New signs and posters will begin showing up around Wesemann Hall in the coming weeks as Valparaiso University School of Law prepares to launch its new “Safe Space” mentoring program.

The Safe Space program is dedicated to providing a welcoming environment where students, faculty and staff can communicate with mentors regarding a wide variety of topics without fear of persecution. The program was originally designed by and for the gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender (GLBT) community to identify “safe zones” where individuals could seek counseling on issues regarding diversity and equality.

The Safe Space program is committed to changing negative attitudes and fostering an understanding of diversity within our educational community. Catch phrases such as “that’s so gay” and the use of racial and ethnic slurs to jokingly address fellow classmates have become a familiar sound on many college and university campuses. While this language may seem harmless to some, it also serves to isolate those who already consider themselves different from the majority.

staff in recent years. The influx of students from diverse backgrounds has led to minor culture clashes and shown the need to be sensitive to inherent cultural differences. According to the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, Safe Space programs increase the visible presence of student and adult allies who can help to shape a school culture that is accepting of all people, regardless of differences.

In order to meet the needs of a diverse community, Valpo Law has chosen to expand its version of Safe Space to encompass an array of topics including gender, religion, culture, race and women’s issues. Moses Suarez, the President of Lambda stated that, “the roll-out of the Safe Space program symbolizes Valpo Law’s commitment to diversity and demonstrates a proactive sense of care to individuality.”

The goals of Valpo’s Safe Space program are to show visible support for diversity through the display of the Safe Space logo, the mobilization of individuals who are committed to promoting diversity through open dialogue and education, and to reduce discriminatory and retaliatory behavior that may occur in diverse communities.

Administrators and student leaders who choose to participate in the program are provided with resources to assist anyone who approaches them with concerns. The volunteers are trained to promote active listening and to work in conjunction with the University’s counseling services and other off-campus resources. Administrative personnel who display the logo are committed to overcoming discrimination through open dialogue and communication.

Participation in the program is strictly voluntary and will include select student leaders and many administrative personnel including deans, associate deans, student relations and admissions staff. While the details of the program are still being developed, the program has proven successful at other schools including Chicago-Kent and Loyola.

Additional training sessions will be held in the future and the leaders of student organizations and other administrative personnel will be invited to attend.

For more information on the Safe

Space Program, please see Joe Baruffi, Paul Kulwinski or Moses Suarez.

Some think that the right to vote is a privilege, duty and obligation of American citizens, but with rights come responsibilities. These responsibilities were the focus of this semester’s first Conversation Project, held last Wednesday at the Christopher Center. Members from Valparaiso University Law School and the Project on Civic Reflection Steering

Committee host two sessions a semester, called the Conversations Project. Their mission is to provide a non-partisan forum where people can discuss controversial issues from an objective standpoint.

In the words of Valpo Law Professor Jeremy Telman, “We wanted an alternative form of conversation instead of having one Republican hack and one Democrat hack screaming at each other.” The project focuses on all sorts of political issues, but ‘tis the season for a presidential election and what better time to discuss the right to participate in the upcoming election.

“We have come through an entire election cycle since beginning the Conversations Project and thought we’d come back to the issue that is at the heart of our democracy,” said VU Professor Jennifer Hora. Hora was the moderator at the meeting last week.

There are three phases to the project, a small group discussion, panel discussion and a session for questions of the panel by participants. Last week’s panel included the Mayor of Valparaiso, Jon Costas, Jane Henegar, a member of the Indiana Bar Association who works for the Obama campaign, and Zora Ludwig. Ludwig came to the U.S. as an immigrant when she was six years old and became a citizen at the age of 19. She provided a different perspective on the right to vote and what it means to those who do not have that right.

the Project on Civic Reflection Steering Committee. Facilitator and 2L, Arriel Stevens, asked one group about voting in the upcoming election and the conversation quickly moved from voting to issues regarding the Iraq war, health care, women’s rights and the economy. All of these issues were important to each person, but their responses were informational versus emotional.

In the second phase, the panel introduced themselves and discussed both their experiences with voting and what the right to vote means to them. A common theme amongst the panel was the problem of people not voting.

It became evident to Mayor Costas during his election campaign while going door to door just how many people would say they do not vote. The most common responses were, “My vote won’t affect the results,” and “Politicians are all crooks.” This motivated him to encourage more people to vote. He worked to send absentee ballots to students from Valparaiso who had left for college, but after sending 90 absentee ballots the problem became more apparent when only seven were mailed back.

rificed to give you this gift. The pain and suffering they endured is enough of a reason for everyone to vote.” He also listed his 10 benefits of voting. Some were the ability to engage, become more unified, setting a good example and most importantly, it will help the Cubs win the World Series.

Panelist Jane Henegar is also a big advocate for voting because it shows those were electing that we are paying attention. “Voting is a privilege and a right, but with rights come responsibilities. Use it or lose it,” Henegar said. “The Founding Fathers strongly believed that without voting democracy will die. It is essential people exercise control over those we give power because if we don’t, we allow abuse of that power.”

The process by which we are governed and how we are governed is the only thing that sets us apart from the rest of the world. Agreeing from experience was the third panelist, Ludwig. The sincere and severe realization of the importance of voting, which many take for granted, washed over the room while Ludwig told her story. Her parents brought her to the U.S. so she could have all the rights and privileges many who grow up here take for granted.

“The group sitting in this room had grandparents and great grandparents who died so you could have the right to vote,” she said. “Voting is your chance and my chance to change our government, or keep it the same. The point is, it’s our choice. Think of the obstacles people go through to become citizens and apart of this country’s future and many born and raised here do not even participate.”

sion, the floor was open for questions.

The panel provided in-depth responses about getting to know representatives, multiple party systems and how technology innovations have changed the political process as well as the degree of integrity in voting.

An issue regarding movements keeping people from voting was brought up by Valpo Law Professor, Edward Gaffney. According to Gaffney, “keeping someone from voting is fundamentally one of the worst violations of this democracy. Whether Republican or Democrat, I hope what comes out of this is a commitment to empower the franchise of voting. Encourage others to vote.”

Recently, Valparaiso University School of Law’s Dean Jay Conison attended a conference on Judicial Independent and Legal Education organized by the American Bar Association (ABA) in Tbilisi, Georgia. Conison is vice chair of the ABA committee and is responsible for the accreditation of law schools in the United States. He was invited to the region in an effort to help establish an accreditation system for Georgia’s newly forming legal education system. Currently, Georgia’s legal system is rapidly transitioning toward a western style legal system. Conison commented that, “Georgia is a country committed to strengthening its legal and judicial institutions. There is wide recognition that building a strong system of legal education, supported by a system of accreditation, is vital for ensuring a high quality legal system and an independent judiciary.”

Read the rest of this entry »

The first week of our summer abroad began with the Cambridge trip rite of passage known as Legal London. This whirlwind week included studying the process of lawmaking in Parliamentary Government and the adjudication of civil and criminal cases in England. The ten students who attended were led by Professor Ed Gaffney of Valpo Law.

Read the rest of this entry »

Dean Adams, the new Associate Dean of Students, has diligently worked for the last six years to arrange a study abroad program in Chile and Argentina. The first group of students who attended the program in Chile and Argentina last summer spent their time studying Human Rights. During the second year of the program 13 students partook in studies relating to human rights and family law.
The South America program is designed for students to explore legal, historical and cultural approaches to human rights in Chile and Argentina. Both countries have been victimized by military regimes, genocide, and disappearances of individuals deemed subversive because of their political views. The program challenges students to think about the social issues and policies that affect human rights in these countries and helps students to think outside of the box about methods for effective reparations for victims of torture. Read the rest of this entry »

By Christine Corral, Executive Director of Career Planning

On behalf of the Career Planning Center (CPC) staff, welcome to a new academic year. I joined the Career Planning Center staff as executive director in June 2008, and I am excited to share that the CPC has already scheduled several recruiting and networking activities this academic year, with more to come. I encourage you to participate in and share your feedback regarding our services and recruiting activities. Read the rest of this entry »

On Friday, February 29, 2008, The Clinic is hosting an elegant benefit dinner, including a performance of “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum” to raise funds for the Law Clinic. The Clinic has been an important component of our curriculum, offering an excellent opportunity to learn the law through actual practice. Everyone is welcome to participate in Friday’s benefit. Tickets are $100 per individual. If you know of anyone who might support this effort, please let us know right away and we will get an invitation to them immediately.

The shows of past years have been very successful and very popular. Once again, the cast is willing to offer a performance for law students and VU folks who cannot participate in the Friday night benefit free of charge.

Come enjoy a star-studded cast of law school faculty, staff, and students in a pre-benefit performance of A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum at 7:30 P.M. on Thursday, February 28 in the Valparaiso University Center for the Arts Theatre.

Tickets for the pre-benefit performance on February 28 will be available at the Law Clinic, Heritage Hall, Room 21, beginning Monday, February 18, 2008. Tickets may be picked up from Sandy Tengblad between the hours of 2:00-4:00 p.m. until they are gone. Seating is limited; first come, first served basis for tickets.

Please keep in mind that there is a dress rehearsal on Wednesday, February 27, 2008, which does not require a ticket.

By Gaby Guzman, Guest Reporter

On January 24, 2008, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) President Nadine Strossen led a lively conversation on current civil liberties issues that face the United States. Professor Penelope Andrews served as moderator for the discussion, and Professors JoEllen Lind and Jeremy Telman responded to Ms. Strossen’s statements.

To begin, Strossen explained that the purpose of the ACLU is to defend all fundamental freedoms for all people. Strossen described the ACLU as being a non-partisan organization, and that since 9/11, prominent Republicans and conservatives have supported the ACLU. The purpose of the ACLU has recently manifested in its constitutional challenges to several provisions in the U.S. Patriot Act, particularly warrantless wire tapping. Strossen stated, “The President authorized wire tapping secretly and that Congress has granted the President much authority and is not complying with the checks and balance system envisioned by the Framers [of the Constitution].”

“The ACLU believes that the government is not justified in invading personal property and believes that our national security budget should not be spent on these blanket dragnet proceedings,” Strossen explained. An example Strossen cited regarding the government’s infiltration on the invasion of our personal rights was Justice O’Connor’s statement in the concurrence of the Hamdi case where she states that, “The war on terror is not a blank check on the government when it comes to the rights of citizens.”

On a more local level, Strossen gave examples of how the ACLU has been active in Indiana, primarily in opposing Indiana’s Voter Identification law, which is viewed as being the strictest in the nation. Strossen states that the ACLU believes that the requirements to comply with this law are disenfranchising and groups in society most affected by this law are the elderly, the disabled, minorities and the homeless.

Strossen demonstrated the difficulty in complying with this law by telling the story of Teresa Clemente, who attempted to get identification at the Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) but was unable to receive one because she was told that her birth certificate did not comply with the law because it was not a certified copy. She had her birth certificate certified, returned to the BMV and was told that her birth certificate was still not valid because it did not state her married name on the certificate. The requirements in complying with this law are disenfranchising and the ACLU is fighting on behalf of low-income individuals and minorities for their right to vote.

In response to Strossen’s viewpoints, Professor Telman stated that the legislators in the executive branch say what the law is. With respect to National Security, the Executive Branch is vested with the authority to draft these laws. More specifically, Professor Telman further stated that Article II in the U.S. Constitution grants the executive branch plenary power over foreign policy issues. In response to warrantless wire-tapping, Professor Telman went on to state that the legislation regarding wire-tapping was passed by a bi-partisan majority and not authorized secretly by the President.

Responding to Strossen and Professor Telman, Professor Lind stated that if we leave the current administration alone and treat the Constitution as though it is not giving us rights, than this makes the President the ultimate decider on issues of national security. According to Professor Lind, we are at a crossroads in our history because there is a very high tension between our individual liberties and our national security.

Additionally, Professor Lind stated that the Framers envisioned that no branch of government should be politically unaccountable, and we are currently faced with an executive that has been the most secretive and the most intrusive. Furthermore, since the Executive is obstructing national dialogue, Professor Lind stressed that it then becomes the Courts responsibility for promoting dialogue and relaying information to the people of this country.

Gaby is a 3L and can be reached at gabriela.guzman@valpo.edu.

By Heather Looby, Staff Reporter

Michael Vick, former National Football League (NFL) quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons, was once a star athlete with a promising future. The ex-Virginia Tech college football great was a first round draft pick and signed one of the largest contracts in sports history. Vick was also a true fan favorite. People still supported Vick despite subjecting his team’s 2003 season to the “Madden Curse” by appearing on the cover of the popular “John Madden Football” video game (rumored to be the cause of many great athletes falling to the wayside), the infamous Ron Mexico incident (the pseudonym Vick gave a venereal disease clinic when he tested positive for herpes), and even after attempting to board a plane with a water bottle that was believed to have contained marijuana. However, Vick blindsided his fans and the entire country with what the authorities found when they descended on his Surry, VA compound on April 25, 2007.

The thirty-six law enforcement officials who participated in the “Bad Newz Kennel” raid found truly deplorable conditions. Evidence of Vick’s illegal dogfighting operation was found in the form of “parting sticks” used to pry open fighting dogs’ mouths, “rape stands” to restrain female dogs who would not willingly submit to breeding, and dogs chained up or in concrete kennels. A total of fifty-three dogs seized from the property faced possible euthanization, being seen as unfit for adoption and a threat to society. Enter, Professor Rebecca J. Huss of the Valparaiso University School of Law, court-appointed by the U.S. Attorney as guardian/special master of Vick’s dogs, the fate of these animals laid in her hands.

After graduating from law school at the University of Richmond, Huss worked as a corporate lawyer for two large firms and then as in-house counsel for a pharmaceutical company’s animal division. Despite her passion for business associations, Huss has always been an animal lover which led to her interest in taking up the study of animal law. In order to break into the newly developing field, Huss spent an entire summer reading extensively and becoming as knowledgeable as possible on the subject. She attended conferences, made connections with other professionals in the area, and began writing papers on various issues in animal law. Her hard work and dedication paid off, as Huss is now considered one of the nation’s foremost experts in the study of animal law.

During the course of her evaluations, Huss worked closely with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (APSCA), which performed the preliminary eleven-point tests on the animals determining their reaction to humans. Her evaluation of the dogs took two factors into account; the interest of public safety if these animals are released back into society; and, if unable to be placed back into the public, the ability of the animal to thrive in a restrictive environment. The latter, meaning that they would never be fit for adoption and would need to spend their entire lives in a dog sanctuary. As Huss explained, dog sanctuaries are not bad places for a formerly abused dog to end up, as they “have huge runs for the animals and the dogs receive lots of human interaction.”

However, much to the surprise of APSCA and Huss, the majority of the dogs were not aggressive toward humans and were safe to work with, in spite of being damaged and withdrawn. Huss recalls a particular pit bull named Sweet Jasmine, who was so wary of human social interaction that animal rescue workers had to carry out in her kennel. Based on her recommendations, forty-seven American pit bull terriers were able to be placed with eight different rescue organizations.

Huss acknowledges the fact that this case has certainly received more media attention because of Vick’s celebrity status, and she wholeheartedly agrees that these dogs have been privileged, compared to the millions of abused and neglected animals all over the country. However, she does not feel that this publicity has been a bad thing. Huss believes that these animals can serve as ambassadors to draw attention to the cause of rescue, and she hopes that because of the media attention which this case has received, “it is possible that someone who had never considered owning a pit bull would give the breed a second chance, and view the dog as an individual to which they would consider opening up their home.”

Overall, Huss is very pleased with the outcome of the case. When asked what she would have liked to see turn out differently, she replied that she “only wishes that there was a way to speed up the process and get the dogs out of shelter faster.” Although, she acknowledges that for most of these dogs, there will be a “long and difficult road to recovery.”

For anyone interested in adopting a formerly abused animal, Huss had this advice to offer, “Get as much information as possible on your dog’s history and be prepared to adjust your expectations in terms of what to expect from the dog, but the rewards can be amazing.”

*Vick is currently serving a 23-month federal sentence with state charges still pending and was ordered to pay $928,073 for the lifetime care of the dogs.*

By Heather Looby, Staff Reporter

Since its construction in 1875, Heritage Hall has undergone numerous renovations, served as dormitory, barracks during World War I, a library, and was eventually placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1976. The oldest building on Valparaiso University’s campus was named after Richard Aaron Heritage, the head of Valparaiso University’s music department from 1878-1894. Heritage bought the building after it its top floor was destroyed in a fire, put a roof on the remaining two stories, and then named the renovation project after himself.

Today, Heritage Hall is best known as home to the Valparaiso University Law Clinic. It is arguably the oldest university law clinic in the State of Indiana, although there is still an ongoing debate with the Notre Dame Legal Aid Clinic, who also wishes to lay claim to that title. The Valpo Law Clinic was founded in 1968 by Valpo law professor, Sy Moskowitz, who was joined three years later by fellow law professor, Ivan Bodensteiner. In addition to the Clinic’s primary focus of education, the law clinic’s mission is to provide quality legal services to disadvantaged members of the community, who cannot afford to pay for other legal representation.

Law students are eligible for clinic after they have completed one half of their legal education and have taken Legal Profession (please visit the Clinic or check the website for more information on any other pre and co-requisite courses which may be necessary prior to enrollment in specific clinics.) Most clinics require an initial interview and a significant time commitment to the program. In order to take full advantage of the learning experience, students are encouraged to take the same clinic for two semesters. Every year, Valpo law students perform over 7,600 hours of clinic work and 3,000 hours of pro bono service.

On top of countless hours of free legal representation volunteered by students, the structure of Valpo’s clinical program is what makes it truly one of a kind among law schools. Professor Barbara Schmidt explains that while over half of American law schools have law clinics available to students, the meaning of the word “clinic” is not universal. Schmidt further illustrates that what really makes Valpo’s program stand out is that at many schools, the term “clinic” is used to describe what Valpo calls “externships.” An externship differs from Clinic because an externship is done off-site with a field supervisor, as opposed to being in-house and on campus under the supervision of a faculty member.

Through the Clinic, Valpo law students are given the opportunity to actually litigate and argue real cases in front of a courtroom, under the supervision of their clinic professor.

The Valpo Law Clinic is made up of 7 individual clinics: Civil Law, Juvenile, Civil Mediation, Criminal, Tax, Sports Law, and the most recent addition, Juvenile and Adult Justice.

-Civil Law Clinic (Professor Marcia Gienapp): Students serve Porter County residents through their work on general civil matters and represent clients in various areas of family law and education.

-Juvenile Clinic (Professor Elizabeth G. Tegarden): Gives students the opportunity to represent court-appointed abused and neglected children and juvenile delinquents of Lake County.

-Civil Mediation Clinic (Professor Barbara Schmidt): After undergoing six weeks of mediation training, students are given the opportunity to mediate small claims court cases and represent clients in domestic relations cases for the Circuit Court of Lake County.

-Criminal Clinic (Professor Dave Welter): Serving residents of Porter and its surrounding counties, students represent clients charged or convicted of misdemeanor and felonies in a variety of trial level cases, appeals, and post-conviction proceedings.

-Tax Clinic (Professor Paul Kohlhoff): Funded by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Tax Clinic represents low-income taxpayers involved in controversies with the IRS. Class time is spent discussing the substantive and procedural areas of tax law and reviewing the active cases which are being handled by students.

-Sports Law Clinic (Professor Mike Straubel): Students provide representation to athletes who are unable to afford legal assistance in cases involving eligibility to compete, doping, and other issues.

- Juvenile and Adult Justice Clinic (Professor Geneva Brown): Law students represent Porter and LaPorte County children involved in delinquency proceedings and adults in the criminal justice system.

*This course is only offered in the Spring Semester*

The Valpo Law Clinic encourages all students to come out on March (insert date ##), 2008 for their annual open house. Even if you are not eligible for clinic yet (attention1Ls), it is still a great opportunity to get to know the staff and learn what the Clinic is all about!

If you have any additional questions (or need legal assistance), please stop by the Law Clinic or contact them directly at 219-465-7903.

Law Clinic Website:

http://www.valpo.edu/law/clinic