ABA Section of Litigation logoLater this week, I’ll attend a conference focused on litigation. Just in case you can’t be there yourself, I thought I’d ask what you’d like me to cover.

The event is the annual conference of the American Bar Association Litigation Section (follow them on Twitter here). We are fortunate that the national event will be held April 9-11 right here in our state, at The Phoenician in Scottsdale. (The State Bar of Arizona CEO, John Phelps, is an Honorary Chair.)

The three days will have a boatload of seminars, 40 of them:

“including 3 plenaries and feature 150 of the nation’s most respected judges, academics and trial lawyers,as they address litigation development and techniques in trial advocacy. In addition to the education portion, the Section Annual Conference provides for an opportunity for meeting and networking with our distinguished guests and fellow participants.”

Wondering what the seminars include? You can breeze through the brochure here.

The ABA makes it even easier. Here is an abbreviated guide.

the phoenician scottsdale

The Phoenician Resort, Scottsdale, Ariz., site of the annual conference of the American Bar Association Section of Litigation, April 9-11, 2014.

I’ll be in and out of the conference this week, seeking stories and great new article ideas for Arizona Attorney Magazine. I’m developing my week’s calendar now, and I’d appreciate knowing which seminars sound most interesting to you.

Here are a few I may drop in on:

  • General counsel forum reveals the real deal
  • Janet Napolitano keynote
  • New technologies of evidence coming to court
  • Essential apps and websites for litigators
  • A lynching that forever changed law practice
  • DOMA’s dead: Now what?
  • Hot Internet litigation trends
  • Lean In for lawyers
  • Social media’s implications for litigation
  • Communicating about mistakes with clients
  • Litigating privacy and data breach issues
  • Dealing with difficult judges
  • Business divorces

… and, of course:

  • The Trial of Wyatt Earp

And then after lunch …

Only kidding. I may not have time to attend all of these. But look over the program and tell me what you’d love to hear a synopsis of.

And if you plan to be there yourself, let me know. Write to me at arizona.attorney@azbar.org. Or reach me on Twitter @azatty. I’ll also be tweeting, and here’s the conference hashtag: #14SAC

Let’s get litigious, shall we?

magazine column dull + cats. What makes a compelling magazine column? Hmmm, let’s see. The truth probably lies somewhere between these two.

What makes a compelling magazine column? Hmmm, let’s see. The truth probably lies somewhere between these two.

I started out thinking today’s post was mainly for the lawyer readers. But now I’m not so sure.

In a few weeks, I’ll be presenting in Chicago at the American Bar Association’s annual Bar Leadership Institute. That’s where incoming leaders (often Presidents) of bar associations gather to get a crash course in numerous elements that go into guiding associations of attorneys.

My charge is to lend insight into what makes A-1 written materials—op-ds, letters to the editor, and the oft-feared President’s Message.

For the uninitiated, the President’s Message is a column-length essay published in a bar association’s magazine, newspaper or newsletter.

That message gives more agida to incoming leaders than virtually any other part of the job. And why shouldn’t it? Bar leaders are adept at many parts of the new job: They know how to run meetings, garner support and reach consensus (OK, “adept” may be a stretch). But how many of them have written a column?

Of course, most people have a good column in them. We have a powerful hankering to share the One Big Idea that has guided us, in life and practice. Without doubt, we can hit that column out of the park.

OK, that takes care of Month 1. Whatcha got for the other 11 months of your year? Gulp.

magazine column visual - Is it too much to expect bar leaders to write less and to think visually? Probably. Because law.

Is it too much to expect bar leaders to write less and to think visually? Probably. Because law.

I’ve read and edited President’s columns since 2000 (and I write my own monthly column; here’s January’s), so I have a pretty strong sense of what makes a good leader essay. But many of you read them; what do you think?

Because one of my messages to the presidents will be to crowdsource great ideas, today I am practicing what I preach. So …

In publications you enjoy (legal or not), what causes you to read a column (rather than a feature article)? What draws you in? What repels your gaze? Put another way:

  • What is the one piece of advice you would give a column writer?
  • What kind of content or approach do you find draws you in and leads you to respond?

If you have a thought that is not captured in my questions, please feel free to share that instead.

I am developing my presentation now. I’d be pleased to share your insight with the BLI attendees. And if I use your idea, I will credit you in my PowerPoint—so there; you, too, will be published!

Arizona Attorney wine label 2

No, Arizona Attorney doesn’t have a vineyard. But we can wish.

Happy Change of Venue Friday! As we get closer to the holidays, I thought you might enjoy this piece that comes from The Onion.

Or, at least, I thought it came from The Onion. But then I realized it was a special deal that came from the American Bar Association (those wags).

Here is the pitch:

“ABA invites you to experience exceptional sommelier-approved wines personalized for you or your firm at a special discounted price. White or red, dry or fruity—select the wine that suits your palate and custom-label it to your liking. Don’t miss this limited-time opportunity! Order by 12/15 for delivery by 12/25.

That alluring and vine-y call points us to a sales page; click here to head over.

A portion of the ABA wine ad.

A portion of the ABA wine ad.

Once I was there, I realized that the offer allows you to create your own semi-custom label for a variety of wines. This, it was intimated, is the quintessential gift that the discerning lawyer and law firm will be handing out this holiday season.

Intrigued, I searched high and low for the best of the boxed wine that we could distribute for Arizona Attorney partners. But I guess boxed vino is not the superb oenophile experience the ABA seeks to impart.

So here at the magazine, we won’t be buying any wine to re-gift. But I couldn’t resist using the site’s cool “create your own label” tool. I led this post with one of my semi-custom artworks. And here is another of my favorites:

Arizona Attorney wine label 1

Here at the magazine, we celebrate early and often, as our custom wine label shows.

I suspect the ABA thought only serious purchasers would fiddle around with their label-maker, so I apologize to them in advance for pointing people to the label page and saying, “Have at it.”

Have a great weekend. And if you decide to get me a gift with a really good nose, I prefer reds.

social media icons

Next February, I’ll be part of a panel communicating all we know for a “Social Media Master Class.” At the moment, I’m feeling vaguely outclassed.

Sure, by February, I plan to have a vast knowledge to impart. But right now, I’d appreciate your insight on what you would expect if you passed by a hotel conference room and spotted the following sign:

“Social Media Advanced Class”

That, essentially, is what we’ll cover in our session.

We will be presenting at the ABA/NABE Midyear Meeting in Dallas, and our audience will be chock full of bar association executives and lawyers.

I didn’t write the copy for the program description, but I am looking for ways to meet its expectations. Here’s what it says:

“If you have not seen the very latest features for Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and other leading social media platforms, you may be living under a rock. Delve into the newest add-ons and enhancements that will bolster your messaging workflow while optimizing your Association’s exposure. Learn how to navigate unexpected (and sometimes unwelcome) redesigns of leading sites. Plus, get recommendations on the best shortcut tools like HootSuite to ease the pains of posting. Whether you’re a seasoned social media junkie or the new kid on the block, you’ll find something valuable to take away.”

social media "map" by Fred Cavazza

I love this social media “map” by Fred Cavazza.

Hmmm. We’d better bring our A game.

I figure one of the best ways to stretch your audience’s knowledge is to stretch your own. That’s why I’ve reached into a few new worlds this past month, to Quora and even Instagram. And I’ve also been examining the old standards (Facebook and Twitter) for what I think are best practices. But Pinterest hasn’t yet sucked me into its vortex.

Later today, I meet (via conference call) will the other panelists (from Ohio, San Francisco, Philadelphia and the District of Columbia). We’ll be strategizing the best way to communicate valuable content to attendees.

Your insights would be appreciated. Write to me at arizona.attorney@azbar.org.

law-schoolHere’s a great way to start off a week: by trying to make a difference to the legal profession.

The American Bar Association is seeking comment on the best practices law schools should be adopting. This is an opportunity to sound off on the legal training ground.

The initiative is part of the strategy of the ABA’s Task Force on the Future of the Legal Profession.

As the ABA describes it:

“The Task Force on the Future of Legal Education was created in summer 2012, and charged with making recommendations to the American Bar Association on how law schools, the ABA, and other groups and organizations can take concrete steps to address issues concerning the economics of legal education and its delivery. The need for the Task Force, and for recommendations as to action, results from rapid and substantial changes in the legal profession, legal services, the national and global economy, and markets affecting legal education.”

“The Task Force is working through two subcommittees, one dealing with the economics of legal education, and the other dealing with the delivery of legal education and its regulation.”

For more information about the specific questions the subcommittees are addressing, read this ABA Journal article by Mark Hansen.

When it comes to law practice, there’s nothing that quite says “Change of Venue Friday” more than poetry. So let’s get rhymin’.

What made me think of the topic was the annual writing competition by the American Bar Association. The Ross essay contest is almost always—you guessed it—an essay.

Recently, though, the ABA has been on the haiku bandwagon. Given the short attention spans of busy people, 17 syllables may be just about right. You can read more about the contest here.

Unfortunately—and this will be the subject of my poetical rant belowyou must be an ABA member to participate. (Full disclosure: Our annual Arizona Attorney Creative Arts Competition is open only to Arizona lawyers. But we’re talking about the ABA, people. Come on. It’s almost a public institution.)

If you are an ABA member, submissions are due September 28. Here are the rules (yes, of course there are rules) and the submission form.

Here is the ABA’s short description (if they could have kept the rules to 17 syllables, THAT would have been an accomplishment):

“In this year’s Ross Essay Contest, we’re looking for 17 syllables that address one of these five topics: Innovation, Inspiration, Law Practice, On Being a Lawyer or the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Members Only? It went out with the jacket.

Yes, that’s right: You must select one of the topics, and be explicit about it; there’s even a dropdown menu on the submission form (just as Bashō originally required, I’m sure).

(And I assume in their topic list they should have included a comma before “or”—otherwise, I may be inclined to write a haiku on the topic “On Being the U.S. Supreme Court.” Hmm. “I got opinions …”.)

So back to my issue with the members-only submissions. Here’s my one-word reaction.

Really? Or, as Judge Learned Hand used to say, “REALLY?”

I get it. Paywalls are everywhere, and members like to feel special. But walling out poets? Say it isn’t so, ABA. You may be full up with tax lawyers, or securities specialists. But I’m willing to wager that your poet coffers are not full to bursting.

So I beseech you.

Don’t get all dictatorial with your caesura. We could be a pair—even a couplet—you and I. Stop being a pest with the anapest. Don’t get literal over your conceit.

We could be epic.

Amidst the constraint of the 5 7 5, I offer a few writing samples, my own protest wrought into rhyme. I invite you to offer your own, my fellow non-ABA members:


Within the gilt gates

ABA members harrumph.

Without, poets seethe.


Fencing out meter

May be lawyerly and all,

But learned it ain’t.


Erskine Mayo Ross

Bequeathed $100-sweet-K

To prod all, not some.


“Yo, tear down these walls,”

Say lawyer poets.

“Rhyme’s for sharin’, bro.”

Have a great weekend.

News from the State Bar of Arizona about a great annual event: Law Day

State Bar of Arizona Hosts First Annual Law Day Legal-Aid Clinics

Clinics will offer free legal advice across the Valley and in Tucson in celebration of Law Day

WHAT: The 2012 Law Day Legal Aid Clinics will serve as a free legal resource where members of communities from across the Valley and Tucson can attend information sessions on a variety of legal topics.

The information sessions will be conducted by volunteer lawyers and will last 90 minutes. Lawyers will provide guests with a presentation on a specific legal topic as well as reserve time for a question and answer period. Guests can participate in one or more sessions at one of the five partner locations.


Saturday, April 28, 2012

Session One: 10 to 11:30 a.m.
Wills and Estate Planning: Available at Pilgrim Rest Baptist Church and St. Paul Church
Immigration Issues (in Spanish): Available at Fiesta Mall and Isaac School District

Session Two: Noon to 1:30 p.m.
Divorce, Child Support, and Paternity Issues

Session Three: 2 to 3:30 p.m.
Bankruptcy and Foreclosure Issues

Session Four: 4 to 5:30 p.m.
Immigration Issues (in Spanish): Pilgrim Rest Baptist Church
Landlord and Tenant Issues: All other locations


North Valley

St. Paul Roman Catholic Parish

330 West Coral Gables

Phoenix, AZ 85023

Central/South Valley

Pilgrim Rest Baptist Church

1401 East Jefferson Street

Phoenix, AZ 85034

East Valley

Fiesta Mall

1445 West Southern Avenue

Mesa, AZ 85202

West Valley

Isaac School District—District Office

3348 West McDowell Road

Phoenix, AZ 85009


State Bar of Arizona Southern Regional Ofc.

270 N. Church Ave., Ste. 100

Tucson, AZ 85701

HOW: Community members can participate free of charge and do not have to pre-register. Admittance to each session is on a first-come, first-served basis, until capacity is reached. For more information on the clinics, contact Alberto Rodriguez at 602-518-8704 or alberto.rodriguez@staff.azbar.org.

WHY: The State Bar of Arizona’s Law Day Legal Aid Clinics were created in an effort to provide access to justice while joining the rest of the nation in celebrating the legal profession. Each year on May 1, the United States celebrates Law Day. Originally proposed by the American Bar Association (ABA), in 1958 President Dwight D. Eisenhower proclaimed the first Law Day to strengthen our country’s heritage of liberty, justice and equality under the law. It was made part of the U.S. Code as Public Law 87-20 on April 7, 1961. The concept was to recognize the importance of the rule of law and both its effect and structure in our country. Over the years, legal and civic organizations nationwide have used these general ideas to develop educational programs for the public.

Death row inmates in Texas’s Ellis I Unit, with Perry Mason on the television, 1994; photograph by Ken Light from his 1995 book Texas Death Row

Today, 25 years of hard work is recognized, as the American Bar Association marks the anniversary of its Death Penalty Representation Project. As part of the event, the ABA will honor three law firms for their commitment to justice and an even-handed system that metes out the ultimate punishment.

Among other portions of the event, the ABA will honor U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice John Paul Stevens (ret.) for his “lifetime of work and unwavering dedication to the principle of equal justice for all.”

More information on the event is here.

(Last December, Justice Stevens penned a book review for the New York Review of Books. In it, he analyzed David Garland’s Peculiar Institution: America’s Death Penalty in an Age of Abolition . Whatever your bent on the subject of capital punishment, Justice Stevens’ review is worth reading.)

Even in a nation that can be partisan and appears divided on many—OK, most—things, I like to think that the Project’s mission—finding competent attorneys for the accused—would be accepted widely.

As the organization describes itself:

“At the Death Penalty Representation Project, we believe that all persons facing a possible death sentence should have the assistance of competent, effective lawyers at every stage of the proceedings against them. Good lawyers are essential to justice, especially in death penalty cases. Over the past 24 years, thousands of our volunteers have contributed their skills, time, and substantial resources to this cause and saved the lives of countless men and women.

“The American Bar Association created the Death Penalty Representation Project in 1986. Our goals are to raise awareness about the lack of representation available to Death Row prisoners, to address this urgent need by recruiting competent volunteer attorneys, and to offer these volunteers training and assistance. We also work for systemic changes in the criminal justice system that would assure those individuals facing death are represented at all stages of the proceedings from trial through clemency by qualified, adequately compensated counsel.”

As odd as it may sound to issue congratulations on such a sobering 25-year accomplishment, that is what I’ll do. Well done, to the ABA, to the three honored law firms, and to any lawyer who has taken on a capital case.

Here is the complete new release:

ABA Death Penalty Representation Project Marks 25 Years of Service

Anniversary Program Features Justice John Paul Stevens (Ret.), Death Row Exoneree and Pro Bono Lawyers

WASHINGTON, Sept. 13, 2011 — The American Bar Association Death Penalty Representation Project, created in 1986 to help ensure fair trials and quality legal representation for those facing a possible death sentence, is recognizing its 25th anniversary Sept. 14, with a program featuring retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens and death row exoneree Anthony Graves. Exceptional Service Awards will also be presented to Arnold & Porter LLP, Dorsey & Whitney LLP and Fredrikson & Byron, PA, for the pro bono work their lawyers have provided in representing death-sentenced prisoners.

The project is honoring Stevens for his lifetime of work and unwavering dedication to equal justice.  After many years of support for capital punishment, Stevens publicly declared his opposition to the death penalty for juvenile offenders just two years before his retirement from the Court. Later, he joined three other justices in concluding that capital punishment is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment.

Also making remarks at the program is death row exoneree Anthony Graves, who spent 18 years in prison in Texas for a crime he did not commit.  Graves was exonerated and released late last year, becoming the12th person to be exonerated from the state’s death row since 1973 and the 139th such person in the country.

Three law firms will be honored for their commitment to death penalty representation and the pro bono work of their lawyers:

  • Arnold & Porter LLP has made death penalty representation a priority in the past four decades.  Firm lawyers have participated in several individual high-profile cases that have overturned death penalty convictions.
  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP has a 20-year history of providing pro bono legal services to death row prisoners, primarily in Louisiana, Alabama and Texas.  Dorsey is currently handling death penalty cases for three prisoners.
  • Fredrikson & Byron, PA has provided lawyers to assist death row prisoners in Louisiana, including the case of Dobie Gillis Williams, whose case was highlighted in the book, The Death of Innocents: An Eyewitness Account of Wrongful Executions.

For the past 25 years, the project’s work has focused on the crisis of counsel in the death penalty system. As one of its primary goals, the project seeks to expand the pool of lawyers willing to serve as pro bono counsel for death row inmates in post-conviction proceedings by recruiting volunteer attorneys to handle capital cases and providing them with training and assistance. The project also educates the public and bar about the crisis of counsel and works toward reform of the systems that provide counsel to indigent defendants through its systemic litigation project.

Learn more about the history of the ABA Death Penalty Representation Project here.  Additional information about firms that provide pro bono service for death row prisoners is available here. For information about representing a death row prisoner, click here.    

ABA/NLADA Conference, Pointe Hilton Tapatio Cliffs

Here is the conclusion of our May interview with ABA then-President Carolyn Lamm, including her comments about the crisis in legal services funding.

Me: The ABA Equal Justice Conference just kicked off in Arizona today. What are the most important issues in the area today?

Lamm: Funding is huge. It’s at the top of the list. The justice gap in the United States is only growing. About 80 percent are not served. That’s huge, especially when they are facing the loss of basic human rights, such as housing and family status, not to be able to have a lawyer. And we know that it’s grown exponentially in terms of need. We now have 65 million Americans that are below the poverty guideline for Legal services Corporation legal service. The stats are that they are able to serve between one and two million per annum.

The funding is now at $435 million. At a time when there were far fewer poor in the 1980s, it was at $765 million, when that amount was worth a whole lot more.

That’s not to mention those in the middle class who can’t afford service. It really is s a tremendous problem.

Me: Are there any other solutions?

Lamm: I’ve heard from some who say that lawyers should do it pro bono. I’m sorry, but lawyers can’t do it pro bono. Lawyers can each devote 50, maybe 100 hours a year. Lawyers can donate money to support it. But we can’t fill that justice gap doing it for free—that’s nonsense.

The ABA does what it can on ABA Day, when we bring in all the state bar presidents to lobby the legislators. What do we get, and extra $20 million, an extra $40 million in a good year? It’s like a Band-Aid on a broken leg. It’s not working.

Me: Are there other topics that will be covered at the conference?

Lamm: Service and support and training. In DC, I see it very starkly. The legal service providers are never as computerized as other places, and they need it more than anybody.

Me: What about staffing?

Lamm: It concerns me that we have so many young lawyers coming out of law school that are unemployed or underemployed. I think the numbers are 40 to 50 percent of graduating classes. We really should be finding ways to put them to work as interns or otherwise to fill this justice gap. They’d get experience and be moving forward. So far, we haven’t been able to do that programmatically, and it’s really horrible. We’ve got the lawyers, and we’ve got the people with the need. That we can’t bridge that is too bad.

Me: What would you name as the ABA’s proudest accomplishment this year?

Lamm: Many things. I think Ethics 2020 is tremendously important. Our advocacy efforts and helping the profession in a time of crisis were important.

Carolyn Lamm, 2009-10 ABA President

Here is more from our May interview with ABA then-President Carolyn Lamm, including her comments about SB1070. We’ll post the conclusion of our interview tomorrow.

Me: In regard to Arizona’s new immigration law, 1070: This morning, there is a statement on the Equal Justice conference website. It is very straightforward, and is very critical of the law. [NOTE: The statement, by ABA’s Committee Counsel, Steven B. Scudder, is no longer on the ABA’s website.] What is the ABA’s position?

Carolyn Lamm: The ABA’s policy that was passed by the House of Delegates—and that’s what we advocate until there’s a new policy—doesn’t specifically refer to this law. What it refers to is the federal enforcement of immigration laws. And that’s what we prefer. We don’t prefer, and in fact oppose, state law enforcement of immigration laws. So this falls within our general policy.

Further, we adopted at our most recent meeting—again, before this law, nothing is specifically focused on this law—a whole series of resolutions that are meant to advocate due process in the adjudication system. They really flow from our 500-page report that I mentioned.

So we don’t have anything specifically on this law. This law falls within the context of our past policy. Our former resolution focuses more on the pre-emption issue, of course.

We obviously condemn in substance the law because it doesn’t coalesce with what our policy is.

Me: At this morning’s breakfast, you talked some about the possible enforcement side of 1070, saying problems may or may not flow from the enforcement.

Lamm: That’s right. I could see equal protection issues if some of our citizens were being arrested or detained on the basis of the way they look. That’s an issue.

Me: But some groups and individuals have said that the law on its face is problematic.

Lamm: There are always differing views on constitutionality, which is why we have courts and a Supreme Court to sort these things out. And there is a view of the law that one could take that there are substantive due process issues and potential equal protection issues because of the way the classes are defined, basically.

Me: Is there a possibility that the ABA House will speak to that?

Lamm: Nothing has been raised so far. But state bars can put in resolutions at any time. I’ve heard about a lot of proposals but I haven’t seen anything.

Me: Do you think it’s possible that in 10 years, say, the ABA leadership will be sorry that they didn’t speak to larger issues?

Lamm: What issues?

Me: Racial profiling.

Lamm: We do have a policy on opposing laws that have racial profiling.

Me: But when you look specifically at the Arizona law, how does a police officer determine immigration status by looking at someone? How does reasonable suspicion arise except in a way that implicates racial profiling?

Lamm: That’s right, that’s right. I can’t understand what it would mean.

We have problems with local enforcement of immigration laws. We have problems with racial profiling. So I don’t know how this law would pass muster, and that’s why I issued the statement that I issued. My first statement was very strong about it. And while reasonable minds can differ, my view is, as the law is, it is objectionable.

Me: You heard some comments about the law from legal leaders at this morning’s breakfast. Were they similar to others you’ve received?

Lamm: I have gotten comments from all ends of the spectrum. We have 400, 000 members. There are those who say this is terrible, this ought to be condemned, people ought to be indicted, this is hideous, you’ve got to boycott.

And I have ones on the other side saying this must be done, we must support it. And you’ve got some in the middle. You can’t make choices just on the basis of what one set said. I have to balance the views of all members and then make a balanced call in light of our existing policies.

Me: I want to ask you about another risk. If you as the ABA President routinely sit in rooms like you did this morning and ask for views about 1070, and no one in those rooms will ever be at risk of being one of those people who will be stopped by law enforcement and asked to provide their ID and immigration status, are you getting a full enough picture to make a balanced decision?

Lamm: I don’t know. It’s very hard. The people at the breakfast are all leaders in the bar, leaders in their opinion community. They have to take a relatively balanced view.

And when I hear from many of the dissatisfied groups that represent the immigrant groups or whatever, I have a lot of empathy for what they’re saying. But they’re not necessarily in the same position as the other groups I’m hearing from, or in the same group as my members, whom I have to reflect as well. When I’m a spokesperson for the organization, I have to stay within the confines of our policy; I can’t go out and make policy.

Me: This morning, you also spoke about demonstrations and protests. What is your opinion about those?

Lamm: Maybe I’m jaded living in Washington, but I’m not sure what demonstrations and protests achieve. Obviously they evidence frustration from a certain population, but being the leader of the organized bar, we tend to solve our disputes in court. And we try to persuade judges that some actors, some law, is legal or illegal and should be invalidated. That’s why we have a justice system. It can’t be that the way the leaders of the bar, the advocates in court, go out to the streets, unless you’ve lost everything, you’ve lost in every forum, and it’s a complete frustration and it’s the only way to save the rule of law. But I don’t think we’re close to there yet.

Me: But when you look back at American history, at the Selma marches, or Martin Luther King Jr. at the Washington Memorial, they certainly were important strategic turning points.

Lamm: Yes, but let’s look at that. The courts had failed. The courts had said, “Separate is equal.” The courts said you can have segregation, and we did. And they weren’t listening. We’re not there yet in the law. If this goes to court and all of the legitimate arguments are made, and the court says, “Oh, yeah, racial profiling is fine, without any evidence or rational basis,” then of course. Perhaps that’s when you have to vocalize.

Me: An organization named FAIR provided this law draft to Arizona, and is doing the same to states nationwide. Does it concern the ABA that a law may be farmed out across the country?

Lamm: Again, I may be jaded by Washington, but that’s the way the system works. You have advocacy groups pushing their views of the laws, and legislators have to look at it and decide that’s right or that’s not right.

Tomorrow: The conclusion of our interview with President Lamm, when she discusses the crisis in legal services for the poor and middle class.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,380 other followers