERS AND WORKSHOP PROPOSALS

 The University of Baltimore School of Law's Center on Applied Feminism seeks submissions for its Third Annual Feminist Legal Theory Conference.  This year's theme is: Applied Feminism and Marginalized Communities. 

 This conference seeks to explore the following questions:  What do we mean by "marginalized communities" and what purposes does that designation serve?  How has feminist legal theory created or contributed to the understanding of who is or is not marginalized?  How has feminist legal theory rendered women universal and marginal simultaneously?[1] <http://mail2.ubalt.edu/exchange/majohnson/Drafts/RE:%20[CDVLAW]%20Job%20Announcement:%20Pro%20Bono%20Program%20Coordinator.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn1>   How has feminist legal theory contributed to the erasing, shifting and/or merging of boundaries and how does that affect how we think about marginalized communities?  How does feminist legal theory intersect with other critical theories regarding marginalization?  How can feminist legal theory work towards alleviating poverty and other barriers faced by marginalized communities?  How has feminist legal theory addressed marginalization relating to such issues as housing, welfare, domestic violence, family composition, human rights, immigration, and religious freedom?  And finally, how has feminist legal theory made (or not made) a difference for those who are portrayed as marginalized or see themselves as marginalized?

 This conference will attempt to address these questions from the perspectives of activists, practitioners and academics.  The conference will provide an opportunity for participants and audience members to exchange ideas about the current state of feminist legal theories and how those theories are being actualized to help women in marginalized communities. From the conference, we hope that a new discourse about applied feminist legal theory and marginalized communities will begin and that this discourse will shape policy and practice.  In addition, the conference is designed to provide presenters with the opportunity to gain extensive feedback on their papers.

The conference will begin the evening of Thursday, March 4, 2010, with a workshop for conference participants.   Building from last year's workshop, which addressed making space for feminist writing, this workshop will continue the tradition of involving all attendees to be participants in the interactive discussion and reflection.  The workshop will be approximately one to two hours in length.

On Friday, March 5, 2010, the conference will continue with a day of presentations by legal academics, practitioners and activists regarding current scholarship and/or legal work that explores the application of feminist legal theory and marginalized communities.  The conference will be open to the public and will feature a keynote speaker Friday evening.  Past keynote speakers have included Dr. Maya Angelou and Gloria Steinem.

The requirements for paper and workshop proposals are detailed below.  To be considered for the workshop presentation, please submit a workshop proposal by 5 p.m. on October 16, 2009 to Professor Margaret E. Johnson (majohnson@ubalt.edu). The proposed workshop need not focus exclusively on the theme of this year's feminist legal theory conference, but should focus on the general area of feminist legal theory and other critical theories.  A workshop proposal should detail the topic of the workshop, your approach for conducting the workshop, and the activities or other methods that you will employ to make the session interactive.  The proposal should also identify how long the workshop will last and any technology or other materials required.  Due to the limited time available during the conference, we will only be able to select one of the proposals for the Thursday, March 4, 2010, evening workshop.  We will notify the selectee by November 13, 2009.  Please make sure to include your contact information with your submission.

 

To submit a paper proposal, please submit an abstract by 5 p.m. on October 16, 2009 to Professor Margaret E. Johnson (majohnson@ubalt.edu <mailto:majohnson@ubalt.edu> ).  Abstracts should be no longer than one page.  Practitioners' and activists' papers need not follow a strictly academic format but all paper proposals should address the conference theme.  We will notify presenters of selected papers by November 13, 2009.  Please make sure to include your contact information with your submission.  We anticipate being able to have twelve paper presenters during the conference on Friday, March 5, 2010.  Working drafts of papers, which can include works-in-progress, completed drafts, and papers already scheduled for publication elsewhere, are due no later than February 12, 2010.  All abstracts and working drafts will be posted on the Center on Applied Feminism's conference website to be shared with other participants and attendees.   Finally, please note that a limited amount of money may be available to presenters for travel expenses.

 

 

________________________________

 

[1] <http://mail2.ubalt.edu/exchange/majohnson/Drafts/RE:%20[CDVLAW]%20Job%20Announcement:%20Pro%20Bono%20Program%20Coordinator.EML/1_text.htm#_ftnref1>  This idea is loosely based on one presented by Professor Patricia J. Williams in The Alchemy of Race and Rights: Diary of a Law Professor 7 (1991).

 

 

AALS Call for Papers


 

Location - The 2010 AALS Annual Meeting will be held in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Networking - The AALS Annual Meeting is the largest annual gathering of legal educators in the world. In addition to the networking opportunities at the AALS Gala Reception, the "Meeting Place" in the exhibit hall, and the various organization receptions and breakfasts, AALS will provide conference attendees the opportunity to organize an informal gathering with colleagues that share similar interests. 

Hotels - AALS Registration, Exhibit Hall, Section programs, Presidential Programs, and the House of Representatives meeting will be held at the Hilton New Orleans Riverside. 

Exhibit Hall - Visit the exhibit hall to view and discuss products that can enhance your teaching and career. The exhibit hall is also the location of the "Meeting Place" - a lounge area with coffee, tea, pastries, and refreshments served in the mornings and afternoons. View the program for the open hours of the hall.

The following sections have requested a Call for Papers for the 2010 Annual Meeting that will take place January 6-10 in New Orleans, Louisiana:

  • Section on Contracts
  • The New Law Professors' Section
  • Section on Business Associations
  • Section on National Security Law
  • Section on International Human Rights
  • Co-Sponsored Program of AALS Section on National Security Law, Section on International Human Rights and Section on International Law
  • Section on Financial Institutions and Consumer Financial Services
  • Section on Litigation
  • Section on Trusts and Estates
  • Section on Securities Regulation

Click the link below to detailed descriptions and deadlines for the above Sections' Calls for Papers:

 

Click Here to View the Calls for Papers 

 

______________________________

 

New Orleans Volunteer Opportunities

 

We encourage you to volunteer some time while you are in New Orleans to play a part in the restoration effort. Please visit New Orleans Area Habitat for Humanity at http://www.habitatnola.org/ to review opportunities to help. Volunteers are needed to work a full day. Please visit

http://www.habitat-nola.org/volunteer/ for more information.

 

In addition, a list of volunteer opportunities can be found here: http://www.neworleanscvb.com/ and go to "Voluntourism."  

 


July 07, 2009

Northeast People of Color Legal Scholarship Conference At Buffalo

NE People of Color - America’s New Class Warfare? - Buffalo

The Northeast People of Color Legal Scholarship Conference (NEPOC) 2009 will take place October 23-25 at the University at Buffalo Law School in Buffalo, New York.

During last year’s NEPOC, we experienced the monumental collapse of Lehman Brothers and subsequently, our financial and real estate sectors. Our nation and economy have been suffering since that time and there have been many interesting changes. This year our theme is “America’s New Class Warfare?”

For more details on the theme, please see the conference webpage.

Instead of relying solely on invitations, this year’s NEPOC will also do a call for papers for the plenary panels. In addition, we are seeking works in progress, leaders for professional development workshops and nominees for the Haywood Burns – Shanara Gilbert Awards. The deadline for the submission of all these materials is June 30th.

Updated Info for Law Review Submission Season

Information for Submitting Articles to Law Reviews & Journals

HERE

Allen Rostron
University of Missouri at Kansas City - School of Law

Nancy Levit
University of Missouri at Kansas City (UMKC) - School of Law


June 9, 2009


Abstract:     
This document contains information about submitting articles to law reviews and journals, including the methods for submitting an article, any special formatting requirements, how to contact them to request an expedited review, and how to contact them to withdraw an article from consideration. It covers about 188 law reviews. The document was fully updated on June 9, 2009.

Still more on the "apprenticeship" model of law firm employment

Legal Writing Prof Blog

We reported earlier that several law firms are slashing starting associate pay and instead placing new grads on an apprenticeship track that will provide supplemental skills training that law schools, at least according to these employers, are not offering.  Some law firms that reject the "apprenticeship" model have expressed their views to the online ABA Journal.  Here's one comment:

Carter Phillips, managing partner of Sidley Austin's Washington, D.C., office, tells the National Law Journal that law students interviewing for jobs may be unwilling to give up the money. "If you're a top-flight law student and you talk to one firm offering $80,000 or $100,000 to take extra classes and then you talk to another firm offering $160,000 to do work you can bill to a client, I don't see that as much of a choice," he said.

In response, the managing partner of Washington D.C.'s Howrey, which is the largest firm to date to adopt the apprenticeship approach, says "the old model is broken."  The new model will provide grads with the training they need while saving clients from otherwise having to pay for the learning curve of these grads.

Interestingly, although an informal poll conducted by Above the Law showed that its readers overwhelmingly support the apprenticeship model, comments left in connection with this story indicate that many think the apprenticeship model is a pretext for lowering salaries while keeping the firm's reputation intact.

July 06, 2009

JOBS: SETON HALL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW CENTER FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE Position Available for Practitioner-in-Residence, Urban Revitalization Project



Seton Hall Law School is seeking applications for a Practitioner-in-Residence for the
Urban Revitalization Project within our Center for Social Justice. The position runs from August
2009 until July 2010, with the possibility of renewal of the position for one additional year,
depending on performance and funding. The Center is home to eight clinics, as well as the
Urban Revitalization Project, the International Human Rights/Rule of Law Project, and a large
pro bono program.

The Practitioner-in-Residence will take a multi-disciplinary approach to addressing issues
of urban revitalization, with an emphasis on housing and education, and will work in
collaboration with faculty in two sections of the Civil Litigation Clinic of the Center for Social
Justice. The Civil Litigation Clinic represents clients in cases addressing foreclosure scams,
housing discrimination, urban education, and prison reform. Examples of cases/projects
undertaken by the Project include representing homeowners against foreclosure rescue scams,
representing tenants in a housing conditions case for appointment of a rent receiver to manage
their building, challenges to municipalities’ affordable housing plans, and advocacy for an equal
education for all children in New Jersey. The Practitioner-in-Residence litigates cases,
undertakes community education, and generally advocates on urban issues.
Although the Practitioner-in-Residence will not be responsible for teaching a clinic
section, s/he will supervise second-year students enrolled in Seton Hall Law School’s externship
program, as well as first and second-year students participating in the school’s Pro Bono
Program as they work on the Practitioner’s litigation and advocacy projects.

All applicants must be members of a state Bar; New Jersey bar membership is preferred
but not required. All applicants should have a strong academic record, an ability to be proactive
and work independently, and excellent written and oral communication skills. We welcome
applications from those with at least 5 years of experience working in one or more of the areas of
concentration of the Urban Revitalization Project. The annual salary is competitive with
comparable positions, and includes benefits.

To apply, please send a letter of interest, resume, writing sample, and list of three
references to the attention of Daphney West, Seton Hall University School of Law, Center for
Social Justice, 833 McCarter Highway, Newark, NJ 07102, or via e-mail at
daphney.west@shu.edu. Applications will be reviewed on a rolling basis.

Seton Hall's Law School is located in the heart of downtown Newark. It is one block
from Newark Penn Station (with trains and subway service to many parts of New Jersey and to
New York City), one block from the New Jersey Performing Arts Center and the Prudential
Center, and within walking distance of state and federal courthouses, museums, and restaurants.
Manhattan is a short train ride away. For more information on the clinical programs of the
Center for Social Justice, visit the Center’s website at http://law.shu.edu/csj/index.html. For more
information on Seton Hall University School of Law, see http://law.shu.edu. Seton Hall
University is an affirmative action, equal employment opportunity employer.

JOBS: Director of Externship Programs, University of Washington School of Law

 

The University of Washington School of Law invites applications and nominations for the position of Director of Externship Programs to begin Autumn 2009. The School of Law is seeking a faculty Director who will build upon the strong foundation of our large and thriving Externship Programs and further deepen our commitment to providing a high quality educational and practice experience for our students. The Director of Externship Programs, working with the Director of Career Services, counsels and advises students on externship opportunities; oversees all field placements; educates and trains field supervisors, and conducts site visits; develops and implements externship policies and procedures; oversees, develops and teaches the externship seminar curricula; and provides vision and leadership for the School of Law's extensive and diverse externship offerings. The Director will also work with other faculty and centers within the School of Law and University, as well as stakeholders in the community, to fulfill the school's mission of public service. The Director is expected to model the highest levels of professionalism, reflective practice, and commitment to academic excellence. All faculty engage in teaching, research and service. This hire will be at the lecturer or senior lecturer level.

 

Qualifications: J.D. degree and a minimum of 3 years of practice experience are required; teaching experience is strongly preferred; judicial clerkship and/or public service sector experience is a plus.

Please send a letter of application, curriculum vitae, and names, telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses for three references to: Professor Lisa Kelly, IAC Subcommittee Chair, University of Washington School of Law, William H. Gates Hall, Box 353020, Seattle, WA 98195. Applications may also be submitted electronically care of this address: lisak2@u.washington.edu. Applications will be accepted until the position is filled.

All positions are contingent on available funding. The University of Washington is an affirmative action, equal opportunity employer. The University is building a culturally diverse faculty and staff and strongly encourages applications from women, minorities, individuals with disabilities and covered veterans. The University of Washington, a recipient of the 2006 Alfred P. Sloan award for Faculty Career Flexibility, is committed to supporting the work-life balance of its faculty.

West Launches New Programs Focused on Pro Bono Outreach, Lawyers in Transition

EAGAN, Minn. – West today announced a new pro bono outreach initiative and a Web site to help lawyers displaced by recent layoffs manage the transition to their next assignment. West is a business of Thomson Reuters and the leading source of intelligent information for law firms, corporate legal departments and government agencies.

Do Justice is a new client-focused initiative that supports law firm pro bono activities. The heart of this program is a relationship with the Pro Bono Institute that makes more than $12 million in Westlaw access available to law firms to support pro bono outreach in the communities they serve.

Between Cases is a new online resource for displaced legal associates seeking employment and networking opportunities. The site includes job search tools, legal education offerings from West LegalEdCenter, information and resources for setting up a private practice, and special offers from Westlaw and other West services. The goal of the site is to help job seekers in the legal industry stay connected with their peers and with prospective employers as they navigate the transition to their next assignment.

Between Cases also offers free resources for displaced attorneys seeking to initiate or continue pro bono work while looking for permanent employment.
Peter Warwick, president and chief executive officer of Thomson Reuters, Legal, said the initiatives reflect West’s longstanding commitment to the legal industry, and to the humanitarian and social justice causes that attract many to the profession in the first place.  

“Across our organization, our primary mission is to help the legal system perform better – every day, worldwide,” said Warwick. “These new initiatives support our customers’ efforts to make their communities and the organizations they care about better through pro bono work, and allow us to put important tools and resources in the hands of attorneys as they transition to private practice or their next role.

“In addition to supporting our customers, Thomson Reuters has a steadfast commitment to equal justice and equal access to representation in the manner that the constitution demands,” Warwick added. “In a society where the rule of law trumps everything, we are proud to be a part of our clients’ efforts to ensure the ideals of justice are upheld for all, and that those rights aren’t forfeited because a wronged party is poor.”

Last year, West gave more than $12 million in Westlaw access to law firms to support pro bono outreach and hopes to increase the number significantly in 2009 through these two initiatives that are geared toward both firm-level and individual support. Likewise, Thomson Reuters supports international pro bono outreach through TrustLaw, a new program from the Thomson Reuters Foundation that will also serve as a forum for lawyers, accountants, judges, journalists, governments and NGOs focusing on specific areas of the law, such as good governance and anti-corruption.

“In this time of severe economic turmoil, the need for pro bono services is greater than ever before,” said Esther Lardent, president and CEO of Pro Bono Institute. “The services that West is supporting with initiatives like Do Justice and offering free Westlaw for pro bono work to attorneys between appointments play a critical role in the effort to offer quality legal representation and due process to public interest organizations and low-income individuals dealing with a crisis in their life, such as eviction, child custody or abuse. Also, it’s imperative that people see due process and accessible courts in order for our society to have a real sense of the rule of law and democracy. This is a collaborative effort, and West is a really important part of that team.”

Learn more about Between Cases and the Westlaw Do Justice program by visiting www.betweencases.com or http://west.thomson.com/westlaw/do-justice/, or by calling your Thomson Reuters sales representative.

NYT: Too much debt to be a lawyer?

Aspiring Lawyer Finds Debt Is Bigger Hurdle Than Bar Exam - NYTimes.com

Finding Debt a Bigger Hurdle Than Bar Exam
Suzy Allman for The New York Times

Robert Bowman was refused entry to the New York bar because of $400,000 in student debt.


By JONATHAN D. GLATER
Published: July 1, 2009

All his life, Robert Bowman wanted to be a lawyer. He overcame a troubled childhood, a tragic accident that nearly cost him a leg and a debilitating Jet Ski collision.

He put himself through community college, worked and borrowed heavily to help pay for college, graduate school and even law school. He took the New York bar examination not once, not twice, not three times, but four, passing it last year. Finally, he seemed to be on his way.

In January, the committee of New York lawyers that reviews applications for admission to the bar interviewed Mr. Bowman, studied his history and the debt he had amassed, and called his persistence remarkable. It recommended his approval.

But a group of five state appellate judges decided this spring that his student loans were too big and his efforts to repay them too meager for him to be a lawyer.

“Applicant has not made any substantial payments on the loans,” the judges wrote in a terse decision and an unusual rejection of the committee’s recommendation. “Applicant has not presently established the character and general fitness requisite for an attorney and counselor-at-law.”

Mr. Bowman, 47, appears to have crossed some unspoken line with his $400,000 in student debt and penalties, accumulated over many years.

New York’s courts have overlooked misconduct like lawyers’ solicitation of minors for sex, efforts to deceive judges and possession of cocaine. Those instances have led merely to temporary suspensions from practice.

“It usually takes a pretty significant record of some underlying misconduct to keep you out permanently,” said Deborah L. Rhode, a law professor at Stanford who has studied bar admissions across the states. Excluding someone for having too much debt was odd, she said; the hard questions about loans usually involve applicants who have used bankruptcy to try to escape loans, she said, and Mr. Bowman has not.

Mr. Bowman concedes that he has never made a payment on his loans, partly because of medical and other deferrals and problems with his lender. But he says he intends to make good, adding that his only hope is to begin practicing law — which means overturning the judges’ decision.

While thousands of indebted students have complained about their treatment by lenders, Mr. Bowman has documented his personal debt crisis with remarkable, obsessive intensity.

He claims Sallie Mae overcharged him, imposing hefty and unjustified fees; did not allow him to defer payments when he was entitled to do so and improperly accounted for periods when he did defer.

According to his detailed records, a Sallie Mae representative even threatened him. “If you default, your license will be taken from you,” the representative said. “Do you understand that?”

When Mr. Bowman said that he did not yet have a law license, the representative responded that the company would prevent him from getting one.

Martha Holler, a Sallie Mae spokeswoman, said that such threats would violate the company’s rules.

“The size of this account is extremely unusual, but not surprising given that the customer took out 32 loans to pursue undergraduate, law and masters of law studies and has not made a single monthly payment over his 26-year student loan history,” Ms. Holler said. “We are performing an extensive review of his extraordinary case, and if we identify any errors we will quickly rectify them.”

Mr. Bowman has not had an easy time of it. He was shuffled through foster care and various legal proceedings as a child. He was impressed by the lawyers who represented his interests and saw a possible life’s work.

Getting a college degree took 10 years because he had spent nearly six in rehabilitation, relearning how to walk after an all-terrain vehicle hit him while he was stopped on his motorcycle. The accident nearly cost him his left leg; he graduated from the State University of New York in Albany in 1995.

He enrolled at the University of California Hastings College of Law in San Francisco in 2000.

After his third year, he began a masters of law program in London, where he lived with a girlfriend. He graduated in December 2004 with about $230,000 in student loan debt, and she helped support him while he studied, and studied again and again, for the bar exam.

In 2007, Mr. Bowman asked for an accounting of his loans, the payment deferrals he had used and his repayment options. He said he did not receive that information for nearly two years — a point disputed by Sallie Mae, which said it tried to reach Mr. Bowman several times in 2007.

Mr. Bowman passed the New York bar in February 2008. Soon after, while living with his once-estranged mother in Miramar, Fla., he was swimming at a beach when a Jet Ski lost control and slammed into him, breaking his good leg in four places.

“My luck on these things,” Mr. Bowman said. “So I contacted Sallie Mae and I’m like, I need a medical deferment and advice. Their response is, none available.”

Sallie Mae transferred Mr. Bowman’s private student loans, the ones not guaranteed by the federal government, to a collection agency, which tacked on a 25 percent fee. That agency transferred the loan again, and he said the next collection agency tacked on another 25 percent fee. Sallie Mae denied this, saying he was charged the fee only once. But suddenly, Mr. Bowman found that he owed more than $400,000.

Knowing it would be difficult to explain his debt to New York’s Committee on Character and Fitness, which reviews applications for admission to the bar, Mr. Bowman gathered correspondence with Sallie Mae, loan statements, even the emergency room report on the Jet Ski incident.

The three lawyers who interviewed him in Albany in January found Mr. Bowman’s “determination to pursue a postsecondary education remarkable,” according to the written evaluation. As for the loans, they continued, “it appears unconscionable that a student loan indebtedness could go from $270,000 to $435,000 in four years.”

Two of the committee members did not return calls seeking comment; the third could not be reached.

In April the judges rejected the committee’s recommendation and ruled Mr. Bowman could not be a lawyer. Michael J. Novack, the clerk of the court that handled Mr. Bowman’s application, declined to comment specifically on his case.

“Generally speaking, if the committee on character and fitness recommends admission of an applicant, the court approves of it,” Mr. Novack said. “But not always.”

Along with asking the court to reverse its decision, Mr. Bowman has consulted lawyers and is preparing a lawsuit against Sallie Mae. One way or another, he vows, he will make the switch from client to lawyer.

July 02, 2009

And more on "open records" litigation against Rutgers-Newark clinic

From The Chronicle of Higher Education

Open-Records Dispute Could Complicate Work of Public Law-School Clinics

A lawsuit seeking to force a Rutgers University legal clinic to disclose client information under New Jersey's open-records act poses a serious threat to the work of public law schools elsewhere, several higher-education associations argue in friend-of-the-court briefs recently filed in the case.

The lawsuit was brought against Rutgers University and the Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic by a real-estate developer whose plans to build an outlet mall were unsuccessfully opposed by a citizens' group that the clinic had represented. Although the developer, Sussex Commons Associates, has not stated why it is seeking a wide array of the clinic's records dealing with the citizens' group, it has accused the group of receiving financial support from the owner of two existing outlet malls in the region and has criticized the clinic's expenditure of "a significant amount of public funds" in opposing the mall development.

Among the law-clinic records being sought by Sussex Commons are minutes of meetings, documents received from expert witnesses, and various billing and payment records associated with the clinic's representation of the anti-mall group, Citizens for Responsible Development at Ross's Corner. Sussex Commons initially sought the records from Rutgers in May 2006—as the battle over the outlet mall was still being waged—and filed its lawsuit that September, after the university's custodian of records refused to give up any of the documents requested.

A New Jersey Superior Court judge, Travis L. Francis, dismissed the lawsuit last year in a decision holding that the state's public law clinics are exempt from its open-records act because they need to protect the confidentiality of those they represent. Sussex Commons, which has argued that New Jersey's open-records law should be interpreted as fully covering public institutions like Rutgers, is challenging Judge Francis's decision before a state appeals court.

Teaching Law Students a Lesson

The friend-of-the-court briefs that higher-education associations have filed on behalf of Rutgers show that they see the dispute as involving much more profound stakes than proximity to an Old Navy or Cinnabon.

In one such brief, filed late last month, the American Association of University Professors, the Clinical Legal Education Association, and the Society of American Law Teachers have joined in arguing that a ruling in the developer's favor would seriously harm the ability of public law-school clinics to provide students with hands-on training.

Continue reading "And more on "open records" litigation against Rutgers-Newark clinic" »

Chronicle reports on Bridget McCormack's work on academic freedom and clinics

From The Chronicle of Higher Education

Academic Freedom Comes Under Fire at Law-School Clinics

Many faculty members at law-school clinics feel pressure from their bosses to steer clear of cases that might incur the displeasure of donors, lawmakers, or others who could complicate life for their institutions, the results of a recent survey suggest.

The survey of about 300 faculty members at law-school clinics found that nearly 10 percent reported having been urged by their law school's dean to avoid a particular case, and nearly 15 percent report having been urged by their clinic's director to avoid one. The survey, conducted by an associate dean at the University of Michigan Law School, was discussed at a conference on academic freedom held last week by the American Association of University Professors.

Faculty members were not asked why they had been urged to avoid cases, leaving open the possibility that in some situations their bosses were motivated purely by educational or financial concerns. And most respondents did not report any interference.

Yet responses to other survey questions suggest that worries about political repercussions could play a role in decisions to shy away from certain cases. Well over half of the respondents characterized their law school's dean as at least somewhat concerned with how their cases would be viewed by alumni or potential donors, and more than a fourth described their deans as caring at least somewhat about how cases are perceived by politicians, state courts, their state's bar association, and groups representing businesses or other interests.

The survey was done last year by Bridget M. McCormack, associate dean for clinical affairs at the University of Michigan Law School and a co-chair of an Association of American Law Schools panel focused on political interference in law-school clinics. Ms. McCormack has not formally published her findings, but they have been circulated among legal educators and were made available to The Chronicle.

The survey's results shed new light on the long-running debate over the proper role of law-school clinics and the question of how much freedom their faculty members have — or should have — in their work, which often involves providing legal representation to the indigent.

Continue reading "Chronicle reports on Bridget McCormack's work on academic freedom and clinics" »

July 01, 2009

"Battle of the Babes" at Wimbledon -- the good looking gals play center court

from The F-Word Blogby

The All England Club has admitted that it schedules matches between "attractive" female players for Centre Court at Wimbledon, reports the Daily Mail.

In the men's tournament, five-times winner Roger Federer and British hope Andy Murray invariably play on Centre.

But on Friday, after Federer left the court, the next match was Victoria Azarenka of Belarus against Romania's Sorana Cirstea.

While both 19-year-olds have top form in the glamour department, Miss Cirstea was seeded 28 while Miss Azarenka, who won, is ranked and seeded eighth.

That same day, second seed Serena Williams was relegated to the new No 2 Court for her win over Italian Roberta Vinci.

The All England Club didn't even bother to deny it:

Spokesman Johnny Perkins said: 'Good looks are a factor.'

The Mail speculates that Wimbledon organisers are trying to cater to the BBC. An unnamed "BBC source" said:

'No one has heard of many of the women now, so if they are pretty it definitely gives them an edge.

'Our preference would always be a Brit or a babe as this always delivers high viewing figures.'

The tennis players have, unsurprisingly, noticed too, and are none-too-happy:

The fifth seed, who was knocked out on Saturday on No 1 Court, said: 'It's weird. If you look at the schedule, it's not only about me.

'It's about Dinara on Court No 2, Venus (Williams) on Court No 1 and the girls who are not very highly seeded they play on Centre.

'I respect them. They're great players for sure. But this is what's weird for me; what's their strategy, what's their plan of making the schedule?

'This is what surprises me a little bit.'

Twice champion Serena Williams even got lost on the way to No 2 Court on Friday.

She was nearly ten minutes late for her match.

Law firms adopting an apprenticeship model?

Law Firm Apprenticeships Could Cause Recruiting Problems, Critics Say

Posted Jun 30, 2009, 08:11 am CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Clients may like the new apprenticeship programs being tried by a few law firms, but associates taking a pay cut to participate may not be as enthusiastic.

Carter Phillips, managing partner of Sidley Austin's Washington, D.C., office, tells the National Law Journal that law students interviewing for jobs may be unwilling to give up the money. "If you're a top-flight law student and you talk to one firm offering $80,000 or $100,000 to take extra classes and then you talk to another firm offering $160,000 to do work you can bill to a client, I don't see that as much of a choice," he said.

Howrey managing partner Robert Ruyak disagrees. His firm announced last week that associates participating in its new apprenticeship program will earn $100,000 the first year and $125,000 the next year, along with a $25,000 bonuses to start and another $25,000 to complete the training. The firm is hiring 20 associates to participate, down from 27 the previous year. During the two-year training period, they will attend classes, shadow partners and get additional experience from pro bono work or secondments to clients.

Ruyak says the program will keep new associates away from the grunt work of document review, which will be handled by staff attorneys. Associates will do less client work during their training, and when they do handle client matters, it may not be billed to the clients. "The old model is broken," he told the NLJ.

Other law firms that have or are adopting apprentice programs include Drinker Biddle & Reath of Philadelphia; labor law firm Ford & Harrison; Frost Brown Todd, with offices in Ohio and Kentucky; and Strasburger & Price in Dallas.

Howrey expects the apprentice program to cost between $3 million and $4 million, including lost billable hours and training costs, the NLJ says. But the firm’s first-year salary costs will drop from $4.16 million to $2.5 million.

SSRN: Legal Education

Tomorrow's Research Today
Tomorrow's Research Today

LEGAL EDUCATION ABSTRACTS

Vol. 6, No. 28: Jun 30, 2009


HANNAH R. ARTERIAN, EDITOR
Dean and Professor of Law, Syracuse University College of Law
arterian@law.syr.edu






 





 

Table of Contents

Robin Boyle, St. John's University School of Law
Jeffrey Minneti, Stetson University College of Law
Andrea Honigsfeld, Molloy College

Lisa McElroy, Drexel University - Earle Mack School of Law
Christine Nero Coughlin, Wake Forest University - School of Law

Bruce A. Green, Fordham University School of Law
Russell G. Pearce, Fordham University School of Law

Wesley Pue, University of British Columbia - Faculty of Law

Galen L. Fletcher, Brigham Young University - J. Reuben Clark Law School

Kate O'Neill, University of Washington - School of Law

June 30, 2009

Sartorial Study Suggests Professors Should Wear What They Want

The Chronicle of Higher Education: Academe Today

How academics dress for a lecture doesn't affect how students perceive them — at least in the long run.

That was the conclusion of a study at North Hennepin Community College that measured students' perception of an instructor based on what type of clothing she wore to her lectures.

Yasmine L. Konheim-Kalkstein, who holds a doctorate in educational psychology, grouped four sections of an introductory psychology course she taught last fall into two "casual" classes and two "formal" classes, each of which were held at different times and on different days.

On the first day of the study, Ms. Konheim-Kalkstein wore jeans, a drab-colored T-shirt, and gray sneakers to the casual class, and black pants, a button-up, black-and-white-striped shirt, and a small heel to the formal class. Students were surveyed about their initial impressions of her approachability, her ability to teach, her age, and her teaching style.

Dressing casually "felt very awkward at first, but I got over it very quickly," she says. "As soon as you start lecturing you forget about it."

For the next four weeks, she continued the routine, but often wore the same shirt — either a button-up blouse or a plain T-shirt — with both her casual and formal outfits. Students were surveyed again at the end of four weeks.

The data showed that Ms. Konheim-Kalkstein's clothing made a small difference in perceptions of her on the first day of class, with those students in the "formal" classes finding her more qualified and approachable than did those in the informal classes. But four weeks into the semester, wearing less-formal clothes had about the same effect on student perceptions as wearing formal clothes.

Ms. Konheim-Kalkstein says she still prefers teaching in formal clothing, but now she feels more comfortable wearing casual clothes in lectures as well. She says she'd like to do further research that takes into account gender differences, as well as the environmental context of the college or university.

"I work at a college where professors wear a variety of things," she says, "Some wear suits and ties and others wear shorts, so regardless of which class I was dressing for, I didn't really stand out."

That would not be true at every institution, Ms. Konheim-Kalkstein observes. "My husband is going to start teaching at West Point," she says. "If he showed up in sneakers, I think he would have a much stronger reaction there from his students."

Call for (Short) Papers AALS Section on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Issues


On the Cutting Edge:  Charting the Future of
Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Scholarship

AALS Annual Meeting
 January 6-10, 2010 in New Orleans, Louisiana


Thirty years ago, Rhonda Rivera published “Our Straight-Laced Judges:  The Legal Position of Homosexual Persons in the United States,” the first comprehensive law review article of its kind.  Since then, the sexual orientation and gender identity legal literature has exploded, with hundreds of articles considering all imaginable aspects of the law’s relationship to gender identity and sexual orientation.  At the same time, political demands of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgender have both multiplied and moved to the center of cultural debates, and the body of case law addressing these issues has likewise grown exponentially.   What, then, are the next steps for legal scholarship?  

The program’s aim is to highlight new issues, new theories, possibilities for linking theory and practice, and visions of the field for the decade(s) to come.  

Because the program aims to spark new ideas, this Call for Papers is for short essays – from 1000 to 2000 words – rather than for full-length papers.  Submissions will be considered for two purposes:

Program participation – One submission will be selected for presentation at the SOGII program at the Annual Meeting, which will be held from 10:30 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. on Saturday, January 9, 2010, in New Orleans.  The selected author will have to rely on his or her own institution for funding to attend the conference.  

Publication – Up to twenty submissions will be selected for publication in a special volume of the Sexuality & Law Journal (published at Tulane Law School) dedicated to the panel topic.  

The SOGII Section executive committee will serve as the selection committee.  For both purposes, essays must be no longer than 2000 words, including footnotes.

The deadline to submit a draft essay is Tuesday, September 1, 2009.  Essays can be revised, subject to the approval of the Journal editors, through the fall semester, although 2000 words will remain the outer length limit.  Please submit the draft paper to Professor Suzanne B. Goldberg, Chair of the Section on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Issues, as an attachment to an e-mail at suzanne.goldberg@law.columbia.edu.  Submissions will be reviewed by members of the SOGII Section's Executive Committee.  Decisions will be communicated by late September 2009.

Dean Weissenberger fired by DePaul University over ABA disclosures

Weissenberger fired by DePaul University :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Education

Weissenberger fired by DePaul University
Comments

June 19, 2009

BY STEFANO ESPOSITO Staff Reporter

Glen Weissenberger, the popular dean of DePaul University’s College of Law, has been ousted — and he claims it was because he exposed “inaccurate’’ information given by the school to its accreditors.

Weissenberger, the school’s dean since 2002, said in an e-mail to law school staff that he was fired for alerting the American Bar Association that DePaul administrators had recently given the ABA “inaccurate” information on its funding.

But DePaul spokeswoman Denise Mattson on Friday disputed Weissenberger’s claims. She said he was terminated because the relationship between the dean and university administrators was “poor and it wasn’t improving.”

DePaul Provost Helmut Epp said in an e-mail to to faculty and staff this week that “the working relationship between the dean and the administration had deteriorated to the point where it had become difficult to accomplish the college’s work, hence my recommendation to the president for this action.”

Epp, who praised the Law School’s accomplishments under the dean’s tenure, didn’t offer any specific examples in his email of that deteriorating relationship.

Weissenberger couldn’t be reached for comment Friday. But in his e-mail to the law faculty and staff, he said “I want to assure you that I was not terminated for any wrongdoing of any kind.”

He said his firing was “based specifically” on a June 16 letter he sent to the ABA claiming the university gave wrong information about the distribution of law school tuition funds during its accreditation process. He claimed the university had violated an agreement to give 75 percent of tuition funds paid by law students back to the law school — a charge the university denies.

A group of mostly law school students — both past and present — is circulating a petition in support of Weissenberger’s reinstatement.

“It has upset many of us and has disheartened us that the university has made this decision,” wrote DePaul’s Student Bar Association President Patrick Tran. “Though the university’s reasoning has been vague, the university has always been resistant to Dean Weissenberger’s initiatives to improve our law school.”

Weissenberger was appointed to a second five-year term in 2007. Before coming to DePaul, he spent 27 years teaching at the University of Cincinnati Law School.

He remains a tenured member of the DePaul faculty.

An interim dean of the College of Law has been hired, and his name will be made public early next week, Mattson said.

Epp has scheduled a private meeting with the law school’s faculty and staff Monday to answer questions about the administration’s decision to fire Weissenberger and about the future of the law school.

June 29, 2009

Obama's Stonewall

Marchers carrying a mile-long rainbow banner 

By Richard Kim, NPR.org, June 29, 2009 ·

In 1996, when Barack Obama was running for the Illinois Senate, he was asked in a survey by Outlines, a gay community newspaper in Chicago, if he supported same-sex marriage. Unlike most candidates, who merely indicated yes or no, Obama took the unusual step of typing in his response, to which he affixed his signature. Back then not a single state permitted same-sex marriage, and sodomy was a crime. Nonetheless, Obama took a position on the progressive edge of the Democratic Party, and he did so with unmistakable clarity: "I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages."

Since then, as Obama traced his dazzling arc to the presidency, his stance on gay rights has become murkier, wordier, less courageous, more Clintonian. During his 2004 US Senate bid, he stated that he supports domestic partnerships and civil unions instead of same-sex marriage. When speaking to gay audiences, he explained his new position as "primarily just...a strategic issue." But on bigger stages he cited his Christian faith as grounds for his belief that marriage is between a man and a woman, a view he reiterated during the 2008 presidential election even while he also asserted, inconsistently, that religion should not dictate a state's approach to gay rights.

As president, Obama has made similar equivocations on gay rights. As a senator and as a candidate, he won the vocal support of the vast majority of gays and lesbians by calling for the repeal of both the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the miserable failure that is "don't ask, don't tell," and by supporting full federal partnership rights (but not same-sex marriage) and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would make it illegal to fire someone because of his or her sexual orientation. But he has so far spent no political capital to turn these promises into reality. Quite to the contrary, Obama's slide hit what one hopes will be a nadir on June 12 when his administration filed a brief defending the legality of DOMA by comparing same-sex marriage to incest and pedophilia.

It is impossible to accept that a president who owes so much to movements for civil rights and social justice, never mind the Obama of 1996, believes in such right-wing bigotry; the only plausible explanation can be one of political calculation. The memory of Bill Clinton's early failure to integrate the military, as well as the aftermath of the 2004 election, when same-sex marriage was blamed for John Kerry's loss, looms large in the minds of top Democratic strategists. Guided by veterans of the Clinton-era culture wars like chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, the prevailing wisdom in the White House seems to be that a forward push on gay rights can only endanger what the Democratic Party hopes will be a lasting majority and would squander precious political capital better used on issues like healthcare and economic reform.

Such logic, however, is quickly becoming obsolete. Six states have legalized gay marriage. Democrats like Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd and New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine have renounced support for civil unions and embraced same-sex marriage, with Corzine having done so as a centerpiece of his re-election bid. Gen. John Shalikashvili, Clinton's chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and a cadre of military leaders have publicly called for an end to "don't ask, don't tell." Huge majorities of Americans, 89 percent in a 2008 Gallup poll, support workplace rights for gays and lesbians. Steve Schmidt, John McCain's campaign manager, and former Vice President Cheney have announced their support for same-sex marriage; and Utah's Republican governor, Jon Huntsman, came out in favor of civil unions, a switch that has not eroded his popularity in Mormon country one bit. At this rate, Obama is in danger of being outpaced on gay rights not just by the American people but by the nonsuicidal wing of the Republican Party.

There is still time for a course correction. In the wake of an uproar from gay activists and progressives, Obama signed a memo extending limited benefits to partners of gay federal employees (but not healthcare or inheritance rights); reiterated his intent to repeal DOMA; and voiced support for legislation that would, in the interim, give healthcare to same-sex partners of federal workers. But words are no longer enough. Now is the time for Obama to act with the full authority of his office and his character to pass a gay rights agenda that, in the end, will be seen as neither particularly radical nor particularly partisan but as a simple matter of fairness under the law.

A promising first step would be to fast-track passage of ENDA. A previous version passed the House by a vote of 235 to 184 in 2007, with thirty-five Republicans in favor, before dying under the threat of a Bush veto. Congressman Barney Frank introduced a stronger version that includes protections for transgender people on June 24, just before the fortieth anniversary of the Stonewall riots in New York City, which ignited the modern gay rights movement.

In those forty years, and especially in the past decade, the arc of the moral universe, as Obama is fond of saying on other matters, has bent toward justice. So much so that the question is no longer, Can the Obama administration afford to support gay rights with full-throated passion—but rather, Can it afford not to?

SSRN: Race/Gender/Sexual Orientation in the Law School Classroom"

"Making Up is Hard to Do: Race/Gender/Sexual Orientation in the Law School Classroom" Free Download


Harvard Journal of Law and Gender, Forthcoming
Washington U. School of Law Working Paper No. 09-05-04

ROBERT S. CHANG, Seattle University School of Law
Email: changro@seattleu.edu
ADRIENNE D. DAVIS,
Washington University School of Law in St. Louis
Email: davisad@email.unc.edu

This exchange of letters picks up where Professors Adrienne Davis and Robert Chang left off in an earlier exchange that examined who speaks, who is allowed to speak, and what is remembered. Here, Professors Davis and Chang explore the dynamics of race, gender, and sexual orientation in the law school classroom. They compare the experiences of African American women and Asian American men in trying to perform as law professors, considering how makeup and other gender tools simultaneously assist and hinder such performances. Their exchange examines the possibility of bias that complicates the use of student evaluations in assessing teaching effectiveness. It hypothesizes that the mechanism by which this bias manifests itself is a variant of stereotype threat, one that they call projected stereotype threat, where stereotypes of incompetence or accent are projected onto the bodies of teachers marked by difference. They examine how institutions respond or, as is more typically the case, fail to respond to these problems. They conclude with some suggestions for change, asserting that if institutions want to pay more than lip service to the goal of diversity, the success and employment conditions of women and minorities will improve only through the hiring of more women and minorities and by addressing directly the issue of bias to educate students about bias and its discriminatory effects on instructors whose bodies are marked by perceived differences and how such bias interferes with their learning.

First online law grad admitted in Massachusetts


An online law school graduate who sued the high court of Massachusetts for the opportunity to take that state's bar examination is now a newly minted Massachusetts lawyer. Last November, Ross Mitchell won his case against the state's Board of Bar Examiners, which denied his bid to bypass a requirement that U.S.-trained applicants be graduates of an American Bar Association-accredited law school. The court allowed Mitchell to sit for the bar because the ABA is mulling changes to its accreditation standards.

more here

Welcome to the Future: Time for Law School 4.0

June 22, 2009 2:31 PM

Welcome to the Future: Time for Law School 4.0

Posted by Paul Lippe

If I need some insight into the future of medicine, I might head over to Stanford Medical School. If I wanted to learn about likely directions in finance and hedge funds, I might visit Penn's Wharton. If I were looking to make investments in computing, I might arrange a tour of a lab at MIT. If I decided to learn something about where legal practice, law firms, and legal departments will be in 2014, where would I go? Not to law school.

Relative to other professional schools, law schools are extremely disengaged from professional practice-- they seek neither to understand nor to influence it. As I have said previously in this space, law has lagged behind the world of global competition--and technology-driven clients--over the last 15 years. It's now entered a whiplash period where it must catch up. If clients have to change 20 percent, then law firms must change 30-40 percent (see Jordan Furlong’s great post on how U.K. changes will migrate to the U.S.), and the "supply chain" to law firms (e.g., law schools and certain companies and service providers) will experience the most dramatic change.   

Over the past six months, I have participated in a number of symposia at law schools and have visited with eight deans, including David Van Zandt at Northwestern and Rick Matasar at New York Law School. How did we get here? In the simplest terms, we can identify three phases of legal education.

Phase I was the apprenticeship system, where folks "read" law under more senior lawyers. Some refer to this model as "Lincoln's way" because it produced great thinkers and advocates like Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Justice John Marshall, and most of the signers of the Constitution. This 1:1 apprenticeship model gradually evolved into a trade school model, where practicing lawyers would supplement their meager income by lecturing on law at the local YMCA night law school.

Phase II, pioneered by Dean Christopher Columbus Langdell at Harvard, created the professional school, and centered the curriculum around the case method and classroom discussion, which is the template for every law school in the country. The American Bar Association and later the Association of American Law Schools worked to eradicate the trade school model, ratcheting up admissions standards and driving the emergence of the faculty as a distinct profession.

Phase III reflects the last generation or so, where law schools have grown more distant from the profession, and the legal academy has come to define itself as primarily engaged in a scholarly pursuit (like, say, literature or history), as opposed to a professional pursuit, like, say, medicine or business.  

Some obvious problems with the Phase III model include:

--Students graduate from law school with a lot of debt but without client-marketable skills, so their primary option is to serve long apprenticeships in law firms, beginning with very rote work, which is less intellectually engaging than law school or judicial clerkships. While law students who get the higher-paying law firm jobs achieve good salaries much faster than medical students, their time to professional independence is longer. This is not because law is more complex or riskier than medicine, but because legal training is inferior.

--It's no surprise that law graduates don't acquire client-marketable skills, since so many law faculty don't care much about the practice of law. Even in 1981, when I went to law school, the faculty generally held law firms in low regard, and clients were presumed unethical without the constant guidance of lawyers  (when I spoke to a law school dean the other day, she immediately equated client with "Enron"). It's nuts for law school to be primarily about understanding appellate decision making and not at all about understanding clients.

--Law school is weak on empiricism--unlike, for example, medical school, which is moving in the direction of being ever more evidence-based. Almost every argument in law school is a hypothetical grounded in abstraction and unproved in experience.

If law schools aren't figuring out the future, who is? Or is the future of law practice not important?  If law schools don't imagine a future any different from the present, is it any wonder many lawyers embrace the fallacy of an unchanging and unchangeable profession?

As I have suggested previously, general counsel are pushing for big discounts for junior associate time, and law firms are deleveraging, which means straight-from-law-school-hiring is going to drop for at least three years and probably forever (tell me again why we're flying to Duke Law School to interview so we'll have an inexperienced lawyer for a project in 2013 and who, if everyone is really lucky, may become eligible for partnership in 2022?). Law schools will have to produce fully functioning lawyers who can quickly become economically viable--not just proto appellate clerks.

Let me suggest some likely elements of change (some of which already are in play at Northwestern and elsewhere):

--An accelerated curriculum, with no more than a year of case method, a year of clinical, and then a year of externship with subject area focus, along the lines of medical school.

--More practice orientation in teaching, with far more adjunct faculty who are active practitioners (a random e-mail I received yesterday said, "One of the reasons I chose Northwestern for law school is I believe in the type of changes that Dean Van Zandt is trying to make. My favorite instructors were not academics but adjuncts who were successful practicing attorneys.")

Continue reading "Welcome to the Future: Time for Law School 4.0" »

June 27, 2009

March a Mile in My Shoes

Posted on Feministe US:

It’s Gay Pride time here in New York City. Specifically, did you know that today is the 5th Annual Trans Day of Action? It’s a tradition we started / revived in the queer/trans people-of-color community around here for several reasons.

First, because we felt the need for another annual landmark to celebrate the lives and struggles of living trans people, in contrast to the somber, autumnal Trans Day of Remembrance. Second, because of an old tradition from decades past: gay pride parades that wanted to be “respectable” forbade trans people from marching on Sunday, so trans folks started their own march-in-exile on the Friday before. Third, because every year there is a lot of bullshit going down that threatens the lives and well-being of trans people, especially those who are marginalized and endangered by poverty, racism, disabilities, criminalization, unjust incarceration, homelessness, immigrant status, and much more. You can read the current list here, which is what the TDOA march was about today.

Here on the internet, there are a bunch of much more symbolic, less immediately-material issues bubbling up that have really been annoying me. Not as much as the city government here discriminating against trans people applying for welfare, but still very annoying in that internet way. Since I’ve built up a backlog, I thought I’d share them with you. An overview first, and more thoughts further down.

First of all, this website. Tranny-Alert.com. That’s right, Tranny Alert. Let me just quote their mission statement.

Your site for all things tranny. Tranny spottings. Tranny news. Tranny everything! We are all trannies, all the time. Our site cannot survive without your submissions! Spot a tranny or suspected tranny around town? See a hot tranny mess? Observe a guidette in New Jersey with tranny style? Notice trannies on TV/Radio/Billboards? Find yourself at a Lady Gaga concert? WE WANT TO KNOW!

So it’s like a celebrity-spotting blog, except they take pictures of random trans women on the subway and publish them. Guess what they just Twittered this afternoon? “omg trannies are marching in union square right now is anyone with a camera in the area?” That’s right, it was the Trans Day of Action march that I mentioned earlier. Seriously, I hope some cameras explode in some trans-stalking faces.

Second, the incredibly bigoted failure of this stand-up comedy bit by Iliza Shlesinger, the first woman (and most recent person) to win the Last Comic Standing reality series.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXDrrcLuwCg&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efeministe%2Eus%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2009%2F06%2F26%2Fmarch%2Da%2Dmile%2Din%2Dmy%2Dshoes%2F&feature=player_embedded.

And finally, the increasingly common trend of everyone under the sun using the word “tranny” all the time. We’ve already talked about what’s most obvious: how it’s not OK for Christian Siriano and other non-trans to toss this term around for cred, especially with negative connotations. It’s a slur, folks. More recently, I came across a couple brilliant pieces of writing by iphisol and cedar (part 1 and part 2) about why it’s not really OK for anyone but trans women, who have been historically slurred with this term, to appropriate and throw it around like it’s hilarious hoppin’ party time. I agree with them.

Read more of this article at http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/06/26/march-a-mile-in-my-shoes/

June 26, 2009

Law Apps for iPhones (and Blackberry)

from A Mobblog on Legal Education by

This article lists some general apps that one may want to add to an iPhone. The one that caught my eye, however, is the Federal Rules of Evidence. The company that provides the Rules, The Law Pod, also offer the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Federal Rules of Bankruptcy, Federal Rules of Evidence, and the U.S. Constitution. Apparently more apps are to in the works too. If the company updates them wirelessly, these apps could be quite useful (FYI The Law Pod folks are smart enough to offer the products for Blackberry users as well).

Furthermore Law Pod claims “Because rather than embracing a traditional business model, after-tax profits from the sale of these applications will be used to provide financial aid in the form of grants and scholarships to law students in need.” That is a nice touch.

This move reminds me of an old film about medical school where med students pretended to know what they were doing and then pulled out a handy reference guide to check a diagnosis. To be clear, looking up information is a good thing. If I remember correctly, Akhil Amar urged his students to keep a pocket copy of the Constitution with them. This service solves the problem of carrying extra paper around. Of course, if one is giving a closed book exam, one now had even more reason to have students surrender all phones during the exam.

What's Old Is New Again: Howrey Introduces Apprenticeships

Jeff Jeffrey
The National Law Journal
June 23, 2009

Starting this fall, Howrey will begin selling recruits on a new program at the firm in which associates will spend their first two years serving as "apprentices" before taking on significant client work.

As part of the two-year program, associates will spend the majority of their time at the litigation-heavy firm attending training seminars where they will learn the practical skills of lawyering, said managing partner Robert Ruyak in an interview.

During their first year at the firm, associates will take classes on legal writing and research and will work on pro bono projects to give them hands-on experience without charging clients. In the second year of the program, associates will be embedded at client sites for several months at a reduced billing rate of between $150 and $200 an hour. They will also continue to take classes on litigation skills such as trial tactics, cross examination, and mediation and arbitration.

Howrey started working on the program about two years ago when the firm decided it was going to move away from lockstep compensation for its associates. (In January, the firm did away with its lockstep model for associates, instead paying them based on measured levels of competency.) To hammer out the details, Howrey hired a consultant and discussed the program with partners and associates. The firm announced the change to partners in a meeting at noon and to associates in a meeting at 2 p.m. today.

Ruyak compares the new program to medical residency and accounting secondment, in which younger accountants are placed with clients for a period of time to learn how their businesses work.

"The old model is broken," Ruyak said. "You're bringing on these extremely bright individuals and letting them waste their careers buried in documents where they aren't really learning the practical skills it takes to be a lawyer."

The firm will be recruiting a smaller class this year, he said, with the goal of making sure that the associates who are hired are joining the firm for the long haul. In the first year, the firm will hire 20 associates and then bring on another 10 from judicial clerkships or from U.S. Attorney's Offices during the second year. "Clerkships and the U.S. Attorney's Office are great because you're learning how trials work. You're learning what the rules are," Ruyak said. "But there just aren't enough clerkships to go around because there are only so many federal judges. This allows us to give associates the experience they need in a much more organized fashion than the way most firms use younger lawyers."

Ruyak said the firm plans to pay associates slightly more than the $80,000 or so they would be making as a clerk but less than the $160,000 many top law firms currently pay. From now on, when associates join the firm, they will be paid $100,000 in salary with an additional $25,000 to, in most cases, help pay off loans from their last semester of law school. During the second year, that amount goes up to $125,000 with an additional $25,000 bonus if they finish the program successfully. Ruyak added that the firm will not be changing any other pay levels.

The reduced pay will also have the benefit of "weeding out the lawyers who are only in it for the money and not to be trial lawyers," Ruyak said. The people hired under the apprenticeship program will report to the firm earlier than usual, in September 2010, for orientation and training.

While associates will be paid less in their first two years, Ruyak said the new approach is not a way to save the firm money. In fact, he said, it's going to cost between $3 million and $4 million to implement once training costs and the unbilled hours the associates work are thrown in.

"The way we see it though is that it's going to cost more in the beginning because we're creating something from scratch, but once we get going and we start having a group of young, experienced lawyers coming out ready to handle client matters, we're going to turn a profit much more quickly than we would under the old model," Ruyak said.

He said that the firm would spend that same amount to train associates anyway, only it would be spread out across seven years. "This way, we just get it out of the way in the beginning."

So far, clients have responded to the change positively, Ruyak said, and many have offered to have first- and second-year associates join them for a few months to learn the ropes of their business. He says the firm has also been speaking with federal appellate judges about having associates serve as extra clerks with them for several months.

Ruyak said that it's easier for a firm that does primarily litigation to implement an apprenticeship program, but he sees it as the future for the profession. "Law firms are way behind on this kind of thing. Other professions like medicine have been doing this for years. The way we have been doing things simply doesn't make sense."

June 25, 2009

Notes from the Breadline: Our Endless Numbered Days

Above the Law Ed. note: Welcome to the latest installment of "Notes from the Breadline," a column by a laid-off lawyer in New York. Prior columns are collected here. You can reach Roxana St. Thomas by email (at roxanastthomas@gmail.com), follow her on Twitter, or find her on Facebook.

We've all heard the statistics about attorney layoffs, unemployment, and the sad state of the economy. But do the hard numbers tell the full story of life in the breadline? Inspired by the Harper's Index, today I offer you the Notes from the Breadline Index.

Months in the breadline: 6

Estimated number of jobs applied for: 266

Estimated number of responses received to job inquiries: 23

Follow-up phone calls returned: 2

Soup recipes developed: 4

Meals consisting primarily of soup: 87

Approximate hours spent online trolling for potential jobs: 745

Average number of times, per day, email inbox checked for responses to job inquiries: 28

Percentage of times inbox check followed by fleeting thought that email has stopped working: 8

Number of evil cats currently freeloading off meager household income: 2

Number of times I have seriously considered the employability of cats: 3

Half-knitted scarves finished now that I have "time on my hands": 0

Maximum number of days without washing hair: 5

 

To read the rest of the list, go to:  http://abovethelaw.com/2009/06/notes_from_the_breadline_index.php

Student Loan Bailout: You Only Have to be Broke for Ten Years

Student Loan Bailout.JPGA new federal program promises student loan forgiveness for people who qualify after they've dutifully paid their debts for ten years. The program will also cap monthly loan payments depending on income. The act, passed in 2007, is set to become effective on July 1st. The National Law Journal reports the awesome news:

Some members of the class of 2009 will have less to complain about, however. A new federal program intended to help borrowers manage their student debt goes into effect on July 1. The legislation -- called the College Cost Reduction & Access Act -- will cap monthly loan payments according to income and forgive student debt balances after designated periods of time. For attorneys, the main beneficiaries will be those who go on to have long-term public interest careers. But the program will also make loan payments more affordable for all attorneys with high debt loads and relatively low incomes.

"There are a lot of things that are making it tough for new graduates, with the tight job market and the deferrals," said Heather Jarvis, a senior program manager at Equal Justice Works, an organization that encourages attorneys to undertake public interest law careers. "But there has never been a better time to graduate, as far as student loans."

Essentially this is the best piece of news for the class of 2009 since they got into law school in the first place. The government will forgive outstanding loans after ten years of payments for people who work in public interest and other qualifying organizations.

read the rest of the story at:  http://abovethelaw.com/2009/06/student_loan_bailout_you_only.php

June 24, 2009

Don't Ask Don't Tell March on 40th anniversary of Stonewall

 

A Message from the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network:

 

Dear Colleague,

 

As you know, this week we mark the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall riots. As Barney Frank noted last week, we have made significant progress since then, but, unfortunately, discrimination still exists – and we have much more hard work ahead of us.

 

At SLDN we have been thinking of an appropriate way to honor those who took to the streets 40 years ago in Greenwich Village to fight for our freedoms.  And, at the same time, we want to honor the estimated 65,000 service members currently serving in silence every day under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." We also want to recognize and appreciate the 13,000 patriotic service members who have been discharged under the law.

 

Like those who fought back four decades ago and took to the streets, we, too, say, "Enough!"

 

Led by the fighting Cook v. Gates plaintiffs (service members discharged under DADT), we will be marching to the White House on Saturday, June 27 to call upon President Obama to break his silence on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."  The first 265 marchers will be veterans and service members. This is the number of service members discharged since January 20 when the President took office. In addition, family and friends of service members will be attending to implore the president to lead the way with lawmakers to get repeal done in this Congress and to end discrimination in the military.

 

We hope this can be a real community-sponsored event and that you and your organization can help make this an appropriate and spirited Stonewall commemoration. One doesn't need to be a veteran or on active duty to show up and support our LGBT troops, one only needs to be committed to equality for all. We will meet in Farragut Square (17th & K St NW) at 2:00pm and march to the White House from there.

 

Even if you can’t make it to Washington, D.C., you can still play an important and hands on role in the demonstration…

 

·         Become an official sponsor of the march. We would love to add your organization’s name to the growing list of official co-sponsors. In turn, we encourage you to spread the word about the march to your supporters and feature information on your website.

 

·         Call the White House switchboard on Saturday. While we’re marching to the White House, you and your supporters can join us by calling the White House switchboard at 202-456-1414. Help amplify the call for President Obama to break his silence on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

 

·         Call your members of Congress. Your supporters can also take action by calling their members of Congress to urge they co-sponsor the Military Readiness Enhancement Act (H.R. 1283) – the bill to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and replace it with a policy of non-discrimination. Click here for more information about calling members of Congress.

 

Together, we have a real opportunity to deliver a powerful message to the White House, Congress, and to the American people, and to let our service members know they have not been forgotten. Let me know your thoughts and if you have any questions.

 

We look forward to your feedback and participation. If you wish to be added today as one of the official sponsors, please let me or Ben Mishkin (bmishkin@sldn.org), SLDN Grassroots Organizer, know.

 

Thank you,

Aubrey

 

Aubrey Sarvis

Executive Director

Servicemembers Legal Defense Network

202.621.5409

 


Don’t Ask Don’t Tell:

 

This week SALT sent a letter to President Obama urging him to use his leadership to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and to adopt an anti-discriminatory policy towards service by gays and lesbians in the military.  Please distribute these documents.    Visit the  SALT Website  for more information.

Isn't this what we all need?

from Feministing by

Oh wait this isn't vintage, this company exists today. Sociological Images (which is increasingly my go-to place for great break-downs of visual sexism) has a great breakdown of their not-so-funny marketing claims.

The Clash Of Ages: How Technology Divides Workers

by Joshua Brockman, All Things Considered, June 22, 2009 Listen Now[3 min 24 sec]

 
Kelly Huang on Facebook 

Eric Pro, a 19-year-old electrical engineer at Aquas Inc. in Bethesda, Md., takes a few seconds out from his workday to send a quick text message on his T-Mobile Sidekick. He says he's in trouble with his girlfriend and he's trying to smooth things out.

While Pro may be worried about how things stand with his love interest, recent studies show real tensions are rising between Gen Y, or 20-something employees; Gen X, or 30-something workers; and their older, less tech-savvy, baby boomer bosses.

Culture Clash

"I'm old-school, but I am willing to learn," says 56-year-old Carmen Larsen, the president of Aquas, an engineering and IT company. Larsen says she typically reaches for a phone before a keyboard. But her daughters, who work with her, help with the learning curve.

"People go out of the office to take a cigarette break for 10 minutes, people take coffee breaks and people take Facebook breaks," says Emma Evans, Larsen's 19-year-old daughter. "It's kind of become built into our way of life."

In fact, 62 percent of Gen Y workers say they engage in social networking from work. That's according to LexisNexis, an online information service. The results of LexisNexis' Technology Gap Survey show vastly different attitudes about appropriate technology use among various generations in the work force. And this is creating a clash of cultures — especially during meetings.

Debate Over Multitasking

"You can have Gen Y-ers who are busy looking at their BlackBerrys. They've got their laptops flipped open, they're engaging in social networking right during the course of a meeting, and you have a boomer rolling their eyes, not understanding it," says Michael Walsh, the CEO for LexisNexis U.S. Legal Markets. "Two-thirds of boomers that were surveyed indicated that they felt that use of devices, technology — such as e-mail, social networking, the Internet, etc. — contributed to a decline in office etiquette."

Meanwhile, Gen X-ers are caught between having to manage and bridge the gap.

Walsh says the generational divide is most intense in Fortune 500 companies because senior management is typically made up of baby boomers. But it's also an issue that small companies like Aquas — with just over 30 employees ranging in age from 18 to 68 — have to contend with.

Social Networking's Reach

According to a workplace study on social networking and reputation risk by consulting giant Deloitte, nearly three-quarters of employees surveyed say they think it's easy to damage a company's reputation using social media.

Companies are cognizant of the far-reaching impact employees can have on their brand through social networking and other online activities. In April, when two Domino's pizza employees posted a video online showing one of them sticking cheese up his nose and sneezing on food, it sent shock waves through the corporate world.

Still, Deloitte's study also found that more than half of employees say their social networking is none of their employer's business.

Sharon Allen, chairman of Deloitte's board, says employers shouldn't put too many rules and restrictions into place: "We do believe as well that the ability to touch base with friends and family during the course of the day allows them to have a better mix of work and life."

Like it or not, technology is blurring the lines between work and leisure. In his book Elsewhere, U.S.A., New York University professor Dalton Conley even coined a term for it: "weisure."

June 23, 2009

Socially Responsible Social Networking

Posted by Deven Desai on http://madisonian.net/

In light of the events in Iran, many may laud the power of tools such as Twitter and Facebook as they allow information to reach the world. Here in the United States, however, a few stories highlight how social networking tools and blogs run into ideas of fairness, honesty, and even justice. First, the FTC is planning on investigating bloggers who are paid for their posts but who do not disclose their affiliation. The article claims “The common practice of posting a graphical ad or a link to an online retailer — and getting commissions for any sales from it — would be enough to trigger oversight.” Second, the Ninth Circuit has just ruled that a woman’s blog posts about her co-workers and job environment were not protected speech. As such, her demotion was lawful. Third, a recent Law.com article makes a strong argument that tweeting while on a jury should not be allowed and jeopardizes the fairness of a trial.

The FTC action seems too aggressive, yet it shows that the idea of blogs having some sort of purity is not always the case. But if it prompts bloggers to be more forthcoming about their affiliations and to develop some best practices (as the article suggests), that could be a good outcome. It also seems to embrace the idea of more information is better which may keep many online happy. Those who think tweeting is some sort of anointed right err. The trial context shows that rather well. As for the blog and speech case, I need to find the decision. The article claims that the court “concluded that [the plaintiff's] speech was not a ‘public concern’ but rather was ‘racist, sexist, and bordered on vulgar,’ and it characterized her behavior, in part, as ’salacious’ and ‘mean spirited.’” I leave it to the First Amendment folks to unravel that one, but I wonder whether this case will be appealed to the Supreme Court.

In any event, these three events show that while we can say that tools that enhance free speech are wonderful in the extreme cases such as the situation in Iran, the more subtle cases raise on-going questions about the contours of speech. As always the issues are familiar. Now, however, simply saying keep your hands off the Internet or keep it free is an insufficient guideline. Too many people are online and too much online behavior tracks offline experiences and problems. In other words, although the technologies seem to make the questions different and requiring special treatment, they may only make the old questions and responses more salient.

Poem for the Rooftops of Iran

Subtitled version of "INJA KOJAST INJA IRAN AST SARZAMINE MANO TO" (link below) - a woman speaking about the state of her country while filming the rooftop shouting of "Allah-o Akbar" in Iran on Friday June 19th.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKUZuv6_bus

June 22, 2009

SALT Sends Recommendations for Administrative Immigration Reform to President Obama

 

June 17, 2009--The Society of American Law Teachers—SALT—sent the Obama Administration recommendations to immediately revise nine categories of immigration policy through executive orders and administrative directives while Congress tackles the task of comprehensive immigration reform.  The SALT recommendations result from the accumulated experiences of clinical law faculty operating immigration law clinics in law schools across the country.


“The SALT recommendations acknowledge the need for national security balanced with due process, the rule of law, and human dignity, which are the heart of American jurisprudence,” said Professor Raquel Aldana, co-chair of SALT’s Human Rights Committee, and in-coming co-president of SALT.  “Our country’s traditions require that we treat all men and women, and their children, fairly and protect them from exploitation while acknowledging the role immigration has played in the history of our country.”


The nine categories of immigration policy include criminalization of immigrants; federal immigration enforcement policies, including workplace raids, gang-related immigration enforcement, and bus sweeps within our borders; immigration enforcement by local authorities; treatment of immigration detainees; rights of asylum seekers; right to counsel at immigration proceedings; exclusion of intellectuals, poets, artists, and activists for ideological reasons; immigrant labor and worker rights issues; and human trafficking.  

 Download a pdf of the executive summary and full recommendations.

Masculinities and the Law -- Revised Program and Registration Reminder

Hello everyone,

We have added a lunch panel to the Friday schedule of our upcoming conference on Masculinities and the Law (September 11-12). I have attached the revised schedule to this email with another copy of the registration form for your convenience.

Download FLT-Masculinities2009scheduleREVISED

Download Registration_Form_masculinities

Best,

Celeste Bocchicchio
Feminism and Legal Theory Project
Emory University School of Law

June 19, 2009

Do a Poster Presentation in New Orleans

Dear Colleagues,

 

The Teaching Methods section is sponsoring poster presentations at the 2010 AALS Annual Meeting in New Orleans, Louisiana (January 6-10, 2010).  We invite you all to consider submitting a poster.  Information regarding posters is noted below.  You may also contact any member of the Teaching Methods poster committee.  Posters are a creative way to share your ideas about effective teaching methods. 

 

Please note the deadline of September 4, 2009.  Submissions are sent directly to AALS.

 

Have a great summer.

 

Teaching Methods Poster Committee

Ruth Anne Robbins (ruthanne@camden.rutgers.edu)

Deborah Schmedemann (deborah.schmedemann@wmitchell.edu)

Mel Weresh (melissa.weresh@drake.edu)

Request for Signatures in Support of Sotomayor

The Alliance for Justice (AFJ) is circulating a sign-on letter in support of Judge Sonia Sotomayor.    Download Law Professor Letter Support Sotomayor Newsletter 18 June 09. 

 

Kellye McIntosh is the contact person:  You can reach her at the Alliance for Justice

ph: 202-822-6070

email: Kellye@afj.org

 

Or, check out this website for further information www.afj.org<http://www.afj.org.

June 18, 2009

Collaboration Experiment: Letting the Students Teach

In response to several inquiries of Albany Law School’s Family Violence Litigation Clinic students concerning tax issues related to separation and divorce, we decided to engage in an experiment that turned out to be a huge success.   The Low Income Taxpayer Clinic (”LITC”) and Family Violence Litigation Clinic (”FVLC”) students were asked to prepare and present an interactive class to share the knowledge that they had gained throughout the semester in a manner targeted to the unique issues faced by each Clinic. We followed a Best Practices approach of integrating substantive doctrine, skills, theory and social science all in one class and the feedback from the students was very positive.

In preparation for the class, the LITC students were asked to collaborate, research and prepare a presentation on tax issues that most commonly affect survivors of domestic violence.  The FVLC clinic students were asked to collaborate, research and prepare a presentation on the challenges faced by survivors of domestic violence.  The goals of the exercise were (i) to provide an environment for the students to collaborate, (ii) to give the students an opportunity to exercise their public speaking muscles, (iii) to provide a forum to express what they had learned throughout the semester and (iv) to cross pollinate.  

During the first hour of class, the LITC students discussed issues such as filing status, dependent exemptions, the Earned Income Tax Credit, Innocent Spouse Relief and entitlement to refunds.    The FVLC students asked questions of the LITC students that were targeted and practical, which required the LITC students to apply doctrinal tax rules to practical questions in a concise and expeditious manner in front of a room of their colleagues.  Throughout the second hour of class, the FVLC students presented a Power Point presentation entitled Domestic Abuse and Financial Abuse for Tax Professionals.   The FVLC students explained various domestic violence issues as they might arise in family law, such as custody, child support orders of protection and financial abuse.   Of particular relevance to the LITC students, the FVLC students discussed financial abuse and explained how to recognize when a client is being abused.   

If you ask the students, it was the best class of the semester and they snicker because they taught it.  Little do they know, by encouraging collaboration we taught them a thing or two as well.

National Immigration Law Center Looking for Policy Director

The National Immigration Law Center (NILC) is seeking a Policy Director for  its  Washington, D.C. office.  This an exciting leadership opportunity for someone committed to immigrant rights and social and economic justice with demonstrated experience in legislative and administrative advocacy, and other aspects of government relations. The Policy Director will help to develop and implement NILC’s advocacy agenda, supervise mid-level management staff and provide technical and strategic assistance to all policy staff. The Director will assume a leadership role at the agency, helping to develop and implement the strategic plan to further NILC’s mission.

http://www.nilc.org/nilcinfo/policy-director-ancmnt-2009-05-31.pdf

June 17, 2009

First Obama DoJ brief defends DoMA as constitutional

From Hunter for Justice:  http://hunterforjustice.typepad.com/hunter_of_justice/

On June 11, the Justice Department filed its first brief defending DoMA since the Obama administration took office. DoJ argued that DoMA satisfies the Due Process clause because there is no fundamental right to federal benefits associated with marriage, thus largely sidestepping the question of whether the right to marry is fundamental for same-sex couples. [As a back-up, however, the brief argued that the summary affirmance in Baker v. Nelson more than 35 years ago is still good law on the point that there is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage. Baker v. Nelson was the appeal from a federal court ruling that Minnesota did not violate the U.S.Constitution by denying a marriage license to a gay couple. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed without an opinion. 409 U.S. 810 (1972)]

The brief also argued that DoMA's limitation of federal benefits to different-sex spouses does not violate equal protection rights because, under rational basis review, Congress has the flexibility to limit marital benefits to the kind of marriage recognized by all 50 states.

The brief was filed in support of DoJ's motion to dismiss the complaint in Smelt v United States, the most recent iteration in a one-couple campaign (against the advice of the advocacy groups) to challenge the marriage exclusion in California.   The primary defense argument appears to be lack of standing: DoJ argues that Smelt cannot challenge the validity of DoMA because he has not applied for and been denied any federal benefits.

Given the standing argument, there's a good chance that the court's ruling in Smelt may not even reach the merits of the constitutionality of DoMA. But you can bet that a similar version of this brief from DoJ, based on the same arguments, will be filed in two weeks in federal court in Boston. There, a much better crafted case filed by GLAD challenges DoMA's constitutionality on behalf of a number of married Massachusetts couples, all of whom have applied for and been denied the federal benefits that are the subject of that suit.

It is clear from this brief that DoJ will be carrying out its role of defending the constitutionality of DoMA, as it does for all federal statutes almost without exception. These lawsuits - especially the one filed by GLAD - could help nudge Congress to repeal DoMA. And it is in Congress where the heaviest obligation rests on the Obama administration to make good on its stated desire to see the law repealed. The repeal effort cannot be successful overnight, but the President should lead it, not wait passively for the congressional Dems to send legislation to him.

The Smelt case also challenges the constitutionality of Prop 8. The California AG's office filed a motion to dismiss that part of the case, arguing that the plaintiffs lack standing to bring that claim because their marriage is unaffected by Prop 8, since the California Supreme Court upheld the validity of marriages performed before last November's election.

The Justice Department brief tries to put a benign spin on Congress's adoption of DoMA by casting it as a choice to recognize for purposes of federal benefits only those marriages recognized by all states. Only problem is ...that's not true.  Before DoMA, the feds recognized any marriage that was valid in an individual's state of residence, and the states differ on recognition rules for some different-sex marriages (such as between first cousins). Federal law still accepts marriages not valid in all states, with the one exception of same-sex marriages.

What's missing from the brief is also interesting.  The Justice Department did not rely on the legislative history of DoMA, which contains a lot of anti-gay language about the purpose of the law. The Justice Department did not offer deterrence of homosexuality as a justification for upholding DoMA. Small victories.

Excerpts from the Justice Department brief after the jump.

Congress had long conferred various financial and other benefits on the basis of marriage in light of the central role the institution has played in advancing a variety of societal interests.  When States began to consider adopting historically novel forms of marriage, Congress took a wait-and-see approach.  It codified, for purposes of federal benefits, a definition of marriage that all fifty states had adopted... At the same time, it cautiously declined to extend federal benefits on the basis of a newer definition of marriage that no States had adopted at the time of DOMA's passage (and only a very small minority of States have since). Thus ...Section 3 of DOMA simply maintained the status quo...

DOMA in no way prohibits same-sex couples from marrying.  Instead, the only right at issue in this case is a right to receive certain benefits on the basis of a same-sex marriage. No court has ever found such a right to federal benefits on that basis to be fundamental...Likewise, DOMA does not discriminate , or permit the States to discriminate, on the basis of a suspect classification; indeed, the Ninth Circuit has held that sexual orientation is not a suspect classification....

[Congress's] measured response to society's evolving understandings of marriage is entirely rational. ...DOMA ...maximizes democratic flexibility under our federalist scheme, by simply preventing some States from requiring ... the federal government to grant benefits to forms of marriages that, under [its] own constitution, [the] federal government [is] not obligated to recognize...

Congress may subsequently decide to extend federal benefits to same-sex marriages, but its decision to reserve judgment on the question does not render any differences in the availability of federal benefits irrational or unconstitutional.

June 16, 2009

Your Queen Blogista is Wine Tasting in Cape Town

So it's just me, folks.  You'll therefore have to be content with one post a day for the next couple of weeks.  Unless any of you want to pitch in.  It's okay, you'll survive.  There's always Facebook to keep you occupied.

SALT CONFERENCE ON Vulnerable Populations and Economic Realities

SAVE THE DATE

Friday and Saturday, March 19 & 20, 2010

Golden Gate University School of Law, San Francisco, CA

Vulnerable Populations and Economic Realities:

an interdisciplinary approach to law teaching

Golden Gate University School of Law and the Society of American Law Teachers—SALT—are presenting a two-day teaching conference bringing new data and theories from the social sciences, communications and media, and education about our most vulnerable populations for use in law teaching across the curriculum.

Watch for the call for proposals in late August 2009.

For more information watch the SALTLAW.org website or contact Michele Benedetto at 415 442 6575 or mbenedetto@ggu.edu.

This conference is being supported through a generous grant from the Elfenworks Foundation.

June 15, 2009

Student evaluations I love

from The Faculty Lounge by

Up until now, my favorite evaluations have included "Drinks too much Diet Coke" (not true any more) and (from an 11-year-old sitting with her mom in my class, when asked how I compared to other professors) "I don't know; I'm only 11 years old."

But today, having turned in my grades for one of my courses, I was treated to a new all-time fave.  The question in our evaluation form is how available the instructor is to his or her students.  The student's evaluation of my availability?  "She's married, dude.  Don't be a tool."

Anyone else have other good ones?

(Posted by Nancy Rapoport.)

Externship Conference: Call for Proposals

CALL FOR PROPOSALS

 

Externships 5: Externships in Changing Times

University of Miami School of Law, Coral Gables, Florida

March 4-6, 2010

 The University of Miami and the conference organizing committee invite your proposals for presentations for the fifth national conference on legal externships.  Externships 5 will explore how externships respond to and advance changes in the legal profession, legal education, and the economy B changes both past and future. The questions to explore include:

 How can externship clinics advance the promise of Carnegie and Best Practices?

How should changes in our students’ career prospects affect our programs?

How might changing roles for lawyers affect our teaching and clinical supervision?

How might new ABA Standards affect the externship community?

 We encourage you to come forward with any topic that will challenge us to reflect on how we foster our students= professional development through clinical teaching in externships. We also encourage proposals designed to address clinicians new to the externship model of teaching.

 We seek presentations in several different formats. We solicit proposals for concurrents in longer (75 min.) and shorter (60 min.) formats. We also encourage workshop/discussion proposals for those who would like to meet by region, by subject matter (e.g. prosecutorial externships), or by experience (e.g. new externship clinicians). We welcome proposals to present scholarly works-in-progress. Finally, we hope to offer several short, quick “great idea” presentations of between 10 - 20 minutes

read the rest here

.Download Externships 5 - Call for Proposals

June 12, 2009

Law Student Loses Free Speech Case Against Regent

The Chronicle of Higher Education
News Blog

June 11, 2009

Judge Rejects Former Student's Lawsuit Against Regent U. and Pat Robertson

A federal judge in Virginia has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a former Regent University law student who was suspended after posting on the Internet an unflattering picture of Pat Robertson, the Christian institution’s founder and chancellor, the Associated Press reported.

The student, Adam Key, accused the university and Mr. Robertson of violating his free-speech and due-process rights. But Judge Jerome B. Friedman of the U.S. District Court in Norfolk rejected Mr. Key’s argument that because the private university accepted some federal funds, it was subject to the same free-speech and due-process standards that apply to the government. In an opinion issued last Friday, Judge Friedman wrote that a university’s receipt of public funds alone does not make its decisions acts of the state. —Charles Huckabee

Law Professor Letter: Support Judge Sotomayor

Law Professor Letter: Support Judge Sotomayor

Full Petition Text:

We the undersigned professors of law write in support of the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

Judge Sotomayor will bring to the Supreme Court an extraordinary personal story, stellar academic qualifications, remarkable professional accomplishments and much needed ethnic and gender diversity. Her rise from modest circumstances speaks to the strength of her character, her tenacity and her work ethic. Her exceptional academic record at Princeton and Yale Law School is testament to her exceptional intellect and her ability to excel in highly competitive circumstances.

On the bench, Judge Sotomayor has distinguished herself as a brilliant, careful, fair-minded jurist whose rulings exhibit unfailing adherence to the rule of law. Her opinions reflect careful attention to the facts of each case and a reading of the law that demonstrates fidelity to the text of statutes and the Constitution. She pays close attention to precedent and has proper respect for the role of courts and the other branches of government in our society. She has not been reluctant to protect core constitutional values and has shown a commitment to providing equal justice for all who come before her.

Judge Sotomayor?s approach to the law reflects her rich and diverse professional career. She served as a prosecutor in the Manhattan District Attorneys office, and as a corporate litigator in private practice. During this period, she was deeply engaged in public activities, including service on the New York Mortgage Agency and the New York City Campaign Finance Board, as well as serving on the Board of Directors of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund.

Her career won bi-partisan respect, which led George H.W. Bush to nominate her to the federal district court and a majority Democratic Senate to confirm her in 1992. Her performance on the district court solidified that bipartisan respect and President Clinton nominated her to the Second Circuit. She was confirmed by a majority Republican Senate in 1998.

We are confident that Judge Sotomayor?s brilliance, her character forged by her extraordinary background and experience, and her profound respect for the law and the craft of judging make her an exceptionally well-qualified nominee to the Supreme Court and we urge her speedy confirmation.

Sincerely:
[Your name]
[Your address]

Sign this Petition

Please select a profession:

* Required Field

The New Student Excuse -- Corrupted-Files.com

Most of us have had the experience of receiving e-mail with an attachment, trying to open the attachment, and finding a corrupted file that won't open. That concept is at the root of a new Web site advertising itself (perhaps serious only in part) as the new way for students to get extra time to finish their assignments.

Corrupted-Files.com offers a service -- recently noted by several academic bloggers who have expressed concern -- that sells students (for only $3.95, soon to go up to $5.95) intentionally corrupted files. Why buy a corrupted file? Here's what the site says: "Step 1: After purchasing a file, rename the file e.g. Mike_Final-Paper. Step 2: E-mail the file to your professor along with your 'here's my assignment' e-mail. Step 3: It will take your professor several hours if not days to notice your file is 'unfortunately' corrupted. Use the time this website just bought you wisely and finish that paper!!!"

read the rest of this story at Inside Higher Ed online:  http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/05/corrupted

June 11, 2009

Going Global: Antipoverty Lessons from Around the World

Poverty Law Prof Blog


New Issue of Pathways:

Spring_2009_cover_214px_274px The Spring issue of Pathways, the poverty, inequality, and social policy magazine of The Stanford Center for the Study of Poverty and Inequality, has now been published.  The issue (full PDF available here) includes:

Editors' Note by David Grusky and Christopher Wimer

TRENDS
Getting to Equal: Progress, Pitfalls, and Policy Solutions on the Road to Gender Parity in the Workplace
Have we "stalled out" in the historic march toward gender equality in the workplace? Pamela Stone weighs the evidence and makes the case for a new way forward.

RESEARCH IN BRIEF
New research developments
A surprising trend in wealth inequality, the biological determinants of poor children's academic performance, the long-term effects of job displacement, and other cutting-edge research.

GOING GLOBAL: ANTIPOVERTY LESSONS FROM AROUND THE WORLD
Flexicurity
Joshua Cohen and Charles Sabel argue that the time has come to build a 21st century labor market modeled on key principles of Denmark's "flexicurity" system.
Pro-Poor Stimulus: Lessons from the Developing World
Martin Ravallion looks to antipoverty programs in developing countries to understand how developed nations like the United States can provide stimulus while reducing long-term poverty.
Combating Poverty by Building Assets: Lessons from Around the World
Ray Boshara describes the key features of asset-building programs throughout the world and examines how the United States can apply them to achieve economic security for the poor.
Northern Exposure: Learning from Canada�s Response to Winner-Take-All Inequality
Jacob S. Hacker describes how the United States and Canada have taken two different roads and why the Canadian road provides lessons that the United States might take to heart.

INTERVENTIONS
Spotlight On...Growing Power and the Urban Farming Movement
In our new "Spotlight On" feature, we talk with Growing Power's Will and Erika Allen about the potential and future of urban agriculture in combating poverty

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

July 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31