A Pioneer Passes

Hon. Jean Williams, 1925-2011

We learned this weekend that a legal pioneer had died after a short illness. As the story says, Judge Jean Williams was the first African American Municipal Court Judge in Phoenix. In fact, she was the first to be appointed in both Phoenix and Tucson.

Jean Williams was a leader, first on the national stage and then here in Arizona. She worked with Martin Luther King, Jr., and later spearheaded efforts for a state holiday to honor him. You can read more of her accomplishments below, but ponder on this for a moment: When she enrolled as a new law student—in 1948—she was the only African American woman in her class at Loyola in Chicago.

Reading about her passing reminded me of a great event that occurred at a recent State Bar of Arizona Convention. At the 2010 event held in Glendale, a terrific group of people gathered to honor Arizona’s minority judges. Speakers included Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Rebecca White Berch and Phoenix Municipal Court Presiding Judge Roxanne Song Ong. So important were (and are) the contributions of these jurists that almost all of the members of the Supreme Court attended.

Arizona is proud to be represented by so many great lawyers and judges, past and present. But among those luminaries, many had higher hurdles to overcome than others. We are saddened by the passing of Judge Williams, but we marvel at the path she and others paved.

Here, thanks to the Maricopa County Bar Association, is more information on the remarkable life and career of Judge Jean Williams:

Honoring Minority Judges, 2010 State Bar Convention: Arizona's Justices with Hon. Lynda Howell (ret.), center

“Judge Williams is the first African American woman to be appointed to a municipal court judgeship, both in Tucson and in Phoenix. Now retired, she received her J.D. from Loyola University Chicago School of Law in 1951 and passed the bar in Illinois that same year. From 1951-1970, she practiced in Chicago, representing welfare recipients and criminal defendants. She was notably active in defending protesters for civil, housing and voting rights in Chicago during the protest marches associated with Dr. Martin Luther King. She was also a legal consultant to the Chicago Coordinating Committee and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

“Judge Williams came to Arizona in 1971 to be near her retired parents in Tucson. She was admitted to the State Bar of Arizona in 1972 as only the second African American woman. After a brief stint as the executive director of a senior citizens law center in California, her parents’ deteriorating health brought her back, and she served as an attorney for the Southern Arizona Legal Aid Society.

“From 1973-74, she was a Pima County Public Defender and then was selected as a judge of the Tucson Municipal Court beginning in 1974. In 1976 accepted a judgeship in the Phoenix Municipal Court where she served until her retirement in 1996.

“Along the way, Judge Williams repeatedly confronted the double-edged sword of being both a woman and black. Described as feisty and outspoken, she was the only African American woman in her entering law school class of 200 in 1948. Throughout her career she faced both overt and subtle discrimination, which she challenged firmly but gracefully. Judge Williams has received many awards for her distinguished legal career and for the fact that she prevailed as a pioneering black woman lawyer in Arizona.”

Follow @azatty

 

A Sculpture’s Gaze

Happy Change of Venue Friday, when we examine some non-legal material on our casual Friday.

The State Bar Convention ended three weeks ago, but this past Wednesday a 40-pound memory of the event was delivered to my office.

The bronze sculpture that adorns my desk sits almost three feet tall and glowers—without eyes—at anyone who crosses my threshold. It was created by Arizona artist John Dawson, and I can’t exactly explain what I like about it. But let me try.

Maybe what I like is the same characteristic that has almost uniformly led visitors to grimace at the piece.

It appears to be a businessman, stern of visage, whose fingers are folded together, in certainty or judgment.

He doesn’t warm the cockles of your heart, and there may be no better representation of, I don’t know, the sterility of Wall Street or the rapacity of unvarnished greed. Bringing the impression home is the fact that his head, his face, is incomplete. Or rather, it appears that it was once complete, but then a portion was wrenched free violently.

Sure, that may make some recoil from the old fellow. But to me it makes him more an Everyman. The less a Person he seems, the more personal the sculpture becomes. Not seeing his eyes makes me think, that could be me. Maybe I should curb my own impulses toward certainty and judgment.

John Dawson

Of course, those are characteristics that editors cherish, so I’m unlikely to eradicate them entirely. In fact, I had been planning to take the sculpture home rather than leave him in the office. But seeing the adverse reaction of many people I work with has made me reassess: If he can evince that much displeasure just by sitting there, he’s staying. The curmudgeon in me is loving that.

By now you’re likely wondering what all this has to do with the Convention. Well, the short of it is that I won the bronze at the Convention’s cool silent auction. All the proceeds benefited the Southern Arizona Children’s Advocacy Center, which was an additional advantage.

For more on John Dawson’s work, click here and here.

Here are a few more photos of the sculpture. Or stop by anytime to see it. Despite appearances, he—and I—will be happy you did.

Follow @azatty

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

A Convention’s Heart

Former Bar President Bob Schmitt speaks after receiving the Walter E. Craig Distinguished Service Award, June 16, 2011

Last Friday, hundreds of State Bar of Arizona convention attendees thronged a Westin ballroom to hear what Juan Williams had to say. And that is understandable, as we wonder about the view held by those from lofty vantage points.

But if there is a heart to a convention—and to an entire profession of lawyers—that heart was found the day before. In a ballroom not so different—though not quite as filled—the Arizona Foundation for Legal Services & Education hosted its own luncheon. There, it honored a variety of commitment that may be less ballyhooed but that is just as noteworthy. For the Foundation luncheon honored lawyers who had brought it—and when I say “it,” of course, I mean justice. These individuals had stepped up for years and years when there was no limelight and no microphone. When their only payment may have been a quiet moment in their drive back home late at night. When the more common response to a dire legal problem—walk away—would have meant devastation or worse to a person or a family.

At the luncheon, then-President-Elect Joe Kanefield delivered what may be described as one of the briefest keynotes in history (that bodes extremely well for his presidential year!), but he used his time wisely.

He took well-earned pride in the fact that Arizona lawyers recently exceeded the $1 million mark in voluntary donations via their dues statements. And he spoke eloquently about how access to justice was not merely his passion—and one of his year’s goals—but that it was a “critical component to the State Bar’s mission; and now it has been made a part of our mission statement.”

As a concrete part of his own commitment, President Kanefield was re-initiating the Bar’s Access to Justice Task Force.

He also related—via Foundation Executive Director Kevin Ruegg—a “typical day in the life of an Arizona legal services provider”:

• 434 people had their questions answered and their hope restored.
• 47 attorneys volunteered their time.
• Even after all that, more than 750 had been turned away, either because they exceeded the laughably low cutoff for someone who is “too well-off” to receive free legal assistance, or because there were insufficient resources to serve them.

The facts were bleak, but Joe’s words were inspiring. And they were followed by the awards themselves:

• John Bouma: Foundation for Justice Award
• Hon. Daniel Barker: Mark Santana Law-Related Education Attorney of the Year
• Ben Smith: William E. Morris Pro Bono Service Award
• Robert Schmitt: Walter E. Craig Distinguished Service Award

Many of the award winners, as well as the distinguished people who introduced them, took the opportunity to remind the audience about the role each of them could play.

In the years that lawyer Ben Smith has stepped up to provide pro bono services, he has assisted more than 1,800 people.

That is not a typo: 1,800+

But that massive number is only a fraction of the need, Smith said.

“It epitomizes the dimensions of the problem we’re all trying to help people with. There are thousands and thousands of people with no access to the justice system.”

Cleans Elections chief Todd Lang, who introduced Ben Smith, put it more bluntly: “We all believe mightily in justice, and yet access to justice languishes.”

Throughout the event-packed convention, a profession winced, and knew not why.

In the video tribute leading up to Bob Schmitt’s award, a friend said, “Bob simply won’t say no to any request, no matter how demanding, as long as it helps someone.”

Yuma lawyer (and former Bar President) Larry Suciu said, “If every lawyer in Arizona practiced like Bob does, this would be a much better profession.”

Schmitt himself hearkened back to his old 1992 President’s column in Arizona Attorney Magazine (thanks for the shout-out, Bob!), where he “preached the 3 Ps”: pride, participation and professionalism.

All the words spoken by the honorees were nice, of course, and much appreciated. But they were unnecessary, as every one of them had lived what they preached.

Next year, if you have the opportunity, pony up the modest fee so you can attend the Foundation luncheon. It’ll help remind you why, when practiced with compassion and commitment, a trade can be transformed into a profession. 

Follow @azatty

Here are some more pictures from the event.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

Convention Swag for 2011

On offer this year: A fortune-cookie. Hmmm.

The State Bar Convention ended on Saturday, but there are still a few housekeeping matters I need to address. So expect a post or two more about Convention content.

One of the favorite posts from last year’s convention (OK, one of my favorite posts) had to do with swag, those (sometimes) marvelous items you get from exhibitors as you traipse past their hard-working booths.

Spoiler-alert: I don’t think this year’s haul was quite as remarkable as last year’s. Nonetheless, I am honor-bound to provide photos of the 2011 swag. (Special thanks to my daughter Willa Eigo, who schlepped up and down stairs and ventured into multiple conversations in order to bring these items to your view. I really do need to pay her more.)

Without further ado, here are the items (please don’t complain, but I did not have the strength to photograph the surfeit of pens that were on offer. I like pens as much as the next free-seeker, but if it was a simple pen with an exhibitor’s logo, no photo)

Tomorrow, I give you my thoughts on what was one of the best events at convention.

Follow @azatty

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

Juan Williams Delivers Keynote

Juan Williams

In an over-capacity banquet room at the State Bar Convention, Fox News correspondent Juan Williams challenged and entertained attendees, as he gave his view on a changing America. He urged Arizona lawyers to step up and play a part in defining communities and policy, especially as they reside and work “in a state that is a laboratory.”

Williams used demographic and Census data—and his own reporting experience—to examine an anxiety that he says many Americans express. The numbers are startling, he said, as the U.S. population booms—perhaps up to 400 million in another 20 years—and the perceived gaps between groups widen.

He said that people he speaks to say, “This is not the country I grew up in.” They do not know where the people who work at the 7-11 come from, and the schools are filled with a more diverse group than ever before.

This is symptomatic, he said, of an anxiety felt by many.

There is a perception, he said, that the newest immigrants are unlike those of previous generations. Now, he said, assimilation is almost a dirty word, and many newcomers may not necessarily even want to become citizens. The “melting pot” has become a “mosaic,” with all the component parts remaining distinct.

Williams spent the majority of his speech exploring a different divide, not racial, but generational. He described his visit to Florida communities where seniors are living longer and more actively than before. They have high expectations of life, and they will likely challenge efforts to provide more services and benefits to a younger generation—especially one comprised of people who seem foreign to them.

In response to a question about diviseness, Williams said that, “It is self-defeating that the United States has not adopted the DREAM Act.”

He said that his heroes are “people like Sandra Day O’Connor and Thurgood Marshall, who acted as architects of society.”

As a law dean once told a young Marshall, “You are either a parasite or a social engineer.”

In that regard, Williams urged those assembled to “stand up and be a leader.” In the ongoing conversation—sometimes battle—over immigration, conflicts between the young and the old, and racial differences, lawyers must decide to make a difference.

Especially those in a laboratory.

In the muck and the mire that sometimes marks public debate, Williams said, good and involved citizens reach in to locate the value.

“Keep your eyes on the prize,” he ended.

More photos are at the Arizona Attorney Magazine Facebook page.

Follow @azatty

 

Is Justice the Abuser?

Scott Whelan

Among the wide variety of seminar titles that populate the convention brochure, the title above caught my eye. For it’s a brave panel that suggests to streams of lawyers and judges flowing past that the system itself, the process to which we’ve dedicated our lives, is a flawed one that causes harm—not just occasionally, but in the normal course of operations.

Co-sponsored by the Arizona Foundation for Legal Services & Education and the Young Lawyers Division, the seminar was a look at immigration law on the ground.

The first half of the session focused on the ins and outs of T and U Visas—those that may aid undocumented immigrants who have been the victim of trafficking (T) or of other crimes (U).

Presenting on that was Scott Whelan, of the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Immigration, who had flown out from Washington for the conference.

That was followed with some pointed conversation from attendees and the panel. The crux focused on local law enforcement—police and prosecutors—and their sometimes reluctance to sign a victim certification. That may occur for a variety of reasons, either a blanket disagreement with the visa use, or a misunderstanding of the certification’s legal import.

L to R: Nicol Green, Valerie Hink and Mary Day

As Whelan described it, local law enforcement often tells federal authorities that they won’t certify, because they do not want to grant a visa or any immigration benefit. But as the panel made clear, neither is the case—it is merely a certification that a person is cooperating and providing substantive assistance in a prosecution.

Panelist Mary Day, of Southern Arizona Legal Aid, noted another reason it may be difficult to get the certification: “Most police and prosecutors do not have a passion for immigration law. They have their own passions.”

Jennifer Castro

The great panel also included faculty Valerie Hink and Nicol Green.

Seminar chairs were Jennifer Castro and Leslie Ross, of the Foundation; Maricela Meza of Karp & Weiss PC; Sharon Ng of Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP; and Jennifer Rebholz of Burrell & Seletos.

Follow @azatty

 

 

Medical Marijuana of Great Interest

It may be too easy to say, but I cannot resist uttering the fact that the medical marijuana seminar is a high point of this year’s Convention. Attendance was well in excess of 200. In a state that has a new medical marijuana law but the legal battles still brew, many came out to get whatever guidance they could.

Panelists addressed the question of federal law preemption and compliance with the new state law. The session was well moderated by State Bar Ethics Counsel Patricia Sallen.

The July/August issue of Arizona Attorney Magazine will cover the same topic in two stories–one examining the federal-state nexus question, and another trying to provide guidance to employers who wish to keep a drug-free workplace. It will be out about August 1.

Follow @azatty

Pat Sallen, State Bar of Arizona

 

 

Movie Night

Movie night, I heard more than once on Wednesday, was a misnomer. Convention organizers worked mightily to convince conventioneers about the event’s true nature, and about the evening’s value.

First of all, we learned, they would be showing a number of legal movies, but it wasn’t going to be a movie screening. Only portions would be shown.

And yes, there was going to be a live band—Sugahbeat—who had played at conventions past. But they, and the food, would all combine to complement the movies and the experience. It was a cool, hybrid thing.

Well, I bit. And I had a good time. But convention-attendees may not have gotten the message, as the room was pretty sparsely attended (in all fairness, I left by about 6:45, so it could have picked up and started hopping after I left—which happens with many parties).

That’s too bad, because a crowd would have enjoyed watching Chicago, Legally Blonde, Erin Brockovich and My Cousin Vinny. But still, the format would have made that a challenge.

That’s because the talented Sugahbeats were the sound in the room—the movie volumes were all off. We should be thankful for that, in a way, because (1) the band is really good and (2) four competing movies would cause a migraine. But more than once I caught myself thinking that the band was great and the movies, silent though they were, were a distraction. But then I would gaze at the screen and think, “That’s a great scene! I wish I could hear it again without the band playing.” I mean, Joe Pesci uttering “yoots” or regaling the judge with an explanation of his clothing suggestion? That begs to be heard. (For that amazing scene, go here.)

I may not be the only one to have felt that way. At least once—as the band covered Rehab by Amy Winehouse—the lead singer stared past the tables of listeners to look into the eyes of Julia Roberts as the plucky Brockovich. Roberts held the singer’s gaze for more than a few beats, and I could swear that the crooner wished, just for a moment, to watch that cool scene beginning to end.

I hear you, sister. I hear you.

Follow @azatty

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

Queer Thing, That Law

A few seminars at the annual convention routinely garner high expectations. One of those is the one from the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) Committee.

This year again gave a great session, well presented by lawyer Jane Ross. She walked the audience through everything they could wonder about queer law but were afraid to ask.

That title and the topic may have caused eyebrows to raise just a few years ago. But now attendees have grown used to the topic—even if they know little about it.

Ross’s presentation opened with some scholarly exegesis on the critical legal studies movement, which may be what some attendees came to hear. Most of us warmed up a bit more, though, when she turned to the facts of real cases that have come out of America’s schools.

Everyone in the room was familiar with schools, if only by having attended once. And so the case facts—detailing abuse and harassment of LGBT students and the school’s usually anemic response—were compelling.

Ross read the facts and asked those assembled how they thought the court ruled. The answers were sometimes revealing. Happily, they were not always distressing.

One surprise of the session was the relatively small number of attendees. The SOGI session has historically packed them in. But that may be due to the fact that SOGI’s usual approach—a moot court of timely cases performed by law students—was foregone this year. I can understand that, given the huge amount of work the endeavor requires. But it would be heartening to see some hybrid approach that provides this important and relevant information to a larger audience.

Follow @azatty

 

 

Sister Organizations Luncheon

What brings friendly but disparate groups together better than anything else? Convention organizers knew the answer was food, glorious food. And that’s what led to creation of the Sister Organizations Luncheon.

What may have been a bit much as a mouthful for a title was made up for by good, solids eats.

Lawyer Benjamin Taylor II ably stepped in as emcee when Melissa Ho‘s law practice reared its head and she had to bow out.

Benjamin Taylor II

Thanks to all the sister bars that participated and made lunchtime into more than food. Let’s hope it occurs every year.

Follow @azatty

Who made an appearance? These eight carrot cakes did! (But they didn't stay long.)