People Who Have Shaped the Teaching Careers of Our Faculty—Part 2

The editors of the blog asked several law school faculty to write about the people who have been the most formative figures in their careers as legal educators. This is the second submission in the series, and it is by Professor John J. Kircher.

The answer to the question “who has been the most formative figure in your career as a legal educator” is very easy for me. It is one name, Professor James D. Ghiardi. During the course of my career Jim Ghiardi has been my law professor, my boss, my mentor, my golf partner, my colleague, my coauthor and my second father. I feel very fortunate to have had the ability of spending a great deal of time with him over the course of my career. Many learning experiences came from that, not only observing what he said, but also what he did.

My initial exposure to the man was in my first year of law school. He was my Torts professor. There was no attorney in my family and, other than characters in movies and on television, I never had any personal exposure to one. I was impressed. He was dressed in a business suit, unlike many undergraduate faculty members to whom I had been exposed. They dressed like their students, possibly thinking that undergraduate chic might make them appear young – certainly not professional. Jim told us that law was a profession and that he expected us to act and think like professionals. He told us what his role would be in the classroom and what our role should be.

A significant sign of Jim’s professionalism is evidenced by the fact that he was elected by the members of the State Bar of Wisconsin to be President of that organization. As far as I can discern he is the only “academic lawyer” to have achieved that status. However he was more than an academic lawyer. He was and continues to be a true professional. He certainly was and continues to be my role model.

 

Continue ReadingPeople Who Have Shaped the Teaching Careers of Our Faculty—Part 2

SCOTUS to Decide on Padilla Retroactivity

Earlier today, the Supreme Court granted cert. in Chaidez v. United States, 655 F.3d 684 (7th Cir. 2011). Chaidez held that the Court’s decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473 (2010), would not be applied retroactively to defendants whose convictions were already final when Padilla came out. In Padilla, the Court held that a lawyer performs below minimal constitutional standards when he or she fails to advise a client of the deportation risks of a guilty plea. Now, the Court itself will have an opportunity to determine whether its decision should have retroactive effect.

The majority and dissenting judges in Chaidez all agreed that the case turned on whether Padilla announced a new rule of criminal procedure, within the meaning of Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989). With only a couple of execeptions not relevant here, Teague prohibits retroactivity for new rules. So, the question in Chaidez seems to boil down to whether Padilla announced a new rule or merely applied the basic ineffective assistance test of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984).

Continue ReadingSCOTUS to Decide on Padilla Retroactivity

Equal Justice and the Poor

Many years ago, I attended my first meeting as a newly-elected representative on our church’s parish council. I was enthused, energized. Then an older man, a veteran of the council, pulled me aside before the meeting started and gave me a warning. “Now you’re going to have your eyes opened, ” he said. “It’s a lot easier when you don’t know about all of the issues.” And, of course, he was right.

I had the same experience some time later when I became involved in the most pressing problem facing our legal system: the inability of poor people to afford legal representation for the important life-changing issues they face. I had been involved in pro bono from the day I was graduated from Marquette, handling divorces, landlord-tenant issues, even a capital punishment case in Texas. I enjoyed the rewarding nature of the work and appreciated the hands-on experience. The clients I represented seemed to appreciate having a lawyer.

But while I was helping individuals now and then, and feeling comfortable that I was doing some good, I was blissfully ignorant of the big picture issues and challenges that had the system in a chokehold — the lack of funding for legal service providers, the reluctance of lawyers to become involved in pro bono, the resistance of some to changes in the delivery of legal services to poor people, the lack of leadership from those in the best position to lead. My eyes were anything but open.

Continue ReadingEqual Justice and the Poor