Where did you work as a PILS Fellow?

This past summer I served as a law clerk at the Cook County Office of the Public Guardian.

What kind of work did you do there? 

In my role there, I advocated for children who had been abused or neglected by their parents. This included client interviews (both in the community and in the office), drafting pre-trial motions, researching case law in preparation for an appeal, and standing up in court for permanency hearings.

How was the experience meaningful to you?

This experience was meaningful to me for several reasons, in particular the strong relationships I developed with my clients and the opportunity to advocate for one of society’s most vulnerable populations.

What did you learn in the course of your work?

Legally, I was able to enhance and develop my trial skills by appearing on record before the court, and specifically, the importance of laying a good foundation and preserving the record for an appeal. I also developed my client interviewing skills by working with children of various ages, races, and sexual orientations. Personally, I also learned the importance of collaborating with colleagues when faced with unfamiliar or emotionally-charged issues. When the summer was over, this experience affirmed my desire to work with children after graduation.

What do you like best about doing public interest law work?

I came to know the children behind the case number, which only strengthened my commitment to ensuring that the court kept their best interests at heart. This personal connection is what I like best about public interest work—the opportunity to make such a long-lasting and powerful impact on an individual’s life. So that at the end of the day, I can go home and feel that maybe, just maybe, I used my gifts and talents to help improve the life of another.

What are you doing to help with the PILS Auction?

This year, I am co-president of the Public Interest Law Society. In this role, I have collaborated with our Do-Gooders’ Auction committee to create an event that we hope will be both profitable and enjoyable. We look forward to bringing the auction to Eckstein Hall and supporting our students’ interest in and commitment to public interest law.

Where did you work as a PILS Fellow?

This past summer I worked for the Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Milwaukee Field Office (HUD).

What kind of work did you do there?

The bulk of my time was spent assisting various Equal Opportunity Specialists in the office investigate fair housing complaints and prepare determinations regarding fair housing complaints. I also performed research for two larger matters that may still be under investigation, so I will not discuss those activities further. Overall, it was a lot of research and writing, with some field investigations from time to time.

How was the experience meaningful to you?

The experience was meaningful to me in two ways. First, I met many great people who showed me the importance of working for a cause that I believe in and how to do so correctly. Everyone in the office was passionate about ending housing discrimination, and they did not hesitate to express that feeling. However, they did not allow those feelings to overcome their professional and ethical duties as HUD employees. It was just as important to guard those wrongly accused of housing discrimination as it was to assist those who had experienced housing discrimination. Even though everyone was passionate about ending housing discrimination, they were also passionate about doing it correctly. It was a great working environment and I am glad I could be a part of it.

Second, it exposed me to an area of the law that I want to continue to participate in. I really enjoyed the work that I did this summer, so this experience showed me the career path that I would like to take.

What did you learn in the course of your work?

I really learned a lot working for HUD. I gained extensive knowledge regarding the Fair Housing Act. My whole summer involved claims under the Act, so it is difficult to express exactly how much information I learned regarding the Act in a few sentences. I also did research regarding private causes of action, administrative procedure, real estate closings, and various public housing issues. My boss did a good job making sure that I saw a wide variety of issues that HUD handles, so I was exposed to a lot of new areas of the law that I had never dealt with before. I had a great learning experience.

What do you like best about doing public interest law work?

The people. In my experience with public interest law, you are normally presented with an individual who has encountered a legal problem in the form of a stack of papers with a lot of confusing language. The person feels overwhelmed and is often extremely intimidated by the problem. In fact, they probably feel the same way many law students do before going into a final exam; the only difference is that they are facing the prospect of losing a home, license, job, etc., rather than the prospect of a disappointing grade. It is hard to explain the feeling that I get when I am able to help someone in a situation like that. I am able to connect with them on a personal level, and it really puts the “problems” in my life into perspective.

The law dominates my life and will continue to do so from this point on. The people I have encountered, and will hopefully continue to encounter, through public interest work remind me that there is more to life than statutes, rules, and structured arguments. They also remind me why I am passionate about the law and reinforce the fact that legal work really is worthwhile. Finally, they also remind me that sometimes they just want someone to listen and are truly grateful when someone does. It gives them hope, and it makes me feel good.

What are you doing to help with the PILS Auction?

This year I have done a lot of work helping prepare for the auction. I have sold raffle and auction tickets, requested donations by phone and in person, and have picked up quite a few donations. In years past I have helped with the clean-up and have volunteered for various activities during the auction. This year I do not plan on helping during the actual auction so that I can experience it as a participant, rather than a volunteer, for the first time.

“Get out of my way,” Thompson answered quickly.

If you think that at 70, the political fire inside Thompson has diminished, you should have seen him during the “On the Issues” session with Gousha, the Law School’s distinguished fellow in law and public policy at Eckstein Hall on Thursday. (In fact, you can, by clicking here for the video.)

The man elected governor of Wisconsin four times before serving four years as US Secretary of Health and Human Services was every bit the forceful, self-confident, optimistic, almost swaggering figure before about 200 people that Wisconsinites knew so well in the 1980s and 1990s.

When Gousha said other people running for the open US Senate seat wanted the job as much as Thompson did, Thompson said, “I don’t think so.”

Thompson appeared to be close to taking offense when Gousha said that, if elected, he would be only a junior senator from Wisconsin. “I don’t believe that,” Thompson said. He said he believed he would be regarded as a leader who could bring Republicans and Democrats together to deal with a federal debt problem that is threatening the quality of life in the future and to promote a stronger economy. He said he’d be looked to by other senators as an expert on issues such as health care policy.

He recounted his successes as governor and as a cabinet member, including Wisconsin’s economic record while he was in office and his roles in reforming welfare policy and launching Milwaukee’s private school voucher program. (He even mentioned a Super Bowl victory by the Packers and Rose Bowl wins by the Wisconsin Badgers while he was governor.)

“I was able to change the attitude of this state,” he said. “I did this, ladies and gentlemen, with Democrats in charge of both houses of the Legislature.”

He can do the same as a senator, he said. “We can build Wisconsin and we can build America, and that’s what I believe America and the public are thirsting for me, and I think they would love to have somebody like me stand up and say, that’s the way we’re going to do it and that’s the direction we’re going to go. And I bet you I got a lot of people who want to follow me,” Thompson said.

He referred to himself frequently as “a builder” and said he would rather be labeled “a do-er” than any political label such as “conservative.”

Thompson defended himself against contentions by critics that he had reversed his positions on issues such as the federal health care law and high speed rail. Asked about attacks that he is not sufficiently conservative, attacks largely funded by the national Club for Growth, Thompson said:

“Just because the Club for Growth nationally is wrong doesn’t mean anyone else has to follow them. They want somebody else to win the Republican primary in Wisconsin. They want somebody to go to Washington just to vote no. . . . They know that I’m going to go out there and shake things up and make things happen, and they’re afraid of that.”

“That’s what America wants, they want a builder again,’ Thompson said. “They want somebody that is optimistic, that believes the United States’ future is still the shining city on the hill that Ronald Reagan talked about.”

As for others who want to succeed retiring Democrat Herb Kohl in the Senate, Thompson said, “Who are they? . . . Did they ever get endorsed by Ronald Reagan?”

Other candidates for senator are expected to take part in upcoming “On the Issues” sessions. Rep. Tammy Baldwin, a Democratic candidate, is scheduled to appear at 12:15 p.m. April 9.

A big thumbs up for Walker across most of the state of Wisconsin. A big thumbs down in Madison.

The two half-states of Wisconsin—one with clear Democratic majorities, one with clear Republican majorities—can be seen in the results of the Marquette Law School Poll released this week. Political contests in either of the half-states alone would be bring few surprises and little drama because they would be one-sided. But combine the two halves into the one Wisconsin we actually have, and you get a polarized, evenly split state that has become a center of passionate partisanship, attracting high levels of national attention.

You can see the two half-Wisconsins in the demographic breakdowns of many of the questions in the new Law School poll. (The results are all on the Law School Poll’s webpage. To go to them, click on “Results & Data” and then on the line referring to “crosstabs.”)

There were some matters where the divide was more visible. On issues such as reducing state aid to education (results generally unfavorable to Walker’s position) or requiring people to show photo identification in order to vote (results generally favorable to Walker’s position), the variations by sections of the state were not as substantial.

Also, caution is in order: While the margin of error for the poll results as a whole was 3.8 percentage points, the margins of effort for results involving subgroups such as people in a specific media market are larger because the samples are smaller.

But there is no mistaking the overall picture. Some examples:

Asked if they approved or disapproved of the way President Barack Obama is handling his job, the poll sample as a whole was evenly split, 47% on each side. But in the highly Democratic Madison media market, 58% approved and 34% disapproved. For the city of Milwaukee, 63% approved and 34% disapproved. The reverse was true in the rest of the Milwaukee media market, which includes Waukesha, Ozaukee, and Washington Counties, areas that vote heavily Republican. The figures for that area were 37% approve and 57% disapprove. The Green Bay/Appleton media market was closely split, 46% approve, 48% disapprove. Results for the state outside those four areas were 42% approve and 50% disapprove.

For Walker, the job approval/disapproval figures were:

City of Milwaukee: 33% approve, 62% disapprove.

The rest of the Milwaukee media market: 61% approve, 36% disapprove.

Madison media market: 35% approve, 62% disapprove.

Green Bay–Appleton: 56% approve, 43% disapprove.

All other media markets: 59% approve, 38% disapprove.

Put that all together and you get 51% saying they approve of Walker’s job performance, 46% saying they disapprove.

You could see the political leanings of each part of the state clearly in the results when people were asked which of these two statements they agreed with more: “I’d rather pay higher taxes and have a state government that provides more services” or “I’d rather pay lower taxes and have a state government that provides fewer services.”

In the city of Milwaukee, 49% of those polled chose the higher taxes/more services side, while 38% took the lower/fewer side. In Madison, the figures were 53% higher/more and 42% lower/fewer.

On the other side of the geo-political divide, 36% of those polled in the rest of the Milwaukee media market said higher/more and 54% said lower/fewer. In the Green Bay-Appleton area, it was 38% higher/more and 52% lower/fewer. For the remainder of the state, the figures were 36% higher/more, 55% lower/fewer.

In his remarks at an “On the Issues” session at the Law School following release of the poll results, Charles Franklin, visiting professor of law and public policy at the Law School this year, suggested that the results of a possible governor’s race between Walker and Democratic State Sen. Tim Cullen were interesting. Franklin, who is directing the Marquette Law School Poll, said that only 18% of those polled knew enough about Cullen to express a favorable or unfavorable opinion about him. Therefore, Franklin suggested, Cullen’s results against Walker might be taken as an indicator of baseline support at this point of any Democratic challenger to Walker.

With that in mind, look at the Walker/Cullen results by region:

City of Milwaukee: Walker 35%, Cullen 52%.

Rest of the Milwaukee media market: Walker 61%, Cullen 31%.

Madison area: Walker 36%, Cullen 55%.

Green Bay–Appleton media market: Walker 52%, Cullen 35%.

The rest of the state: Walker 56%, Cullen 34%.

Getting a big turn out on the turf where you’re strong and doing better than expected on the turf where you’re weak are the standard underlying priorities for any statewide campaign by either party. You can count on that being true in all three of the major races expected this year: for governor, U.S. senator, and president. Regional strategizing will be a factor in the advertising campaigns of candidates—and the air waves are going to be awash with commercials all year—but it also is a consideration in the often under-publicized “ground game” of campaigns. Networking with supporters, targeted mailings, phone banking, and knocking on doors while distributing campaign literature will all be high priorities for candidates who want to maximize the voting among residents in their half of Wisconsin’s political map.

The full poll results can be found here.

At noon today (Jan. 25), Charles Franklin, visiting professor of law and public policy and director of the poll, will discuss the poll results with Mike Gousha, distinguished fellow in law and public policy, in Eckstein Hall. The session is free and open to the public. Video of the session will be posted on the Web page for the poll shortly after the session ends.

A brief look at the results: With the spotlight on the almost-certain recall election for governor, more people said at this point that they would vote for Gov. Scott Walker, the Republican who has been in office for a year, than for any of four possible Democratic challengers. The margins in favor of Walker ranged from five to ten percentage points.

Asked if they approved or disapproved of the way Walker is handling his job as governor, 51% said they approved and 46% said they disapproved.

The poll results also included information on how Wisconsinites rate candidates for the U.S. Senate seat that is open this year, what they think of some of the proposals that have stirred controversy in the state in the last year, and the standing of President Barack Obama and some of the Republican candidates for president. 

The Law School polling project will continue throughout 2012, with fresh rounds of polling generally monthly. All poll results, along with analysis of what the poll shows, links to media coverage of the poll, and announcement of upcoming events, will be posted on the Web page for the poll.

But sometimes, timing is everything. So that’s why there were a gaggle of television cameras, a cluster of reporters, and about 200 others in the room when Kennedy joined Mike Gousha for an “On the Issues” session at Eckstein Hall on Thursday.

Kennedy is director and general counsel of the Wisconsin Governmental Accountability Board. Now in possession of petitions with about 1.9 million signatures calling for recall elections for governor, lieutenant governor, and for four state Senate seats currently held by Republicans, the board is at center stage for one of America’s hottest political scenes. What the GAB decides in handling the petitions and setting the course for the elections that are almost sure to result will have a major bearing on Wisconsin’s future and become a vivid part of Wisconsin’s history.

“It’s an honor to be part this process,” Kennedy told Gousha, the Law School’s distinguished fellow in law and public policy. ”And it’s definitely energizing. You can’t help but get juiced when you’re working on something this challenging.”

Kennedy compared the role he and the board are playing to being an umpire or referee in a sports event. Asked by Gousha about contentions from partisans on both sides of the political spectrum that the board is biased, Kennedy said, “Ultimately, it’s just how you do the job. Someone has to play this role, whether it’s wrestling or soccer or football. . . . Someone has to make the calls.”

“People are going to try to work the ref,” he said.

For part of the session, large screens in the Appellate courtroom showed live images of the scene in an undisclosed location in the Madison area where GAB employees were scanning the recall petitions to create an electronic record that will be open to all. Kennedy said both tight security and an effort to be open to the public were necessary given the stakes at hand. He said 450,000 pieces of paper were submitted to the GAB on Tuesday, the deadline for the recall petitions, and each one of them needed to be scrutinized. They are also sure to be scrutinized by others. The GAB is planning to create a data base of the signers.

Under orders from Waukesha County Circuit Judge Mac Davis to give the petitions careful checks for proper signatures and possible duplication of signers, Kennedy said he was unable so far to set a timetable for when elections might be held. The GAB is expected to go to court next week to ask for more time than the 30 days for making decisions called for in state law. “We’ll probably be in this process for a while before things start to coalesce,” Kennedy said.

The conversation with Kennedy, which can be viewed by clicking here, was the first of what are sure to be numerous sessions at the Law School this year aimed at shedding light on the epic political developments in Wisconsin.

Coming up Wednesday will be the release of results from the first round of the Marquette Law School Poll. You can learn more about the poll by clicking here and you can click here to sign up for an “On the Issues with Mike Gousha” conversation with Prof. Charles Franklin, director of the poll, at noon Wednesday at Eckstein Hall. The session will be free and open to the public.

One good answer: You can run a large-scale polling project, adhering to the highest standards of professionalism and non-partisanship. You can poll repeatedly throughout the year, so that you can follow trends. You can make all the results available promptly to anybody. You can go to lengths to give others a chance to see what you’ve found out.

That is what the Marquette Law School Poll is going to do. It will be the most extensive polling project in Wisconsin history, and we are fully committed to making it an independent effort that will have no agenda except to find out as much as we can about public opinion in Wisconsin and share it with all.

In fact, consider this your invitation to tune into the poll’s results. We are launching the first round of polling on Thursday, Jan. 19, and will release the results next Wednesday, Jan. 25.

The results will be posted on a Web page that will go live in advance of that release. In addition, an “On the Issues with Mike Gousha” session will be held at noon on Wednesday at Eckstein Hall. Gousha, the Law School’s distinguished fellow in law and public policy, will interview Charles Franklin, the Law School’s visiting professor of law and public policy who is leading the poll project. The session is free and open to the public – you can sign up by clicking here. A video of the discussion will be posted on the Law School’s Web site and on the poll Web site afterward.

Franklin, a University of Wisconsin-Madison political science professor, will be at the Law School for all of 2012. He is a nationally respected expert on polling and a political analyst who is called on frequently by the news media.

This year is certain to be an epic one for Wisconsin politics, with the likelihood of close elections for U.S. Senate and president and, with the filing this week of petitions with more than a million signatures, an all-but-certain recall election to determine whether Scott Walker should be ousted as governor less than half way through his four-year term. It will be only the third recall election of a governor in American history.

Why is a law school getting into the polling business? Dean Joseph D. Kearney sees it as an important part of a growing effort by Marquette Law School to help inform the public on major issues and to make the Law School a crossroads for serious discussion of such issues. He described the polling project and its context in this paper sent to the Law School community in November. The poll will be paid for not out of tuition money from law students but rather from the dean’s discretionary dollars (donations by alumni and friends in support of the Law School’s priorities).

Franklin has said often in planning the launch of the poll that there will be people who will assume there is partisanship or an agenda behind the effort. His advice has been that that should not change our pursuit of doing things in the best—and most non-partisan—fashion we can. We invite people to judge us by what we actually do as part of the polling project. And, at least as important as that, we invite people to join in, delving into the results along with us and benefitting from having the solid grasp of public opinion that provides an important and level-headed piece of the picture of Wisconsin in a highly-charged and historic time.

Alan J. Borsuk is senior fellow in law and public policy at Marquette University Law School. He has been part of the planning process for the Marquette Law School Poll.

[Editor’s Note: This blog is the first in a series of interviews with faculty and staff at the Law School.] 

Professor Gordon Hylton is a graduate of Oberlin College, where he majored in History and English Literature. He holds a J.D. and M.A. in History from the University of Virginia and a Ph.D. in the History of American Civilization from Harvard University. Following law school, he clerked for Justice Albertis S. Harrison and Chief Justice Lawrence I’Anson of the Virginia Supreme Court and worked for the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination. He joined the Marquette faculty in 1995, after teaching at IIT Chicago Kent College of Law and Washington University. He has also taught as a visiting professor at Washington and Lee University and the University of Virginia and served as a Fulbright Lecturer in Law in Ukraine. His current research interests are in the history of the legal profession, constitutional history, and the legal history of American sports.

Question: What motivated you to pursue a law degree and ultimately teach law?

When I was a senior in college, my plan was to go to graduate school in history. However, the job market for historians was supposedly terrible, and I was intrigued by the idea of being a lawyer, even though there had never been a lawyer in my family. I ended up splitting the difference by enrolling in a joint law and history program at the University of Virginia, in my home state.

After three years at UVA, I had completed my law degree and the coursework for a master’s degree in history. At that point, I accepted a clerkship with the Virginia Supreme Court, and while clerking, I finished my master’s thesis. During that year, I decided that I wanted to be a history professor rather than a lawyer, so I enrolled in the History of American Civilization program at Harvard to work on a Ph.D. Although I planned to concentrate on American legal history as my major field, I felt I was leaving law for a career as a history professor.

However, while in graduate school, I decided that what I really wanted to do was to teach in a law school. I took a course called “Preparing for Law Teaching” at Harvard Law School, and after teaching for a year as an Instructor in the Harvard History Department, I entered law teaching at Chicago-Kent.

Question: You also have a Ph.D. in history. What relationship do you see between the study of law and history?

Law can be, and is, studied from a variety of angles, including the historical. Historians try to explain why and how the present turned out the way it did. Studying how the law developed is an excellent way of understanding why the law is the way that it is and why that it sometimes needs to change. Lawyers who understand legal history have a much more comprehensive understanding of the system in which they operate.

Question: Which lawyer from history do you most admire and why?

I have long been fascinated by the professional notion that lawyers properly suppress their own moral and ethical judgments in the name of the zealous representation of their clients. That may be an essential component of the adversary system, but it does not seem like a very good formula for greatness. Lawyers are most heroic, I believe, when they transcend the adversary system and stand on their own beliefs.

I don’t really have a “lawyer from history that I admire most,” but if I had to pick someone it would probably be a lawyer turned politician like Abraham Lincoln or Huey Long. I do think that Thomas More is the most overrated lawyer in history.

Question: You grew up in Virginia and have spent time in both the Midwest and the East. Do you see similarities or differences between how the three parts of the country approach the practice of law?

I think there probably was a time when there were regional differences in the way law was practiced, a la My Cousin Vinny. However, the days in which lawyers wore blue suits in Boston, brown suits in Chicago, and white suits in Houston are pretty much over. I grew up in a town of 2000 people that was the largest community in a 25-mile radius, so I have always been interested in the practice of law in small towns and rural areas. There are still great differences between the practice of law in small towns and major metropolitan areas, but geographic region per se no longer seems to make much difference.

Question: You have a genuine interest in baseball and sports in general. Do you see a connection between baseball and the law? What attracts people to both?

For people who are interested in law, organized baseball represents a fascinatingly self-contained legal system. The sport is like a legal matryoshka doll—one of those Russian dolls where every time you open up the doll, there is another doll inside. The baseball industry is governed by a hodgepodge of statutes and court interpretations. Inside the industry, the game is governed by a mesh of contractual agreements and other restraints of trade; the standard player contract that ties players to teams is like a miniature constitution; and on the field the game is defined by a legal-code-like rule book and presided over by judicial figures known as umpires. And then there are the unwritten rules. Following baseball from a legal perspective is like taking a course in comparative law.

Question: What is your favorite class to teach?

My favorite part of law teaching is teaching first year students in their first semester of law school. At that point no one has received a grade or a rank in class, so everyone is even. Plus, first semester law students almost always do the assigned reading and usually show up for class ready and willing to grapple with the material. I have taught first year, first semester courses in Property, Torts, Jurisprudence, and the Legal Profession at five different law schools, and the experience has been uniformly enjoyable.

Among upper level courses, my favorite class to teach is Trusts and Estates, because the entire course revolves around the themes of death and greed, which give the course a real literary quality.

Question: What advice would you give to a student starting law school?

I think it is important to begin law school with a commitment to being in law school. In spite of everything that has happened in the past several years, law school is still the right place to be for people who have decided that they really want to be lawyers. However, it may not be the best place to find out what one wants to do in life or to simply extend one’s undergraduate years.

Question: What is your favorite book?

I don’t know exactly why, but I find myself re-reading Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises at least every few years. The same is also true for Hunter Thompson’s Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. I am still working my way through the Gospel of Luke and the Epistle of James.

Question: What is the greatest strength and the greatest challenge facing the American legal system today?

The greatest strength of the American legal system is its unquestioned commitment to the rule of law. The greatest challenge is maintaining the public faith in the fairness and openness of the system. We really do need to figure out a way to make legal services more readily available to middle- and low-income Americans.

I am excited by WILL but also happy to be able to return to the Law School on the adjunct faculty and teach Election Law this spring. When I proposed the class and first taught it a few years ago, I thought it would be something that could be offered every two years for the politicos in the student body. I had no idea that it would be delivered during a time when Wisconsin had become a virtual election law laboratory. But that’s where we are and that’s where I’d like to go in my next blog post.

I learned a lot from Judge Ihlenfeldt over the years, but one of the most valuable lessons he taught me came very early in my legal career, and I see this story as making an important point for law students and new lawyers. The practice of law requires constant learning; you’ve barely begun to know what you need to know when you leave law school. And you can—must—learn the lessons of the law (and life) from everyone, not just your professors, but your colleagues, your adversaries, your clients, and even from judges.

Back in the mid ’70s, as an associate at Foley & Lardner, I first appeared in bankruptcy court for banks and other creditors, often seeking to recover collateral or to oppose the discharge of a debt. I had appeared before Judge Ihlenfeldt a few times, and on this particular occasion he had ruled against me. I don’t remember the details, but the decision may well have involved the judge’s exercising some discretion, and he exercised it against my client. The case was over, and (as often happened in his court) the lawyers had lingered in chambers to talk. He could tell that I was upset at losing (not then having much experience at it—a condition that time has healed), and he turned to me, in his gentle way, and said, “Oh, Tom, you have to understand that we’re the bankruptcy court. Bankruptcy law is intended to benefit debtors, and you shouldn’t expect to win all the time when you represent creditors.”

This comment struck me at the time and many times since as one of the best lessons that a judge could teach a young lawyer. And it has implications beyond bankruptcy law. Good judges like Judge Ihlenfeldt call them as they see them and follow the law as they understand it. But a lawyer should never lose sight of the fact that much of the law (understood as being what judges do) is not black and white, but gray, and a judge’s instincts in the gray area—whether to afford a debtor relief, to let a plaintiff try to prove her case, or to cut a lawyer some slack—are every bit as much a part of the law as the stuff in the books. I’m glad that I learned that lesson early from a great judge.

Collins practiced with her husband, Vincent Collins, in Waukesha in the mid-1900s. She was one of the first women to practice law in Wisconsin. Recently I had the chance to speak with Collins’ daughter, Patricia Andringa, about her mother’s work and life as an early woman lawyer in Wisconsin.

Collins graduated from Waukesha High School in three years in 1923. She attended Marquette University and graduated in four years in 1927 with both an undergraduate and law degree. She met her husband while at Marquette, and they graduated together.

Collins’ grandfather encouraged her to attend law school. He told her that he felt she was bright enough to go to law school, and that if she went, he would reward her when she graduated. At Marquette, she was a member of an honor society and played tennis. She was twenty-one when she graduated. She was the sixty-sixth woman lawyer in Wisconsin, according to the Wisconsin Bar Association’s “Pioneers in the Law: The First 150 Women” website. The Collinses graduated with Mabel Watson Raimey, the first African-American woman lawyer in Wisconsin.

At the time the Collinses graduated from Marquette, most students graduated with an LL.B. degree. In the late 1960s, the LL.B. degree was reclassified as a J.D. The Law School sent Lois Collins her J.D. paper, which the family still has. When the family learned that her degree had been reclassified as a J.D., they celebrated with a cake topped with Lois Collins’ Marquette graduation photo. The family also still keeps Lois Collins’ notary seal.

After graduating, Lois and Vincent Collins married on August 28, 1930. Lois Collins worked for a time in Waukesha as an assistant city treasurer.

Vincent Collins established his reputation in Waukesha as the city attorney from 1932 to 1938. He entered private practice with his wife as Collins and Collins in 1933. Lois Collins was the second named partner in the firm. The firm later became Collins, Collins, and Tichenor when Paul Tichenor, another Marquette graduate, joined the firm. Consistent with the time, the firm was a general practice law office.

Andringa said that her parents spent time each night discussing cases and other legal matters. Although Lois Collins did not practice law full time while she raised her family of seven children, she had an integral role in her husband’s practice as a sounding board and strategist. When the children were around, the Collinses were careful to go into another room to discuss legal matters. She also drafted documents such as deeds, some of which my father has come across in his own practice.

Lois Collins was raised a Methodist, but she converted to Catholicism when she married her husband, who was Catholic. She was active in Catholic social and philanthropic circles throughout her life. She was the president of the Christian Mothers of Joseph’s Church in Waukesha and the Milwaukee Archdiocesan Catholic Women. She was one of the prime motivators in establishing Catholic Memorial High School in Waukesha and raising capital for the school. Andringa remembers the fundraisers her mother and other local women put together for the school, including making and selling rag dolls. Her mother spent much time on the phone soliciting funds for the school.

Andringa said that growing up in the Collins family, she and her siblings “never gave the idea of women’s rights any thought.” They were raised to think that they “could be anything and never given the impression that it would be otherwise.” Andringa said that her “mother could do anything and was always ready for a challenge.”

The Collins’ legacy lives on. Son James Collins and grandsons Tim Andringa and Mark Andringa followed in their parents’ and grandparents’ footsteps in attending Marquette University Law School.

*Thanks to Assistant Dean Jane Casper who located the wonderful photos of the Collinses and to Professor Gordon Hylton who explained the J.D. reclassification to me. I am also grateful to the Waukesha City Attorney’s Office staff, who verified Vincent Collins’ years of service.

Congratulations to the participants in the 2012 Jenkins Honors Moot Court Competition: 

• Joseph Birdsall
• Bailey Briggs
• Clayton Britnell
• Nicole Cameli
• Mark Darnieder
• Dana Gilman
• Kristina Gordon
• Steven Gruber
• Nickolas Hagman
• Anne Halverson
• Matthew Hanson
• Nicholas Hermann
• Gabriel Houghton
• Nathan Imfeld
• Adam Koenings
• Jenna Leslie
• Jenna McConnell
• Sarah McNutt
• Matteo Reginato
• Patrick Ritter
• Brett Schnepper
• Max Stephenson
• Ariane Strombom
• Megan Zabkowicz

Students will begin writing their appellate briefs in January with the rounds of oral argument commencing later this spring.  The competition includes three preliminary oral argument rounds and a semifinal and final round.  

The Jenkins competitors are fortunate to have the opportunity to argue before distinguished members of the bench and bar from Wisconsin and beyond. The final round judges of the 2011 competition were the Honorable Carolyn Dineen King, the Honorable Barbara Brandriff Crabb, and the Honorable Patricia J. Gorence.

The competition is named after the James G. Jenkins, the first Marquette Law School dean. More can be read about Jenkins in Professor Gordon Hylton’s blog post.

[Editor's Note: This month, faculty members are posting on their exam taking tips. This is the fourth post in the series.]

As law students know, tomorrow begins exam week.  We have endeavored to present some exam taking tips from some of the faculty who will be administering those exams.  (Those tips can be found here, here, and here.) I’d like to add one more to the list.  Relax.

It may seem odd to say “relax,” but I think ”relax” is an important exam taking tip that is often overlooked.  For weeks now, students have been outlining, reviewing their outlines and texts, meeting with study groups to go over concepts, and drawing graphs and flow charts on the whiteboards in Eckstein Hall’s study rooms.  All of that work is the process of studying and all of that work will continue in your head long after you have closed your text or left your study group.  (If, in the last couple of weeks, you have dreamt about outlining or about the course material you know your brain is processing all of this material.)

Now, on the eve of exams, allow yourself permission to take the night off.  Plan a dinner with friends (try not to talk about exams), watch a funny movie, get in a good workout.  And above all, get a good night’s sleep.  Your mind is processing and absorbing the material you’ve been feeding it; there isn’t anything new you will learn tonight if you push yourself to study until the wee hours of the morning.  You can spend time tomorrow morning making one or two more runs through your outline before you head to your exam.

Best of luck to all students.

A true discussion on the merits of these articles could easily lead to hours of debate. In fact, given the current job market, employment statistics, and the cost of a legal education, it might be easy to agree with these authors. But I think there are benefits to legal education that can’t be measured in dollars and cents, and for me these articles are discouraging and devalue a hard earned legal education.

Thus, as alumni blogger of the month, and an employed professional, I want to use my first blog post to remind myself and others of the many ways my education at MULS prepared me for work in the professional world. So, below is my personal list for your consideration, feel free to add to it in the comment section.

1. Legal Writing and Research. Much to my dismay, while at MULS I was forced to take two semesters of legal writing, and one advanced legal research course. I wanted to learn legal theory and have exciting debates. I did not want to spend my time studying legal writing and honing my research skills. These courses were the bane of my law school existence. However, after five years in the professional world, I can honestly say I would not have had some of the successes I’ve had without these skills. I write daily. Emails to clients, technical memos, presentations, the list goes on. Clear, concise legal writing is essential to my job, and my ability to write well has been a instrumental part of my career successes thus far.

2. Critical Thinking and Reading. I know this one seems obvious. One could argue that it’s impossible to do well on the LSAT and get into law school unless you already possess these skills. But, spending three years surrounded by people who also excel at these skills forces you to really practice them. By the time you graduate, these skills will be sharp, and these skills are extremely valuable for any client service professional. I read daily. My job requires me to critically read statutes, treaties, and secondary documents and to interpret them and apply them to my clients’ situations. My clients depend on this ability, and it is an essential part of legal education.

3. Legal Theory. Legal theory should not be underrated. Legal theory gives you the basics. A strong foundation of legal theory means that when I’m given a research task, I have a general idea of what I’m looking for, I know where to start looking, and I know the correct terminology to make my research efficient. Legal theory is important and should not be scoffed at as impractical.

4. Opportunity. This last point might seem vague and general, but in an effort at brevity I wanted to find one word that summed up all of the benefits of a legal education. For me, that word is opportunity. The opportunity to learn from, and really get to know, some of the best minds in the legal professtion (thank you professors!). The opportunity to network and meet interesting and accomplished people through various activities and events. The opportunity to form life long friendships.The opportunity to improve myself, and the world around me, through volunteer opportunities. The opportunity to work in a job I love, that challenges me every day. The opportunity to travel the world. My legal education opened up a world of opportunities, many of which would have remained closed without it.

Yes, law school is expensive. Yes, I will still be paying off my law school loans when my daughter goes to college. If I was asked today, I would advise any would-be law students to be sure they passionately desire a legal education before undertaking the expense. But for me, law school was a fantastic three years, full of wonderful memories that I look back upon with pride. I wouldn’t trade a minute of it, and I am proud of what I have accomplished because of it.

Law school essay exams are a completely different kind of essay exam than what students might be used to.  Here, Professor Mitten shares his essentials for taking law school essay exams.

1.         Carefully read question at least twice and sort out what happened.  It may be helpful to draw a chronological diagram of the parties’ conduct.

2.         Determine the question(s) that you are being asked to consider.  For example, it may be broad (e.g., discuss the parties’ respective claims) or very specific (e.g., consider A’s claims against B).  Some professors (like me) will give you credit only for answering the question asked.

3.         Identify each plaintiff’s claims and address each claim separately.  For example, in torts, tell the professor who (plaintiff) is suing whom (defendant) for what (tort)?

4.         Identify the applicable rule of law that governs and list all elements (i.e., what must plaintiff prove to prevail?)

5.         Carefully analyze plaintiff’s legal theory, which requires: i) considering all elements of the applicable rule; ii) using the given facts; and iii) arguing both sides’ respective positions.

6.         Based on your analysis, determine the likely resolution of plaintiff’s claim by an impartial third party such as the judge or jury.

7.         Identify and analyze defendant’s affirmative defenses while following the steps in #3-6.

8.         Know what you want to say before writing.  The best answer is not necessarily the longest one.  Rambling B.S. and verbosity will negatively affect your grade.

9.         Spotting and fully analyzing the issues raised by the facts are far more important than having “the right answer” (since there may not be one).  Organize your thoughts carefully, express them briefly, and then move on.  When writing, keep in mind that your answer needs to be clear, concise, and complete. Your answer should reflect the product of following #3-7.

10.       Exercise proper time management when taking an exam.  You may assume that the recommended time for each essay question corresponds to its relative point value, so allocate your time accordingly.

[Editor's Note: This month, faculty members are posting on their exam taking tips. This is the second post in the series.]

Law students dread the exam process. This feeling is no surprise given the fact that in many courses examination grades become final grades. Unfortunately, agreement on a simple technique that maximizes effective learning does not exist. But there is some agreement on pitfalls that every student should avoid during times of study and review. One pitfall is failing to process and understand course material. It is so easy to simply turn the pages of a textbook or stare at a course outline that appears on a computer screen and then conclude: “I understand this topic. It’s clear as can be and I don’t need to review it again.” Such confidence may, in fact, be a signal that the material has only been memorized and that there is little, if any, understanding of how it is used in specific contexts. The results can be devastating.  Simply memorizing principles and doctrines
makes it difficult, if not impossible, to identify and analyze legal issues presented in examination questions.  Under these circumstances, final grades may be very disappointing. It is important, therefore, that students always include time during the study process to ask: “Do I really understand how the principles and doctrines work or am I simply staring at words and watching time pass?”

[Editor's Note: This month, faculty members will post on their exam taking tips. This is the first post in the series.]

If my first year of law school was any indication, first year law students are looking ahead to final exams during the coming weeks with some trepidation.  Undoubtedly one of the main sources of that trepidation is the fear of the unknown – specifically, what is the final exam going to look like and are students adequately prepared to take that exam?

What I have learned as a law professor is that one of the best ways to reduce that fear is to try to manage it, to the extent possible. In the case of final exams, that means, as an initial matter, studying all the legal principles and concepts learned throughout the semester to understand what their elements are, and how, when and why they apply.

However, a student must not only know the “law,” but also be able to analyze facts in light of that law.  That, perhaps, is the greater source of uncertainty, for there is no telling in advance what the hypothetical fact pattern on the exam will look like.  I believe one of the best ways to reduce that kind of uncertainty is to practice the skill of legal analysis by taking practice exams.  That does not mean passively reading over practice exam questions and answers.  Rather, it means taking a practice exam (or several of them) in a timed environment, possibly with one or two colleagues taking the exam at the same time in the same room.  Only by simulating the exam-taking experience can a student identify areas for improvement, and then  work on improving in those areas.

If a professor has made any of her old exams available, as I have, those are some of the best indicia of what that professor’s exam will look like (assuming she has not changed her testing method or format), and thus are one of the best exam-practicing tools.  If not, then a student can either take exams from other professors who use the same testing method or even try to write her own exam questions (which can actually be a quite effective study technique).  In short, to master the skills involved in taking an exam, much like playing soccer or arguing a moot, a student needs to practice the skills over and over again.

But stirring the pot can move the cooking process forward. Spreading important and provocative thoughts can get people thinking along lines they might not have considered previously. Bringing a wide range of committed people together can lead to conversations – informal, as well as formal – that start something rolling.

I hope, and I’m even a bit optimistic, that we served some of those purposes at the conference, sponsored by Marquette Law School and the Marquette College of Education and attended by almost 200 people. The audience included key education policy figures across the spectrum, from union leaders to an advisor to Gov. Scott Walker.

I thought of the conference as a musical piece in four movements: What can be learned from what has been done in developing a new school system in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005; getting a handle on the rapidly developing movement nationwide to overhaul teacher evaluations as a key to improving teacher effectiveness; a look at community efforts to improve educational outcomes overall in Milwaukee; and general assessments of what is needed in educational thinking to move Wisconsin forward. That meant we had three keynote speakers, all of them figures of national standing who were fresh faces to Wisconsin’s educational debate, and more than a dozen panelists, including important  figures in state and local education policy.

Feel free to sample the nearly five hours of video that we have posted online from the conference. And let me share with you a few moments that stick out for me:

Paul Pastorek, the former superintendent of Louisiana schools who was one of the architects of what has happened in New Orleans, railing against conventional school systems that he said are broken when it comes to giving many kids a chance to succeed. Pastorek said, “My argument is not against unions, it’s not against teachers, it’s not against administrators, it’s not against legislators, it’s against the damn system. If people work in a broken system, the system designed to achieve the results we’re getting, they cannot be successful.” He called for systems that support strong leadership of individual schools, with strong accountability for results.

Pastorek and Sarah Carr, an education reporter for the New Orleans Times-Picayune, touching nerves in the debate over the impact of high levels of poverty in shaping educational outcomes. They were joined by Marquette’s Howard Fuller, who has also worked extensively in New Orleans, and Prof. Brian Beabout of the University of New Orleans. (If you’re going to watch one thing from the video, go to this exchange, starting at 1hour and 23 minutes.)

Carr said, “I do think the leaders in New Orleans have made a mistake in viewing school change in isolation from broader societal change.” She said poverty cannot be used as an excuse for why children don’t succeed in school, but issues such as early childhood education, criminal justice, and mental health services need to be addressed as part of “a broader revisioning” for New Orleans.

With some heat, Pastorek responded, “I would argue that as far as educating kids is concerned, what comes first in getting success with kids is getting success with the classroom. . . . Educate the kids first in the classroom successfully and then the dynamics in the outer environment change.” 

Fuller said, “There’s a difference between saying you got to end poverty before you can improve schools and saying ending poverty is a critical factor in our overall effort to improve schools.” He said if people such as Pastorek and himself don’t listen to what Carr is saying, many people won’t regard them “as real.” And he drew applause when he added, “You can’t support stuff that says, I’m all for the kids in schools, but I’m going to take away health care, I’m going to take away jobs, I’m going to take away housing, I’m going to take away every single thing those kids need — but I’m with you.”

Sarah Almy, director of teacher quality for the Washington-based Education Trust, pointing to places around the country, as close by as Illinois, that are making major strides in improving the way teachers are evaluated and using the results to spur more effective teaching. Mike Thompson, deputy Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction, followed by describing how Wisconsin is joining that effort, and Bob Peterson, president of the Milwaukee Teachers’ Education Association, said a joint management-union initiative in Milwaukee Public Schools is well ahead of what the state is doing.

Republican State Sen. Luther Olsen, a key figure in legislative action around education, saying that the goal is to improve teaching and not to be vindictive against teachers, as many teachers fear. “The most important thing in teacher evaluation is the professional development that comes afterward,” Olsen said. (But, so far, seeing that this happens is a question that hasn’t been addressed.)

Dan McKinley, executive director of PAVE, an organization that primarily has assisted private and charter schools in Milwaukee, invoking the Dalai Lama, with a simple prescription for improving the overall scene: Do more of what works and less of what doesn’t work. 

Bill Raabe, director of the National Education Association’s Center for Great Public Schools, calling for teachers to be given an important voice they often haven’t had in figuring out how to accomplish better results for children. He said that beyond disputes over collective bargaining, there need to be ways to use the knowledge of those who know the most about what is going on in classrooms.

The conference certainly filled a central goal for public policy programming in Eckstein Hall: to provide a forum for intelligent, fair-minded discussion of important issues. And maybe it did more. At a time when Wisconsin’s educational landscape has changed dramatically and every educator and advocate is trying to figure out how to move forward, maybe we gave the pot a useful stir.

This is the same with the law. Law school classes teach you substantive law. However, you do not necessarily learn all you need to know to practice in the real world. This is where the importance of an internship comes in. I believe that a law school internship is vital to a law school education. I am currently interning with the Wisconsin Supreme Court. My internship is an extremely valuable experience because it is exposing me to the inner workings of our state’s highest court and, at the same time, forcing me to further develop my research and writing skills. An internship can give context to what is learned in law school, teach one valuable legal skills, and also help students’ resumes stand apart.

Marquette University Law School has a highly respected internship program. The Marquette internship program has a vast array of available positions. For the fall, spring and summer semesters, the school accepts applications for the positions (look for the announcements in the news and notes). The school works hard to place individuals in these positions. The process is somewhat competitive, but the law school attempts to place everyone.

An internship can give context to what is taught in law school because it shows how general legal principles play out in the courtroom or in other various legal venues. In my short time with the Wisconsin Supreme Court, I am being given the privilege to see the inner workings of the court. I see how my legal research and writing even help the justices to decide important issues before the court.

The most beneficial experience I am being given is the time I spend discussing legal issues with both the justice and his clerk. They push my understanding of legal topics by questioning me on the different facets and implications of the legal issues the justices are deciding. These challenges push me to think on my feet and react.

I also have the opportunity to witness oral arguments. I am not sure about you readers, but I am a little bit of an adrenalin junky. I can tell you first hand that those attorneys arguing before the Wisconsin Supreme Court are like quarterbacks up facing the legendary sack master Reggie White. The justices’ questions are like all pro defenses attempting to find the holes in the offense, except all this takes place in a court. The justices look for flaws in the various attorneys’ arguments. These attorneys, with all their skill, are trying to score a touchdown by having the justices accept their positions. The importance of both written and oral communication is evident from observing the arguments.

An internship can also teach valuable legal skills because it forces one to create legal memoranda and briefs. The difference between life and school is best summed up in the following quotation by Tom Bodett: “[i]n school you are taught a lesson and then given a test. In life you are given a test that teaches you a lesson.” In my experience at the Wisconsin Supreme Court I have been given meaningful projects with real deadlines. My work product helps the justices make their decisions. I feel my involvement in a small way is still an important step in the judicial process.

An internship can also help individuals stand out in comparison to competitors seeking the same legal positions. To prospective employers, an internship may be the difference in getting a job. In today’s market, it is difficult to find a paying position as a clerk, summer associate, or, eventually, even as a licensed attorney. As such, it is critical to make every effort to make yourself more desirable to prospective employers. An internship can help one do this because it gives a person experience and also, hopefully, a good reference. An internship can be your first step in establishing your legal reputation, which is extremely important to the practice of law.

In conclusion, an internship is one of the most valuable experiences a student can have during a law school career. To draw a comparison between athletics and the practice of law, consider the following. For a football player to make it to the Super Bowl, the football player must participate in both practice and regular season games. Compare the ultimate job you want to obtain in the legal profession as the Super Bowl. Your law school education is akin to practice. Law school is where you learn and develop your running, passing, and tackling skills initially. Your internship is similar to regular season games where you test and prove your skills. Ultimately, if you prove yourself worthy, by winning enough “games,” you can get a ticket to the big show (your first legal job), which is the ultimate goal for all of us. In short, an internship can be a valuable addition to a law school education because it can give context to one’s education, help one develop skills, and help one’s resume stand apart.

MELMS V. PABST BREWING CO. AND THE DOCTRINE OF WASTE IN AMERICAN PROPERTY LAW

Thomas W. Merrill ………………………………………………………………………… 1055

COMMENT ON MERRILL ON THE LAW OF WASTE

Richard A. Posner …………………………………………………………………………. 1095

CONTRACT AND PROCEDURE

Christopher Drahozal & Peter Rutledge ………………………………….. 1103

WISCONSIN’S ANTITRUST LAW: OUTSOURCING THE LEGAL STANDARD

Michael P. Waxman ………………………………………………………………………. 1173

BROKEN SYSTEMS, BROKEN DUTIES: A NEW THEORY FOR SCHOOL FINANCE LITIGATION

Aaron Y. Tang ………………………………………………………………………………. 1195

BARROCK LECTURE: HOW SHOULD WE PUNISH MURDER?

Jonathan Simon …………………………………………………………………………….. 1241

SEC V. DOROZHKO’S AFFIRMATIVE MISREPRESENTATION THEORY OF INSIDER TRADING: AN IMPROPER MEANS TO A PROPER END

Elizabeth A. Odian ……………………………………………………………………….. 1313

THE AMERICAN DREAM DEFERRED: FAMILY SEPARATION AND IMMIGRANT VISA ADJUDICATIONS AT U.S. CONSULATES ABROAD

Cain W. Oulahan …………………………………………………………………………… 1351

GENDER AND JUDGING

Diane S. Sykes ………………………………………………………………………………. 1381

“I think it’s huge” that people who weren’t part of past events are now stepping into key roles, Ellen Gilligan, president and CEO of the Greater Milwaukee Foundation, told Mike Gousha, the Law School’s distinguished fellow in law and public policy in the last “On the Issues” session for this semester.

Gilligan is the key figure behind the recent launching of Milwaukee Succeeds, an effort that has brought together more than 40 key leaders and organizations with the goal of improving Milwaukee’s record in moving children successfully “from cradle to career,” to use the effort’s subtitle.

Asked by Gousha how she responds to those who have been skeptical of what the effort can accomplish, Gilligan said she shows them “a lot of optimism.”

“Timing is everything,” she said. “Sometimes the stars align. Sometimes there are opportunities for certain things to happen that might not have happened 20 years ago.” She thought Milwaukee was ready for an effort such as this one. One of the reasons? The election of Gov. Scott Walker and the aftermath of that election, which, for better or worse, she said, created a climate in which working together had a stronger draw to more people.

And then there’s the new-leader factor. Gilligan came to Milwaukee a year ago from Cincinnati, where she was a top figure in that city’s community foundation and where she was deeply involved in launching the Strive Partnership, an effort that is a model for Milwaukee Succeeds. She is one of several relatively new figures in major positions in Milwaukee.  

“I am an eternal optimist and I don’t think we have a choice,” Gilligan said. “That’s part of sending in new troops. You have fresh blood who view this situation differently, who are not beaten down by past history. I am not beaten down by the past history. I am optimistic that we can make a difference and that we have to make a difference. We don’t have a choice.”

Gilligan said she was not very interested in taking part between advocates for Milwaukee Public Schools and advocates for Milwaukee’s private school voucher program. “I’m not sure it’s terribly productive,” she said. “I’d rather focus on the children.”

She said the concerns underlying Milwaukee Succeeds are matter such as whether third graders can read on grade-level, not whether they went to schools in MPS or charter or voucher schools.

She told Gousha Milwaukee Succeeds is “a process” and not “a program.” No new initiatives were announced in launching the effort. Instead, participants are working on creating a list of key, measurable indicators that can show whether Milwaukee is making progress. Then, the focus will be on how to align efforts throughout the city to improve outcomes. She said it is an effort that will take years.

She said she views herself as “a collaborative leader.” But she clearly is determined to  push forward

To watch the video of the “On the Issues” session, click here.

Cross posted at Indisputably.

And just a week prior to the Pro Bono Celebration, we held a one-day Marquette Volunteer Legal Clinic (MVLC) at the second annual Project Homeless Connect.  The event, organized by Community Advocates, Inc., was hosted at Marquette’s Alumni Memorial Union, where 65 service providers set up shop for the day to reach some of Milwaukee’s homeless.  240 people attended the event and benefitted from the services that included everything from vision screening to haircuts to driver’s license recovery.  More than 10% of the attendees sat down to talk to one of the volunteer lawyers and law students at our clinic for the day.

Now we’re looking forward to our upcoming celebration for Lori Zahorodny, Program Assistant for the MVLC.  She will be recognized at the Wisconsin Law Journal’s Unsung Heroes event on November 18^th for her outstanding contribution, critical support, and vision for the MVLC.  It’s hard to imagine someone more deserving of this honor than Lori.

This coming year will be filled with reflection and visioning as we celebrate the MLVC’s tenth anniversary.  Within this past decade of providing free legal services, we’ve spread our clinics to multiple points in the community and have watched student interest in pro bono work steadily rise.  We now greet attorney volunteers at the clinics who were once student volunteers, giving us no doubt that this culture of pro bono helps shape the Marquette Lawyer.  Now that’s something to celebrate.

But down the road and even now in places other than eastern Wisconsin? Cutbacks in federal spending could and sometimes are translating into decisions not to prosecute cases, Santelle said. 

Speaking Tuesday at an “On the Issues” session at Eckstein Hall, Santelle told Mike Gousha, the Law School’s distinguished fellow in law and public policy, that the staff he oversees in offices in Milwaukee and Green Bay, has been reduced from about 80 several years ago to about 70 now. More cuts may lie ahead, he said.

But so far, the reduction has been accomplished without affecting decisions on who to prosecute, Santelle said. That hasn’t been true in offices of US Attorneys in some places around the country, where decisions on matters such as “smaller” drug cases or white collar financial crimes are being shaped by whether the office has adequate resources. He said a $1 million bank fraud in some instances may be below the threshold a prosecutor has set for bringing a case to court, given practical limits on how much can get done.

Santelle said the annual budget of his office is about $8 million – and prosecutions generate about 10 times that each year in penalties, fines, or repayment to the government for improper spending. Santelle said that while politicians understand that the US Attorney’s Office is actually a money-maker for the government, it is hard to expect prosecutors will be spared from across the board cuts.

Santelle’s hour-long session before about 75 people touched on a wide-range of issues, from the high priority put on national security work, even in eastern Wisconsin, where there have, fortunately, been no terrorism episodes, to the positive sides of a legal career in federal service. Santelle has worked for the Justice Department since1985 and has been US Attorney for eastern Wisconsin since 2010.

Santelle was appointed by President Barack Obama, a Democrat, and, in an era of strong political partisanship, he agreed that there have been more matters brought to his office by political activists on either side of the spectrum who think people on the other side have done something wrong. But he had no hesitation in labeling the way prosecutors do their work as “apolitical.” He said he had never been involved in something such as a decision on a prosecution where partisan politics was a factor in how to proceed.

He said, though, that changes in the presidency can have an effect on priorities of the Justice Department, such as how much attention is given to enforcement of environmental regulations. 

Santelle said that a tighter supply of cocaine was driving up prices on the street. For prosecutors, that means more crimes being committed where the drugs involved are pills or other controlled substances. Gousha asked him his thoughts on public opinion polls that show wide support for decriminalizing marijuana use. Santelle said he should be counted on the side of those who oppose that. Marijuana is, in his view, not just a recreational drug. He said marijuana that is being sold today is often far more potent than what was available a generation ago and has more serious effects on users.

Overall, Santelle said, the level of cooperation among law enforcement officials has improved significantly from the past, when different federal agencies kept information from each other and there was limited cooperation between federal and local prosecutors or officers. He said there is generally good communication between law enforcement representatives working in the Milwaukee area, and he talks frequently to people such as Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm. “You benefit tremendously from the fact that law enforcement talks to each other,” Santelle said.

The session with Santelle can be viewed by clicking here.