Partisanship, Politics, and the Voting Rights Act: The Curious Case of U.S. v. Ike Brown

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 has been described as the crown jewel of the Civil Rights Movement. The success of the Act to remove official obstacles to voting is undeniable, and the influx of African American voters into the political system changed the nature of politics in the United States at all levels. The political and cultural context has changed so greatly that in 2006, it was politically possible for the President Bush\u27s Justice Department to bring the first claim against an African American for violating the voting rights of white citizens. This article seeks to explain how this suit was possible by the opening up of enforcement space on the Justice Department\u27s agenda. The article also warns that African American politicians today should be concerned that traditional methods of proving discriminatory intent under the Voting Rights Act could be perversely harmful by allowing statements made during the civil rights era to be used against them in a Voting Rights Act suit

The Sky is Falling (Again): Evaluating the Current Funding Crisis in the Judiciary

This Article will consider the current crisis in a broad historical context. This larger narrative can provide a helpful perspective in the current debate. It offers a glimpse into how we came to the current system and allows us to question our assumptions regarding the way the system currently works. Historical context is an important (and under-discussed) aspect of this crisis. As the leaders of the bench and bar come together to evaluate changes to the current system, the discussion should begin with understanding how the system evolved to where it is now and with appreciating the fact that the current situation may call for solutions very different from those that worked in the past. This Article is structured around three broad themes of access to the legal system: (1) access to the courthouse; (2) access to lawyers; and (3) substantive and procedural access to justice. While the purpose of this Article is to encourage leaders in the judiciary to view the current crisis differently-and not necessarily to propose solutions-this Article includes some suggestions for consideration

Should the Rooster Guard the Henhouse: A Critical Analysis of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980

The purpose of this Article is to critically examine the aspect of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 which seems to invite the most criticisms and raise the most questions of impropriety - namely, the initial receipt, review, and investigation of misconduct complaints. This article proposes that the current process of receiving, reviewing, and investigating judicial misconduct complaints should be amended. Specifically, the Act should incorporate into the current system an initial review and investigation by a magistrate judge. To this end, Part II sets out the procedures of how complaints are currently handled under the Act. Part III then discusses the constitutional limitations for designing a judicial misconduct process, and the practical criticisms and limitations of the current process. Part IV looks at recent congressional proposal for altering consideration of judicial misconduct complaints-adoption of an inspector general. Finally, Part V proposes that instead of an inspector general, Congress should consider amending the current judicial misconduct Act to require the appointment of magistrate judges to initially receive, review, and investigate misconduct complaints

GET YOUR HEAD IN THE GAME: GAMIFYING THE BAR EXAMINATION

During a recent administration of the bar examination, I observed the following: a student who had a child ten days before the exam passed; a student on law review failed; a student whose predictors indicated he should fail the bar exam passed; two students who were in the library every day studying failed. Even though these folks were all taking the same exam, their outcomes varied dramatically, and there did not seem to be a common variable that predicted whether they would pass or fail. My first inclination was to throw up my hands in frustration and chalk it up to the fact that every student’s situation is unique. I was satisfied to shrug and mutter, “what can you do?,” until I came across a podcast on Coach Nick Saban. Saban is a successful college football coach at the University of Alabama.2 As I listened to the podcast, I realized that the bar exam experience is very similar to a football team’s preparation for a championship game. The stakes are high, the preparation is intense and condensed, each individual bar taker will either win (pass) or lose (fail), and there are points assigned based on how well the performer does. I wondered whether the tools that assist championship teams could also assist bar takers in their quest to pass the bar examination. Thinking back to the students who passed the bar exam when statistics or circumstances predicted they would not and to those who failed even though all outside indicators pointed to them passing, I realized there was something that the passers and the failers (unfortunately) had in common, but it was not predictors or grades. The passers dedicated themselves to a process to pass the bar. They not only studied, they studied the right way. For those who failed the bar exam, there was inevitably something missing—it could have been time spent on the bar exam or it might have been the failure to be in the right state of mind as they were studying. My goal in this article is to draw from sports psychology and Coach Saban’s idea of “The Process” to help those taking (or retaking) the bar exam reach their full potential and pass. Success on the bar exam requires dedication and the right state of mind. I hope this article helps bar takers get in the passing mindset by giving some concrete steps to enhance study habits. To do this, Part I discusses how sports psychology is relevant to bar exam prep. Part II, the central portion of the article, describes the elements of the Process and how they relate to bar prep. Part III discusses how college athletes are different from those taking a bar examination and how developing self-discipline is crucial to bar exam success. Part IV emphasizes the importance of keeping life in balance while committing to the Process

Legal Ethics in a Time of Change: An Assessment of the American Bar Association\u27s Ethics 20/20 Commission

Bob Dylan sang Times They are a-Changin\u27. A line from that song is you better start swimmin\u27 or you\u27ll sink like a stone. This could easily be the theme of the 2013 Law Review Symposium. The Symposium was about change. Change that has come, is coming, and will (or should) come to the world of legal ethics and professional responsibility-as well as the consequences of refusing to recognize and adapt to change. The Symposium was prompted by work of the American Bar Association\u27s Ethics 20/ 20 Commission, established in 2009 by then President Carolyn B. Lamm. The Commission was tasked with evaluating (with 20/20 vision) the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct and making recommendations for necessary revisions as a result of advances in technology and global legal practice developments. \u27 The goal of the Symposium was to consider issues addressed by the Commission as well as those left unaddressed. The hope is that these articles continue the discussion and contribute to the debate of how lawyer ethics and professional responsibility should evolve in a world that that is quickly changing

Raise Your Hand and Swear to Be Civil: Defining Civility as an Obligation of Professional Responsibility

The need to reclaim civility in the practice of law has become a rallying cry in the profession. Lack of civility has been blamed on everything from an increase in the cost of litigation to the cause of the public\u27s lost faith in the legal profession. Further, courts are increasingly willing to sanction a lawyer solely for uncivil conduct. This article examines the puzzle of civility by addressing two fundamental questions. First, what are the obligations of civility? This question is answered using content analysis to analyze civility codes adopted by thirty-two state bar associations. From this analysis ten core tenets of civility are identified which are common across all jurisdictions. The second question addresses how civility is distinct from other professional obligations, such as legal ethics and professionalism. Examining the history and development of these professional obligations, this paper demonstrates that civility is distinct and should be treated as a unique obligation of professional responsibility

Forty (Plus) Years After the Revolution: Observations on the Implied Warranty of Habitability

The implied warranty of habitability has been called the “most prominent result” of the revolution in tenant rights that arose in the 1960s and 1970s. How has the revolution fared after forty-plus years? How have courts responded to the shift from examining the landlord-tenant relationship under the doctrines of contract in the place of property law? This article examines some of the issues that courts are addressing today with regard to the implied warranty of habitability. The article will begin with a historical discussion of the warranty’s rise to provide context for how truly revolutionary its adoption was. Then, jumping forward, cases addressing the implied warranty over the last twelve years will be examined to provide context to discuss unresolved questions that remain. The purpose of this article is to provide a snapshot of the state of the implied warranty today, so that when soldiers fighting in the landlord-tenant revolution forty years from now look back, they have some understanding of how the battle lines of this generation were drawn