By Natalie Kijurna, Career Planning Center

10. I want a job.

9. The information will help me get a job.

8. I am interested in participating in on-campus interviews next semester.

7. I want to make sure I don’t miss the deadline for registering for on-campus interviews.

6. I may learn of job opportunities I had not thought of before.

5. I want to build my resume.

4. Alumni Mike Bell (’03) may provide helpful tips on professional development, networking, and an out-of-state job search.

3. I’m getting interviews, but that’s where it ends.

2. Symplicity is not so simple,

And, the number 1 reason you should attend Spring Blitz,

1. Free food!

The VLD/VLR had a great bipartisan turnout for the Super Tuesday results party at Buffalo Wild Wings. Over fifty students and a few professors enjoyed free food and a lively study break while watching the caucus and primary results. Several students also participated in a contest to predict the winners in each state, with Christy Commers, Lucas Tieman, Bob Prince, Kristen Thompson, & Justin Staublin all winning T-shirts for their efforts. Congratulations and many thanks to all who played!

In the aftermath of Super Tuesday, Senators Obama and Clinton are in a virtual tie, with most sources reporting 838 delegates for Obama and 834 Clinton, both falling far short of the necessary 2,025 delegates needed to clinch the Democratic presidential nomination. For the GOP, Senator John McCain, who had 720 of the 1,191 total delegates needed for the Republican nomination, was 2/3 of the way there after Super Tuesday, but has practically clenched the nomination with Romney’s subsequent withdrawal from the race.

The nation is gearing up for a close and exciting race! All students, especially Indiana residents, should be aware that they need to register to vote 30 days prior to the Indiana primary on May 6^th. Due to the tight race and the date of the primary, the Hoosier state will play a vital role in the quest for the Oval Office. We are recruiting election workers for the primary election. Please contact us if you are interested, as these are paid positions. In addition, stay tuned for the upcoming visits of Indiana Democratic gubernatorial candidates, Jim Schellinger & Jill Long Thompson.

For more information on the Valpo Law Democrats, or election day, please contact Heather SchaeferHeather.Schaefer1@valpo.edu or Jennifer Sheetz jsheetz@valpo.edu .

VALPARAISO, Ind. – One of China’s premier performing arts troupes will help Valparaiso University celebrate the Feb. 13 opening of its Confucius Institute, which aims to build greater cultural understanding and business ties between northern Indiana and China.

The opening ceremony at Valparaiso’s Center for the Arts will be attended by representatives of the Chinese government and the institute’s partner institution – Zhejiang University of Technology – and feature the Zhejiang Butterfly Performing Troupe and acclaimed Chinese tenor Yan Shengmin. The troupe will present traditional Chinese music, folk dance, acrobatics and excerpts of the classic Chinese opera “The Peony Pavilion.”

Zhejiang Butterfly Performing Troupe has toured extensively throughout China and internationally and its members are the principle performers of the Zhejiang Provincial Singing and Dancing Theater. The troupe is composed of 11 musicians, seven dancers, two acrobats and an actress from the renowned Kun Opera.

The opening ceremony will include remarks by Valparaiso president Dr. Alan Harre, a representative of Zhejiang University of Technology and a Chinese student enrolled at Valparaiso.

Jianyun Meng, director of the Confucius Institute and a lecturer in foreign languages and literatures at Valparaiso, said the opening ceremonies will be the first in a series of programs that will bring a stronger sense of Chinese culture, language and the arts to Northwest Indiana.

“Our goal is to make Valparaiso’s Confucius Institute an essential resource to help northern Indiana businesses, K-12 schools and the community at large develop relationships with China,” Meng said. “Indiana and China will benefit greatly from stronger economic and cultural ties.”

Valparaiso is the first faith-based university in the United States to host a Confucius Institute, a non-profit institute established and funded by the Chinese government to promote cultural, business, educational, artistic and government exchanges. In particular, the Institute will work to develop these exchanges between northern Indiana and Zhejiang – which became Indiana’s sister province in 1989. Zhejiang, located south of Shanghai with a population of more than 50 million, is one of China’s most prosperous provinces.

As part of the Confucius Institute opening ceremonies, a Feb. 14 concert in the Chapel of the Resurrection on campus will feature a joint performance by the Zhejiang Butterfly Performing Troupe, Valparaiso University Symphony Orchestra and the concert band Windiana. The concert begins at 7:30 p.m. and is open to the public.

The Zhejiang Butterfly Performing Troupe also will perform at 7:30 p.m. Feb. 15 at Governors State University in University Park, Ill., at 2 p.m. Feb. 16 at Memorial Opera House in Valparaiso, and at 2 p.m. Feb. 17 at Purdue University in West Lafayette.

Among the first initiatives of the Confucius Institute, Meng said, will be hosting two Chinese language teachers this spring to lead language courses for members of the campus and Northwest Indiana communities. Future programs will include:

● Offering Chinese classes in local school districts and bringing teachers from China to assist in the development of courses.

● Workshops and guest speakers on Chinese policies and culture for businesses, government officials and other interest groups.

● Classes and events exploring Chinese traditions and arts, including calligraphy, painting, landscaping, film, music and traditional Chinese medicine.

● Sponsoring trips to China for various groups, including medical professionals, small business owners, educators, farmers and retirees.

The Confucius Institute will take up residence in the former Valparaiso International Student Association House on campus. Meng said he is working with the Chinese government to build a library that will be open to the public and include textbooks for teaching the Chinese language, information for tourists, cultural materials and a selection of Chinese movies and music.

Valparaiso has maintained strong programs in Chinese studies for many years, including the development of partnerships with universities in China
and creation of the University’s Hangzhou Study Center. In 2002, the Freeman Foundation awarded Valparaiso a $1.8 million grant to fund initiatives strengthening its Chinese and Japanese studies program.

For more information about the Confucius Institute at Valparaiso, call (219) 464-6771 or visit valpo.edu/confuciusinstitute

December 4, 2007  VALPARAISO, IND. – Of the 48 remaining American Pit Bull Terriers in the Michael Vick civil forfeiture case, 47 have been recommended for placement with rescue organizations, with many likely eligible for future adoption by the public. The recommendations were made by Valparaiso University School of Law Professor Rebecca J. Huss, court appointed Guardian/Special Master of the dogs. One dog has been euthanized for medical reasons. 

“I am confident in the rescue organizations I recommended for permanent placement. With the experienced care they will provide these dogs, I foresee that many will eventually be able to be adopted by members of the public,” Professor Huss said upon submitting her Summary Report to the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

Professor Huss recommended the dogs be placed with eight organizations. Those receiving the most dogs are Best Friends Animal Society, with 22, and Bay Area Doglovers Responsible About Pit Bulls (BAD RAP), with ten. The U.S. Attorney late this afternoon filed a motion in U.S. District Court containing the report and urging the Court to adopt its recommendations. The Court will now determine whether to accept or deny the motion.    

The summary report details Professor Huss’ work. It included traveling to Virginia on multiple occasions to interact with the dogs and their caretakers as well as speaking with animal control officers and numerous rescue organizations. Professor Huss also relied on information from the initial ASPCA report; daily or weekly reports from interim care providers; and reports from BAD RAP, which provided kennel evaluation services. A team from Best Friends Animal Society supplied feedback after evaluating the dogs remaining in shelters.

Several dogs had previously been moved to interim foster care for training and assessment. Other dogs were transferred to facilitate their continued evaluation and dogs from one Virginia shelter were later taken to a Washington, D.C. shelter due to an unexpected staffing shortage.  

Professor Huss stated: “While in the foster home, each dog must continue to exhibit behavior indicating it would be safe to the public prior to being adopted. For the dogs that may need to remain in a sanctuary environment, although there will certainly be a period of adjustment, I believe that these dogs may not just survive, but thrive in that environment.”   

“I thank the shelters and organizations that assisted in the process. They are dedicated, hardworking and have contributed much to this effort. The shelters were very accommodating, and everyone I dealt with in the federal government was responsive to the need to act quickly to set up a structure to place the dogs,” Professor Huss added.

In July, the United States filed a civil forfeiture action relating to approximately 53 American Pit Bull Terriers located on Mr. Vick’s property. On October 15^th, the court appointed Professor Huss Guardian/Special Master of the 48 surviving Pit Bulls. Due to the ongoing criminal case, the rescue organizations and Professor Huss are unable to disclose information about the dogs until at least January 25, 2008.

The eight organizations are:  

Best Friends Animal Society, Kaneb, Utah (22 dogs)

BAD RAP, Oakland, California (10 dogs)Richmond Animal League, Richmond VA (4 dogs)

Georgia S.P.C.A., Suwanee, GA (3 dogs)

SPCA of Monterey County, CA (3 dogs)

Recycled Love, Inc., Baltimore, MD (3 dogs)

Animal Rescue of Tidewater, Chesapeake, VA (1 dog)

Our Pack, Inc. (1 dog)  

For more information, please contact: Tom Shaer, Tom Shaer Media, Inc. Telephone: 224-305-2551 Email: shaermedia@aol.com

By Marc Baranov

In late September, aspiring public interest lawyers nationwide scored a major victory in the battle against ever-increasing student loan debt. After years of negotiations and debate on loan repayment assistance programs, Congress passed, and President George W. Bush signed, the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 (CCRAA). In part, the CCRAA allows recent law school graduates who work in “public service” to pay off their qualified federal loans at a reduced rate, and have the balance of these loans completely forgiven after 120 monthly payments, or ten years.

“This is a decisive victory for law students,” said Daniel Suvor, Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) Law Student Division. “Over the past several years, law student leaders aggressively lobbied for this change, prompting law students nationally to write thousands of letters and hold hundreds of meetings with their Senators and members of Congress.”

According to the ABA, eighty-seven percent of law students borrow money to attend law school. The average law student graduates with $83,181 in total educational debt from a private law school, and $54,509 from a public law school. Additionally, according to the National Association of Law Placement, the median gross starting salary at a non-profit public service organization is approximately $40,000.

“With standard loan repayment schedules, some young lawyers were being forced to opt out of public interest work to stay above the poverty line,” said American Association of Law Schools Executive Director Carl Monk. “This law will allow public interest entities to compete with the big firms and successfully lure the best and brightest into their ranks.”

The new law offers substantial loan forgiveness for “public service” attorneys that make ten years of payments towards their qualifying federal student loans. After the ten-year period, “public service” attorneys will be eligible for total forgiveness of their remaining federal loans, regardless of the remaining balance owed. It is also noteworthy that the ten years of “public service” do not have to be consecutive.

“I have wanted to be a Public Defender since Criminal Law during my first year of law school,” said Rachel Raymond, a 3L at Southwestern Law School in Los Angeles. “This law will allow me to pursue my dream, and not just for a year or two, but as a lifetime career.”

Per the current language of the CCRAA, “public service” includes all full-time employment by government agencies and “501(c)(3) organizations (among other categories). Over the next year though, the Department of Education will issue regulations that determine how broadly (or narrowly) this term will be interpreted.

The new law also allows borrowers to enter into a reduced payment program that ties monthly payments to an affordable percentage of monthly income, which could potentially reduce monthly payments by two-thirds. As written though, the CCRAA has potential pitfalls with regard to tax payments and marriage disincentives. Specifically, forgiveness at year ten might be construed as taxable income under the law, and the Department of Education might add both spouses’ incomes together to determine how much the borrower must pay, conceivably tripling or even quadrupling the borrower’s monthly repayment.

Congress is currently in discussions over these very issues. Learn how to explain this exciting new law to your fellow students and how you can lobby your members of Congress on these and other important issues by visiting abanet.org/lsd/legislation. Also, for more information on how the CCRAA can work for you, consult your school’s Financial Aid Department.

Marc Baranov currently serves as a Delegate from the ABA Law Student Division to the ABA House of Delegates.

By: Eric Gettemy, Executive Editor

On Wednesday, November 14, VUSL students, faculty and professors gathered in front of the Valparaiso Courthouse to protest recent events in Pakistan. The New York Times reported that Pakistani police have jailed thousands of Pakistani lawyers, and while in a sheer display of authoritarian power, General Pervez Musharraf suspended Pakistan’s constitution and placed the Supreme Court under house arrest citing a “state of emergency.”

VUSL SBA President Sebastian Smelko issued this invitation to the student body and VUSL community.

“On Wednesday, November 14, the ABA is organizing a lawyers’ march inWashington, D.C., to support the rule of law and lawyers in Pakistan.At 11:30 a.m., lawyers will gather in the plaza in front of the JamesMadison Building of the Library of Congress before walking around theSupreme Court. Lawyers across the country are participating in similarmarches in their communities, and the ABA is encouraging andsupporting these local efforts.

To support these measures, Professor Ed Gaffney and I ask you to assist us in this endeavor. Some of our very own professors will joinus as we take a stand against this arbitrary governance and I hope I can count on you to march over to the Porter County Courthouse on Wednesday at 11 AM to make a statement on this issue there. As this is during Chapel Break, I hope I can count on you to be there. There will be media present to document our message and intent.

This is not only a positive way to show dedication to the legal system, but show that we are committed to the protecting the Rule of Law all over our World. This is not a political issue; rather, thisis a stand for liberty and written constitutions of which we all believe [are] sacred. It is my duty, as the President of our Student Bar Association, to call upon you to use a half-hour of your time on Wednesday at 11am to show our solidarity towards these ends.”

There was a strong showing at the protest, and many cars passing by honked and waived in support of the cause.

Professor of Constitutional Law Ivan Bodensteiner was at the protest, and had these words to say:

“If we can learn anything from these events in Pakistan, I suppose it shows that if you want to start a dictatorship, the first thing you have to do is take out the lawyers and the press.” He also stated, “The recent attack on attorneys and the press in Pakistan demonstrates the significant role attorneys and the press play in preserving the rule of law. For us, as attorneys, it reminds us of our awesome duty and responsibility as guardians of the Constitution and the rule of law. While we are not alone in this, there is a reason why those who want to place themselves above the law see a need to silence the members of our profession.”

By Kristen Thompson, Editor In Chief

On Thursday, October 18 the final round of the Judge Luther M. Swygert Memorial Moot Court Competition took place. The Neils Science Center Auditorium on the main campus was packed, all hoping to see some of the best oral arguments that VUSL has to offer and to get a glimpse of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia doing what he does best. Accompanying Justice Scalia were Judge Daniel A. Manion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

The first issue before the justices was: Does an ordinance regulating picketing that creates a 200-foot buffer zone around a funeral service violate the First Amendment rights of protestors? 3L Alissa Wetzel was first up, arguing for the Petitioners. Wetzel discussed the irreparable harm of the Petitioner who was unable to express himself in a public forum. The main part of the argument being that the ordinance was not narrowly tailored. Justice Scalia was the first judge to question Wetzel asking whether the ordinance was content-based. He then expressed that “a funeral is not a place to protest.”

Wetzel countered his point by explaining that it was the first impression of the court and that people have a special private benefit of their homes but not in a public forum. She argued that the City of Eastover allowed “good” speech but banned “bad” speech which is a direct violation of the First Amendment. Wetzel then brought up a case in which Justice Scalia wrote part of the opinion. Justice Scalia stated that he did not remember the case as the crowd laughed.

Wetzel went on to argue that the ordinance does not have a significant government interest under a heightened scrutiny standard. However, Justice Scalia stated that he believed picketing at a funeral is “sick” and it would be reasonable to want to restrict such speech. He also added that it seemed like a time, place, manner argument. Wetzel argued that when making a political statement, the location is part of the message. Scalia disagreed asking why “the backdrop of a message needs to be a mother’s son’s funeral?”

Judge Pallmeyer discussed the issue of “core political speech.” As Judge Manion asked whether the protestors were intending to show that the funeral was a punishment by God. Wetzel explained that it was not about sinful conduct, but aimed at America at large.

3L Andrew Lucas argued the issue for the Respondents. Lucas focused his argument on the funeral being a captive place in which the speech is invasive and therefore Intermediate Scrutiny should be used. Once again, Justice Scalia was the first to jump in and stated that the ordinance was not narrowly tailored. Lucas countered by stating that the 200 foot buffer was designed to protect an invasion of privacy. He explained that even if the protest was in support of the funeral, the protestors would still not be permitted to come closer than the 200 feet.

Judge Pallmeyer asked whether the ordinance included hand-billing and if so, why is it not content-based? Lucas argued that the ordinance does not restrict on viewpoint but it restricts part of the funeral. He also stated that the ordinance is closely related to the significant purpose of protecting people attending a funeral.

Justice Scalia made the point that picketing targeted at a home is not allowed, not picketing by a home. Therefore, why didn’t the city do something similar and ban picketing targeted at a funeral rather than ban picketing near a funeral. Lucas answered this by stating that the City feels it avoids the problem of figuring out who was protesting what by creating the 200 foot buffer. Justice Scalia replied stating that this argument broadens the ordinance rather than narrowing it. Lucas brought up that the protestors have alternative means and can do whatever they want past the 200 feet.

The second issue before the judges was: Are Alex Bauer’s First Amendment right violated when he is suspended from school for participating in a protest during school hours? 2L Jeffery Speights argued for the Petitioners explaining that it was unclear whether the funeral was a school-sponsored event. He pointed out that the school was not involved with the funeral; it just allowed students to leave to attend it. In support of that argument, Speights explained that no faculty members were there to supervise the students. He also argued that the Petitioner was protesting with the congregation of his church and the content of the protest was “core political speech.” The sign the Petitioner was holding stated, “Woe unto those who condone homosexual activity.”

Justice Scalia disagreed with Speights use of the term “core political speech” explaining that the speech in question was not core political speech. Speights argued that nonetheless, the school cannot silence speech just because it is disagreeable. Additionally, he argued that the principal of the school had no right to censor and suspend the Petitioner. Another point Speights brought up was that the protest did not create a disturbance of school using Tinker v. Des Moines to support his argument. Concluding by stating that the speech engaged in by the Petitioner was protected and was not expressed in a disruptive way.

2L Tamara Carnahan argued the issue for the Respondents stating that the school was being proactive and its reaction to the situation was not in violation of the Petitioner’s rights. Both Judge Manion and Justice Scalia were concerned with whether or not the funeral was associated with the school. Carnahan explained that the funeral took place during school hours, the students had to get permission from the school to attend, a convocation ceremony was scheduled and therefore the school was participating in the funeral.

Justice Scalia questioned whether a solemn requiem high mass would qualify as a school sponsored event. Carnahan answered by stating that there had been previous violent events in the school and the school was acting to protect the school. Judge Manion asked whether the Principal know of the Petitioner’s views before the funeral. Carnahan stated that the school felt justified in letting the students go to the funeral.

Speights reserved two minutes for rebuttal in which he made two points. First, he reiterated that the funeral was not a school function. Second, he stated that the City’s code was an unconstitutional violation of free speech, was not narrowly tailored and fails both strict and intermediate scrutiny.

After a brief recess in which the judges deliberated, all three judges ruled for the Respondents represented by Andrew Lucas and Tamara Carnahan. The Best Oralist award went to Tamara Carnahan. The judges then gave their observations about the arguments. Judge Pallmeyer said that each one of the participants did a good job advocating for the client and gave good, direct answers to the questions.

Judge Manion said he was impressed with everyone and their knowledge of the case and case law. He went on to say, “It is always better to know your opponent’s case better than the opponent.”

Justice Scalia stated, “You guys are ready, I have heard a lot of arguments on the Supreme Court and many are not as prepared or as good as you.” He also gave some tips, stressing to never display impatience or exasperation in questioning. “The only time you are not wasting your time is when you are answering a judge’s question,” he advised. Justice Scalia ended by stating, “Congratulations, all four of you will be excellent advocates.”

Other awards for the competition were: Best Brief—Dominic Buttitta.

By Jen Sheetz

The Second Conversations Project on Wednesday, November 7th, was the second in the five lecture series for the 2007-2008 year. This program was titled “Honoring our Veterans: Theory and Practice” and focused on the experiences our service members have in the military, but more importantly as they reenter society after deployment.

The panel bridged a broad assortment of perspectives from Earl McDowell, who spoke of his experiences with the U.S. Marine Corps in Vietnam and subsequent time with the National Guard. Currently Earl is actively involved with the Portage Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW). Captain Nathan Harlan of the United States Army and the National Guard spoke of his experiences being deployed in Iraq. Jill Carley, Director of Programs for the Illinois & Indiana Veterans Administration Clinic, spoke to the mental health challenges her clients, and how the VA is looking to address their needs as well as support them through housing assistance, if necessary. Moderated by Chris Buckley, a VU Law Student and former member of the U.S. Marine Corps, panelists spoke to the difference between serving today, versus during the Vietnam conflict and relative peace time.

Captain Harlan spoke directly to his experiences with health care, and the need to receive services for hearing loss, and stress. He related that while Walter Reed Army Medical Center was a state of the art medical facility, prior to 9/11/2001, Walter was already scheduled to be closed in 2009. This decision was made in order to focus resources on expanding the National Naval Medical in Bethesda, Maryland. Therefore when operations began in Afghanistan and Iraq, Walter Reed needed to focus on soldier care, and the facilities were overwhelmed. Captain Harlan’s wife was a nurse at Walter Reed, and stationed there for five months with the Army. In Captain Harlan’s personal experience he relayed the time elapsed since experiencing a hearing loss of 50% in one ear from an explosion next to his vehicle in Iraq fourteen months ago, to now just recently seeing a doctor in Indiana for examination on the condition.

Jill Carley addressed the challenges the VA Clinics have in addressing the breadth and depth of issues experienced by veterans. Not only do veterans experience Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), they also have a high likelihood to experience other “less serious” afflictions such as depression, anxiety, survivor guilt, and substance abuse. Until recently, the VA was unable to fully address the stages of substance abuse problems. If patients wanting treatment came to the clinic drunk, they were told to go home and dry out. If they could stay sober for a week to prove they really wanted to change, then the clinic would find a program to place them in for treatment. Policies have now changed such that if a veteran comes to the VA, they will be seen and placed for care upon going the clinic. Chris Buckley expanded upon soldiers’ feelings of survivor guilt, saying this sometimes is the worst of untreated issues since a soldier may have lived through combat, but fellow soldiers and friends did not. This guilt stays with a person throughout life with questions of “Why me?” or, “Why did I live and so-and-so did not?” and, “Why is my life more important than someone else’s?”—questions all resulting in depression. Often the only people able to identify with these feelings are other veterans, and so to capitalize upon these networks can be fundamental to a soldiers’ well being and healing.

Earl McDowell then stated how the VFW makes efforts to support soldiers in just his fashion by providing a safe place for fellowship and recreation. They also ask at every meeting if anyone knows of a comrade in distress, so that the community can help that person in their day-to-day life. Sometimes this means taking a collection to pay a NIPSCO bill. Other times it may be health bills that are so overwhelming, the family has no money for food. The VFW also conducts a community service projects, such as Toys for Tots, every holiday season.

The audience included community members from the American Legion, and VFWs in Valparaiso, Chesterton, Porter and Portage. Students with personal service, as well as those with family members serving, were actively engaged in exchanging stories of their experience as well as asking questions of the panelists. A common theme among tables was that of gratitude to those who did serve, as well as a desire to support families with returning soldiers.

All Conversations Project Events are held in the Christopher Center Community Room at 7pm and are free and open to the public. Following the presentation and conversation, a reception is provided. Upcoming events in 2008 are: 35 Years of Roe v. Wade: Commemorate or Commiserate on Tuesday, January 22nd. Super Tuesday Spin Doctors: Lessons from the Primaries on Wednesday, January 30th. Forty Years Gone: Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Many Guises of Prejudice on Thursday April 3rd.

For further information, contact Professor Jeremy Telman, VU Law School, 465-7811 or Jeremy.Telman@valpo.edu.

By Eric Gettemy

On Thursday, October 18, 2007, VUSL students were able to participate in an Question and Answer session with United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Justice Scalia is most noted in his jurisprudence for having a textualist philosophy when considering questions of statutory interpretation, and having an originalist philosophy when interpreting the Constitution. The questions were prepared beforehand and used at the discretion of the VUSL American Constitution Society and the Federalist Society, who jointly sponsored the event. In his remarks, Justice Scalia mentioned his personal opinion of Valpo Law, and why he chose VUSL out of many others he could have visited. He stated, “I haven’t visited all two-hundred law schools. There are only some I have a special affection for, Valpo is one of them.” Scalia’s answers to the questions were by and large thoughtful and candid. What follows here is a list of some the questions posed and a brief summary of the answers given by Justice Scalia. Let me stress the fact that the session was not electronically recorded, and these answers are from shorthand notes, and thus do not represent a word-for-word transcript. The purpose of this article is to give the general gist of what was said.

1. In a recent article, the New York Times characterized the ideological divide on the Court as “bitterly divided as it has ever been.” The Times said this divide makes the Court more like a “political body than a legal one.” Whether real or perceived, the idea that the Court is politically or ideologically divided is disturbing. How would you address this law student’s concern regarding the influence of ideology and the administration of justice?

2. Is the Court concerned about the high number of 5-4 decisions and the perceived lack of collegiality on the bench?

A: 1 and 2. “You should not believe what you read in the New York Times.” This was followed by laughter, and Scalia quickly narrowed his initial jest by specifying that when the Times writes about the Court, they are nearly always misinformed or plainly wrong. He stated this is mostly due to the fact that no one has access into the Justices’ discussions of the case, not even secretaries or law clerks. In addition to this, it is the long tradition of the Court not to respond to these types of articles because the Court is not a political institution. He stated, “The press does a terrible job of covering the Court because all they care about is a story, it doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. Further, they shy away from philosophical argument, which is really what the Court is about, and look for personal or political strife within the Court.” Scalia added that the latter doesn’t even exist, and that his best friend on the Court is Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who is obviously politically distinguishable from himself. As a side note, he said their families often vacation together to establish the fact the personal differences to not contribute to the internal structure or decision making process of the Court. In addition to this, the personal differences in the Court do not contribute to the personal relationships outside of the Court. There is no lack of collegiality on the bench.

3. In light of evidence that public schools today are more segregated than they’ve ever been in the past 30 years, should the Court be using strict scrutiny in assessing the constitutional validity of efforts to correct this pattern of segregation?

A: “This is a silly question.” [Scalia intimated that he would find a law that provided for the compulsory mixing of race unconstitutional. This would be due to the fact that segregation, as it was understood in the 1940s and 1950s, no longer exists today. If there are areas that happen to be disparate in race, it is far different than a state-sponsored “separate but equal” policy.]

4. In light of the public concerns being voiced about the executive branch’s claims to vast power such as warrant-less wiretaps, torture, dispensation of federal habeas review, and foreclosure of a federal forum for detainees, should the role of the Court be to reign in executive power?

A: The Court does not exist to shape up the executive branch or to shape up the Congress. Public grievances are taken care of through the democratic political process.

5. Regarding abortion, physician assisted suicide, gay marriage and other controversial issues, why is there such a legal issue with what people do with their own bodies? Shouldn’t the ultimate power be given to the individual whose bodies are affected by these policies and laws?

A: Society has always regulated morality. Current examples of this can be found in the prohibition against bigamy or smoking. Why would these be the business of society any more than abortion would be? If there is abortion, why not have incest? First of all, the notion that abortion is solely dealing with “your own body” is highly disputable. Secondly, the question is silly to begin with.

6. Thurgood Marshall has said, “I do not believe that the meaning of the Constitution was forever fixed at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the Framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation, and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, we hold as fundamental today. We will see that the true miracle was not the birth of the Constitution, but its life, a life nurtured through two turbulent centuries of our own making…” What is your response to Justice Marshall’s remarks on the Constitution?

A: I believe that the questions should be put to the people through the democratic process. The Court should not be in the business of making public policy. Generally, people who want to accomplish their ends by changing the Constitution are the ones who can’t get it done through the political process. Whatever frailty existed in the original document, it is not up to five out of nine people to decide [The required majority on the Supreme Court].

7. What deference should be given to the doctrine of stare decisis?

A: Not too much in statutory matters because Congress can fix statutes. As for stare decisis and the Court, I follow a three part analysis:

1. How wrong is it? How wrong was the result of the case?
2. How accepted is the decision today among the legal community, and the other justices?
3. Can I work with it? Is there a clear and functional rule that can come from the case and its reasoning? For example, Roe v. Wade was a horribly unworkable case, and possibly one the worst reasoned cases on the history of the Court, no matter which side of the abortion debate you fall on. Even in Casey, the standard is essentially what is considered an “undue burden.” This standard is policy, not law. I can’t work with it.

8. What are your views on the contentious nomination process for Supreme Court nominees?

A: This is what lies at the end of the road of an “evolving Constitution.” The most important thing the people [Congress] want[s] is to put people on the Court who want to rewrite the Constitution to fit their agenda. The people [Congress] have figured out the game.

9. Will Justice Scalia hire a Valpo student as a law clerk? [Followed by loud applause]

A: I believe in a meritocracy. I would even prefer to hire a Valpo student if I could be sure I could count on him and his ability. The position is critical to the functioning of the Court and subsequently the Country and it would not be a good thing if I had a clerk who couldn’t handle the job once he’s already been selected.

By: Natalie Kijurna

Career Services

Believe it or not, there’s a second library in the law school. It’s located in the Career Planning Center! The CPC’s library contains books that answer virtually every question you can think of to ask about your job search…and then some.

The books in the CPC are available for check-out, so come in and take advantage of these great resources! Here are just a few of the available titles:

Guerrilla Tactics for getting the Legal Job of your Dreams – Kimm Alayne Walton, J.D. If you’re not the editor-in-chief of the Harvard Law Review, this book holds all the secrets you need to get the legal job of your dreams. We also have the DVD!

Building Career Connections – Donna Gerson. This book gives step-by-step instructions on how to cultivate and maintain relationships and helps you build the connections you need to succeed.

Networking Made Easy – Patty Marler & Jan Bailey Mattia. The advice in this book will give you the confidence you need to network successfully in any setting.

Nonlegal Careers for Lawyers – Gary A. Munneke, William D. Henslee & Ellen Wayne. Covers the latest opportunities in nonlegal careers. You’ll learn when and how to choose a non-legal career, the specialized skills legal training provides, and how to plan and conduct a job search.

Careers in International Affairs - School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University. Prepares students for positions in organizations where they will serve and represent their country or the international community.

What Can You Do With A Law Degree? A Lawyer’s Guide to Career Alternatives Inside, Outside & Around the Law – Deborah Arron. Includes a roster of Internet job resources, a unique job grid system to define your ideal career and work environment, a list of online career assessment tests and hundreds of job options.

The Complete Guide to Contract Lawyering: What Every Lawyer and Law Firm Needs to Know about Temporary Legal Services – Debborah Arron & Deborah Guyol. This book describes how and why lawyering temping has gone mainstream, and how you can take advantage of it.

The Directory of Business Information Resources (2007) – Includes information on 98 industries, including their associations, newsletters, magazines and journals, trade shows, directories and databases, and websites.

2007 Sports Market Place Directory – This 2,300 page reference work includes information on professional, college and youth leagues and teams, sports media, events, facilities, sponsors and professional services.

The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law – Mark Herrmann. The Curmudgeon offers practical and honest, if blunt, advice for surviving and thriving in a law firm.

Women-at-Law: Lessons Learned Along the Pathways to Success– Phyllis Horn Epstein. Discover how women today are meeting the challenges of competing in an often all-consuming profession without sacrificing their desire for a multidimensional life.

Choosing Small, Choosing Smart: Job Search Strategies for Lawyers in the Small Firm Market – Donna Gerson, Esq. Focuses on the small firm market, including how to approach firms effectively, how to negotiate the best salary and benefits package with an employer and how to succeed as a small firm lawyer.

What Law School Doesn’t Teach You…But You Really Need to Know – Kimm Alayne Walton, J.D. Learn simple strategies including how to: create an outstanding first impression, take criticism and make it an opportunity to shine, recover when you make a mistake, etc.

The Official Guide to Legal Specialties: An Insider’s Guide to Every Major Practice Area – Lisa L. Abrams, J.D. An inside look at what it’s like to practice law in 30 major specialty areas.

The Right Moves: Job Search and Career Development Strategies for Lawyers – Valerie A. Fontaine. A search consultant shares advice and detailed information about every step of the job search process and unlocks the mysteries of hiring and promotion.

The 2008 What Color Is Your Parachute? A Practical Manual for Job-Hunters and Career-Changers – Richard Nelson Bolles. A job hunting classic covering practical tools for job-hunting, how to deal with unexpected changes and the vision tools for uncovering your ideal work.

Federal Appellate Court Law Clerk Handbook – Joseph L. Lemon, Jr. and Federal District Court Law Clerk Handbook – Calvert G. Chipchase. Both of these books provide an overview of clerkship responsibilities and assist clerks as they perform their jobs.

The Internship Series – Washington Internships in Law and Policy 2007 and The City/County Attorney Internship Book 2007. These manuals list various available internships.

Lessons from a Headhunter with Heart: Spiritual and Practice Keys to Navigating (and Surviving!) Job Change – Patricia A. Comeford, J.D. with Gina Sauer, J.D. Helps you honestly assess what you really want from a job, knock down the barriers that keep you from your true life’s work and chart a realistic course to career satisfaction.

The Trusted Advisor – David H. Maister, Charles H. Green & Robert M. Galford. This book argues that the key to professional success is the ability to earn the trust and confidence of clients.

We also have the Vault series, several books from NALP that analyze salaries for lawyers and much much more! Please stop by and check out our library!