DeanWuBlog

Context

As a law professor, I try as much as possible to see multiple viewpoints. I believe that my responsibilities as a teacher charged with training advocates requires me to offer them a range of acceptable positions taken by lawyers in actual practice and to ensure they will be effective for any client who retains them. Students benefit from the challenge of articulating arguments with which they may disagree.

There is a specific process of acculturating new members of the profession to legal culture, especially in the first year curriculum, however, which I believe requires our self-consciousness about what is happening. It is the method by which, typically through Socratic method, we ask students to analyze cases by distinguishing those facts that are legally relevant from those that are not legally relevant. This is a very important skill, crucial to everything else that a lawyer is expected to do. It is a deliberate process. It becomes an unnoticed phenomenon. The same sharpening of focus occurs in medical school with the training of new doctors.

Yet it is troubling, because it tends to strip away much of the context that may well have been very relevant to the parties as well as the rest of society, not only motivating them but also explaining the situation: issues of authority, power, race, gender, class, history, personal relationships, and so on. These other facets of the cases we study may be much more important than the aspects that determined the outcome in official terms, at least to all of the participants in a matter other than the judge and the lawyers. Hence the familiar complaint made by even sophisticated lay observers, namely that disputes have been resolved for “technical” reasons. Lawyers tend to be unsympathetic to this lament, for virtually everything they do appears, in particular to those who do not benefit from the ruling, to be “technical” – arguably, that is the whole point of introducing lawyers to a matter, to have them address what is “technical” and thus beyond the skill of those lacking professional expertise.

Matters are more complex than that, too. There is no simple distinction between what is legally relevant and what is not legally relevant. Facts do not come ready-made in the world, stamped as relevant and irrelevant. An integral part of distinguishing precedent is the difficult task of drawing the line; it is contested and dynamic. The controlling law changes over time. In the infamous case of Dred Scott v. Sandford, the Supreme Court made a decision about jurisdiction that essentially turned on the race of the litigant. In its holding, it ruled that African Americans were not citizens. Since then, the case has been repudiated; it is clear that the race of the parties is not legally relevant much less dispositive. In the more recent case of Burger King v. Rudzewicz, the Supreme Court mentioned in a footnote that the relative wealth of the litigants was not legally relevant in determining whether personal jurisdiction was exercised properly. For almost all individual litigants facing corporate adversaries, relative wealth will be highly influential in decisions about where to sue or preferences on where to be sued.

So in my approach, I try both to ensure students are competent by conventional criteria in the mode of thinking that is expected of lawyers and that they are able to challenge that mode of thinking where and when appropriate. The best lawyers not only follow the law; they change it.

Dean Search

As Dean, I play no role in the choice of my successor. Our institution has a strong sense of faculty governance, and it is the law school professors who will have the most important collective voice in determining who leads us next. Although I have abided by the principle that I should not seek to influence the decision, I would like to comment on the process by praising everyone for the collegial discussions that I know have occurred and are continuing. In addition, I believe all of us should recognize the service of Dr. Beverly Schmoll, Dean of the Eugene Applebaum School of Pharmacy here, who has once again chaired the committee. I am confident that with the candidates who have been brought back to meet with all of our stakeholders, a terrific individual will be identified to serve as the tenth dean of this wonderful Law School.

Reading and Writing

I was shocked once to have met a law student who confided to me that he didn’t realize the profession would require so much reading, and, furthermore, he didn’t like to read. I was tempted to advise him he had made a mistake and it would was not too late to withdraw from the first year. Upon reflection, however, I realized he likely had not been encouraged enough to value reading (and writing), and he also was actively misled by the portrayal of lawyers in the media – they hardly ever do any research, but instead appear to rely on their oral advocacy, as if no preparation were needed for effective cross-examination.

Be that as it may, it is crucial for us as educators to cultivate a love of language. My scolding someone that the placement of a comma may turn out to be an issue worth millions of dollars, in a subsequent dispute, will not inculcate the sense that words are powerful enough to change the world, nor will it provide any training in how to make it so.

Perhaps I am naïve, but I believe that the internet will have a salutary effect. It is direct democracy in action, and it enables each of us to become an author capable of communicating with everyone else, cheaply and instantaneously. Our ability to blog or even twitter, on subjects mundane as well as profane, not only gives us power but also allows us to play. As we create, most of us will want to improve. We will want to have better audio and video recording, which is shifting the cultural toward a universal language that could not have been dreamed of (graphic and dynamic rather than literal and traditional), but we also will want to be more skilled in our diction and grammar. In that, we may have hope for advocacy.

Confidentiality

Perhaps the most difficult aspect of our professional training is learning to maintain confidentiality. The lawyers who have done their best to protect the information entrusted to them by their clients, even those who have committed criminal acts, have been vilified by the general public even as they have been celebrated within the profession. It is not easy to cultivate discretion, especially within a culture that has established norms of disclosure of even personal information that an earlier era deemed obviously private.

Nonetheless, as you are trained as an advocate and counsel, you will learn the importance of confidentiality. No matter how much public interest there is in a case you are handling, and even – especially – if your own self-interest would favor revelation over secrecy, it will remain crucial to exercise restraint. The legal system depends on no less.

Endowed Professorships

The other day a student asked me whether we should have more endowed professorships and the answer is a resounding “Of course!” We have a single endowed chair, established by the late Walter Gibbs with a bequest, and when it was set up we were able to recruit a nationally renowned constitutional theorist here, Professor Steve Winter; he had previously taught at Miami and Brooklyn. The Gibbs Chair was crucial to the effort to bring someone of Professor Winter’s stature, to the benefit of our intellectual community as well as reputation.

An endowed professorship allows us to recruit and retain the most talented faculty. They are established when a donor gives us a sufficient gift -- $1.5 million for an endowed chair. As with other gifts for an endowment, the corpus is used to sustain the position permanently; the income, which is made from the investments directed by the university’s foundation, are paid to the holder of the honor. For a donor, it is an opportunity to help the institution, receive the recognition of the title (Professor Winter is the Gibbs Professor), and perhaps even influence the curriculum by supporting a specific specialty.

Much as law firms must compete in the marketplace, so too law schools must do everything possible to ensure talented scholars remain productive and committed to staying. Our faculty are talented enough that they are recruited by other schools, a problem that is preferable to the alternative (professors who do not attract the interest of anyone else). In those efforts to attract the superstars of academe, the prestige of a chair is crucial.

There are other honors, which are conceptually similar to an endowed professorship, that we bestow on our professors. The Honorable Avern Cohn, a United States District Judge who has been generous toward the Law School, established the Cohn Family Scholar position, which is held on a rotating basis by different professors. Professor Greg Fox was the inaugural Cohn Family Scholar, for two years; he will deliver a lecture on historical aspects of his area of international law in the winter semester. Friends of the Honorable Damon J. Keith, an LLM alumnus, set up a Visiting Professor position named for him. As I mentioned earlier, we have begun the search process for the first holder of this position, who will teach a course on civil rights.

As with many other aspects of our mission, we have wholehearted agreement from everyone that it would be desirable to increase the number of endowed professorships. It is the duty of the dean to determine how to ensure that such aspirations are realized.

Advancement

Among a law school dean’s most important responsibilities is advancement of the institution. “Advancement” in this context is a euphemism for fundraising. It is a constant calling. Even public institutions in this era depend heavily on private support.

Like many deans, I have found advancement to be a fulfilling activity, perhaps the best part of the job. Observers sometimes suppose that development (another euphemism) will be a duty that is less than pleasant, but in fact the people whom one sees are generally supportive of the school already and they usually have a sense that they will be asked for money at some point. The interaction is as positive as possible, because it consists of discussing the strengths as well as the needs of our Law School, with someone who is already a stakeholder. They are a friend to us, even if they are not yet known to me. One does not simply accost strangers with a demand for a contribution.

The crucial lesson of advancement, development, fundraising or whatever name we give it, is that people must be invested as more than merely sources of revenue. Otherwise, they will give only once. They must be genuine stakeholders, whether it is as adjunct professors, guest lecturers, moot court judges, or simply attendees at conferences. They must come to campus, interact with us, and feel as if they are part of a community that needs them. So I have found that to persuade them to give time, which is more valuable than money for any of our prospective supporters, is the greater challenge; once they have sacrificed their time, they will follow by offering their money.

The best fundraisers, however, are students. As individuals and in groups, they are far more appealing to virtually everyone, than any dean or faculty member, building, or program, no matter what the message or how articulate the presentation. So I encourage our current students and recent graduates, especially interactions with their peers, to discuss the value of the education they are receiving. It is in their principled self-interest to do so.

As we undertake this activity, it is important to bear in mind that we must express appreciation at every turn. The cliché is true – and it is effective as an appeal – “every penny counts.”

Anxiety

This time of year, first year students begin to feel anxious. It is inevitable and it is true at every law school and of virtually all individuals, regardless of a person’s academic credentials, work experience, or personality. People then become anxious that they are too anxious; in a demonstration of the power of suggestion, they even become anxious that they are not anxious. No advice, whatever its quantity or quality or source, appears especially effective in addressing this phenomenon. Nonetheless, it is imperative to offer at least a few words of reassurance. Most importantly, it is possible to take comfort that one is not alone. Others have suffered the same worries and they have succeeded – finishing the first year and proceeding through the upper-class experiences before beginning wonderful careers in the law or otherwise.

In concrete terms, I would suggest the following.

Form a study group if you have not already done so. Study groups and support networks of individuals who have a seriousness of purpose about their academic work have proven effective and they are likely to work for you. The practice of law is not a solitary activity; there are no hermit lawyers, and there is no need for lawyers on desert islands. The study of law should be social as well, in the best sense.

Write an outline. The process of creating an outline is more important than the product of the outline. An outline that is customized for your professor, your casebook, your course, and your experiences, will be superior to any professionally produced study aid no matter how expensive. There is no substitute for the effort of reviewing and synthesizing that is necessary for developing your own outline.

Turn off your television. Better yet, move it into a closet. This is a test of your desire to be a lawyer: if you cannot stand to do this, you will not be able to make the commitments necessary to do your best for your clients.

Take a break. You had family and friends and hobbies before law school and you should have them throughout law school. There is nothing in the stress of law school that exceeds the stress of legal practice. Indeed, it is likely that law school is considerably more gentle and forgiving than will be clients and courts. It is important, accordingly, to develop good habits and coping mechanisms, which will last once you are a member of the bar. Engage in meaningful conversations, walk the dog, visit the gym, go out on a date, see a movie, and so on. Then, refreshed, return to the serious endeavors before you: motions to dismiss, the meaning of consideration, the rule against perpetuities, proximate causation, and mens rea.

Enjoy the Thanksgiving holiday.

Honors Convocation

Woody Allen once said half of success in life is showing up. I have come to believe that most of the other half is showing up again and reliably.

That said, I regret very much I will miss Honors Convocation. This important annual event, which recognizes students receiving the many awards we confer, along with the generous supporters who have created those prizes, celebrates individual achievement even as it creates a sense of community.

I believe all attendees deserve an explanation of what I will be doing instead. At the risk of immodesty, then: I will be receiving an award, too. The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA), an organization with which I have been associated my entire professional life, is honoring me as a “Trailblazer” at its annual convention in Las Vegas. NAPABA has been an important organization in my development as an attorney. I am humbled to be designated a “Trailblazer.”

Kingsley Browne

I am delighted to announce that Kingsley Browne of our law faculty has published Co-Ed Combat: The New Evidence That Women Shouldn’t Fight the Nation’s Wars. Professor Browne, an expert on evolutionary psychology, does the type of scholarship I believe we should promote, because of its interdisciplinary nature and its attempt to engage with public policy issues in concrete terms. Evolutionary psychology is an exciting line of research that has many implications for the law, but it oddly has received relatively little attention from legal academics. We are fortunate to have someone who is a leader in the specialty among us.

Our great strength as an institution is the strength of our faculty, and Professor Browne exemplifies that. He was one of the few professors here whom I knew prior to becoming Dean. I had met him years ago when we both testified before Congress on affirmative action, offering opposing recommendations. It has been terrific to become better acquainted with him and to engage in further discussions.

Ms.

I have always used “Ms.” in addressing women. I have been surprised that some people have asked why I do not use “Miss” and “Mrs.” It is good, however, to be challenged in one’s opinions, and it is always useful to review one’s rationales.

I have chosen to “Ms.” because it is a counterpart to “Mr.” in the sense that it is a generic social title applicable to people regardless of age or marital status. The use of “Miss” and Mrs.” in contrast distinguishes between unmarried and married women, suggesting that their marital status is a relevant factor even in a professional context; it is unequal in the sense that men are not similarly marked as unmarried or married. The use of “Mrs.” coupled to the husband’s given name and surname is even worse in this regard, for then the married woman ceases to have any individual identity that is discernible.

As it happens, “Ms.” is a word that has a distinct moment of acceptance in the mainstream. Etymologists seem to agree that it was the 1984 election, in which the Democratic nominee for Vice-President was Geraldine Ferraro, a member of Congress, that caused newspaper editors to adopt “Ms.” as never before. Ms. Ferraro had not taken her husband’s last name, and she indicated a preference for “Ms.” Even William Safire, the venerable authority on usage, acquiesced.

Of course, more important than any view I may have is the preference of the person who is named: the trumping principle is that each of us should have the power to declare for ourselves who we are. Thus, if any woman would rather be “Mrs.” or even “Mrs.” with the spouse’s name, I will defer to them.

 (More)

DIA

One of the benefits of our location is the concentration of civic institutions and cultural activities. Among them is the Detroit Institute of Arts. You likely know of its fame. The Diego Rivera mural, "Industry," is a world-renowned piece, and it is only part of a tremendous collection.

Dean Sharon Vasquez of the WSU College of Fine, Performing and Communication Arts has been part of the team working on the DIA's renovation. She recently sent me the below and asked that I ensure everyone was aware of the upcoming activities. I am delighted to commend these programs to you.

Please plan to bring a full delegation from your organization or community to our free Public Opening Weekend, November 23-25! On this weekend, the museum will be open for 32 hours straight, from 10:00 AM Friday, November 23 to 6:00 PM Saturday, November 24; and from 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM on Sunday, November 25. There will be wonderful programming and great entertainment for the whole family. Friday night's programming includes "Art After Hours," a high-energy, late-night party with DJs, etc., from 10:00 PM Friday night to 4:00 AM on Saturday! Though it's geared especially towards the "20/30-Something's," it should be great fun for anyone who can stay up that late!

Criticism

This weekend, members of my church visited with our senior minister at a potluck dinner. The group was organized because of concerns about diversity, within a congregation that, by my estimate, is likely already one of the more racially integrated --at least in black and white terms -- that could be found anywhere in the nation. There is still work to be done, though, however much progress can be made.

I was struck by the attitude of the senior minister. He came to us six years ago, accepting the call to this congregation as his first permanent post following seminary, itself rather remarkable given the prominence of the institution. As good as he has proven to be from the pulpit, he has been even better in his ability to manage: the combination of the substance of his sermons and his skills in organizing have revitalized the place. What was remarkable at our informal gathering, however, was his humility and openness to criticism.

It would be easy to conclude that he is able to listen to negative comments, because he has been successful. The better analysis, in my view, ascribes just the opposite casual relationship. He has been so successful, exactly because he demonstrates that rare ability to respond to others with an assumption of their good faith and a shared cause. He is able to envision the future, rather than defend the past.

Announcement

I am pleased to announce that Felicia Thomas will be working in the Admissions Office as the Director of Recruitment & Enrollment. As you know, Ms. Thomas joined the law school last fall in the Dean of Students Office as the Director of Academic Success. Ms. Thomas will attend law school recruiting fairs; coordinate prospective student open houses and informational sessions; provide consultation to prospective students with regards to the Admissions process; and assist in the development of a comprehensive marketing plan to increase outreach and recruitment efforts, among other duties.

Ms. Thomas is a 2002 graduate of the University of Michigan Law School. Prior to joining the law school, Ms. Thomas served as a law clerk to Judge Daphne Means Curtis (WSU Law '73) in the Wayne County 3rdCircuit Court, Civil Division. Ms. Thomas also worked in the Division of Student Affairs at the University of Michigan, Office of Student Activities and Leadership and taught as a graduate student instructor in the UM Sociology department. Ms. Thomas can be reached at 313-577-8040.

Thank you very much.