reviewing Voices of American Law documentary series(Thomas B. Metzloff & Sarah Wood producers

Collins, Lauren M.

English

bepress Legal Repository

Voices of American Law: US Supreme Court Cases Meet the 21st Century

Duke Law Scholarship Repository

30 SPRING 2008Christopher Columbus Langdell, formerdean of Harvard Law School, is credited withpopularizing the case method of teaching lawat the end of the 19th century. One hundredyears from now, Voices of American Law willbe named among the initiatives that broughtthe case method into the 21st century andextended the relevance of this learning toolbeyond legal education into legal practice. At various times in history, teaching the lawthrough the analysis of legal opinions has beengiven boundless praise and equal criticism.Once again, the arguments regarding the cred-ibility of the case method have picked uprecently as the literature regarding humanlearning styles increasingly shows that people,especially those brought up in the eras of tele-vision, personal computers, and the Internet,learn better when multiple senses are stimulat-ed. Rather than argue about its strengths orweaknesses, a project undertaken at the DukeUniversity School of Law expands upon thecase method to bring cases alive in a way thatwould likely soothe objectors at the same timeas it supports the belief that a legal opinion canprovide a thorough understanding of the lawbehind the decision. It's all in the presentation.Voices of American Law provides innova-tive educational materials to assist those whostudy the law in their understanding of theSupreme Court and its role in American soci-ety. The project was originally conceived as away to make the case method easier for inter-national students to grasp, introducingAmerican Constitutional Law in a way thatwas more accessible to those who were newlyexposed to the American legal system. Led byProfessor Thomas Metzloff and producerSarah Wood, the series is made up of 12 20-minute documentary depictions of criticalcases, with five more to be completed in thecoming year. Each documentary includesinterviews with the parties and lawyers whoshaped the case. They tell the stories of thereal people behind the Court's opinions,making the cases feel more authentic to stu-dents learning the law from their analysis ofthe cases. They can do the same for practi-tioners using the precedential value of thecases to shape local law and policy.Gaining a better understanding of thesignificance of the Court's decisions.The Voices documentaries, which serve asan extension of the case method, are meant to"get students ready to understand the signifi-cance of court decisions," Metzloff says.Several of the cases that have been examinedfor the Voices project are those that ProfessorMetzloff has taught for years as a CivilProcedure professor, but the documentariesprovide something additional. By learningmore about the background of a case,Metzloff says, "I came to understand the legalarguments and how they fit together, andwhat was actually at stake in the case. I fig-ured that if I'm learning something havingtaught the case 20 times, there's something toit."Voices of American Law: USSupreme Court Cases Meet the21st CenturyB Y L A U R E N C O L L I N SEvery day, Thomas Van Orden passed a granite monument carved with the Ten Commandmentson the grounds of the Texas State Capitol in Austin. Believing that a religious text on governmentproperty violated the First Amendment, he sued the state of Texas to have it removed. Throughinterviews with the people involved, the documentary explores the history and context of themonument, and the story of Van Orden's journey to the US Supreme Court.Through the project, students havereported gaining a better understanding ofthe reasons a lawyer takes a case and the com-mitment a party makes when she decides tofight for a cause. For example, Casey Dwyer,a recent Duke Law grad, was struck by herinteraction with David Baugh, an African-American attorney who defended the right ofBarry Black, a Virginia Klansman, to burncrosses in Virginia v. Black, 538 U.S. 343(2003). "My experience on the project has taughtme to keep in mind that every case has at leasttwo, and often times many more, sides," saysDwyer. She has carried this realization intoher work with a major law firm. "The video'sfocus on the human elements of the cases hashelped remind me that my work as a lawyerhas real consequences on real people's lives."Her work on Voices has influenced her deci-sion to make pro bono cases a significant partof her work as an attorney. Marla Zimmerman, also a recent Dukegrad, learned first hand about the level ofcommitment clients challenging what theydeem to be personal rights violations havethrough her interaction with a teen who chal-lenged school drug testing in Board ofEducation v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822 (2002). Theencounter has had an impact on her work."My experience with the Voices of AmericanLaw project continues to influence my legalcareer. As a practicing lawyer, I make it apractice to analyze and discover the storybehind a legal dispute. I believe that under-standing the personal backgrounds and moti-vations of those involved in a case is just asimportant as understanding the legal argu-ments." Shortly after work on the series began,Professor Metzloff integrated the documen-tary about BMW v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559(1996) into his Civil Procedure course. As atest of the impact of the project, half of theclass viewed the video while the other half didnot and the entire class was quizzed. Theresults were that those who had viewed thevideo showed a significantly better under-standing of the facts of the case and were lessswayed by the persuasive stance that theauthor of the opinion had taken. This indi-cates Voices enhances students' learning of thepractical skill of assessing factual situationsand applying the law to them. This is anintended goal of Professor Metzloff whobelieves that "law school is about lawyering."To this end, Voices "[gives students an] inde-pendent basis to assess the Court's logic andrationale." What attorney preparing to attackunfavorable law could not benefit from that? Voices of American Law benefits thosein practice, too.But Voices does not only benefit law pro-fessors and the students they teach. Practicingattorneys with limited time and large caseloads can take advantage of the level of analy-sis given to key Supreme Court cases throughthe documentary series. Rather thanresearching news articles and broadcasts fromscratch, in addition to reading briefs andpleadings, attorneys can get a better feel for acase and its players through Voices. The docu-mentaries reveal the interaction between thelawyers and clients in the cases, says Metzloff.This is most certainly instructive to membersof the practicing bar dealing with similarissues and clients.Having collected additional, candid infor-mation about the case, the documentarianspresent it in a form that is engaging, both inits content and format. Voices responds to thecurrent research that overwhelmingly findspeople learn better when multiple senses arestimulated. "Most people learn better whenthey have multiple sources of information,"says Wood. "You read the case and you getsomething out of that. You see the case, andyou get something out of that. Because of theway that people learn, you get somethingvisually that you don't get from reading." Each Voices of American Law documen-tary includes the litigation and a journeythrough the events leading up to it as well aspersonal interviews with many of the peopleinvolved. As an added bonus, the Voices web-site, www.voicesofamericanlaw.org, includesvarious documents from each case includingpleadings, transcripts, amicus briefs, newsarticles, and evidence raised in the cases beingexplored. Thus, the series presents the case inmany dimensions.Examined cases can be important tostate litigation or extend beyond dailypractice to the creation of policychange.Though each clip is about a SupremeCourt case examining constitutional and fed-eral law issues, the documentaries are oftendirectly relevant to issues likely to arise even ina practice limited to state law. One such exam-ple is the issue of takings and eminent domain,examined through a greater look at the deci-sion in Kelo v. New London, 545 U.S. 469(2005). The decision in Kelo, in which theSupreme Court upheld economic develop-ment takings of unblighted, residential proper-ty as an extension of the idea of "public use,"caused immediate reactions in states across thecountry, including North Carolina. A reviewof the opinion might make it easy for the prac-titioner to intuit the logic and legal position ofa homeowner afraid of losing her land or agovernment official wishing to sustain a smallmunicipality, but falls short of helping onefully understand the extent of the emotionsTHE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR JOURNAL 31Pharmaceutical company, Pfizer, was at the center of the planned redevelopment in Kelo v.New London, which sparked the city of New London's actions to exercise its power of eminentdomain. Above are the modern offices of Pfizer's headquarters. Kelo's home is on the back side.32 SPRING 2008involved on either side of the controversy.Beginning shortly after the Court's ruling,and as recently as August 2007, editorials andnews stories expressing concern in NorthCarolina demonstrate that the issues raised inKelo have consistently remained on the agen-da of the citizenry and state and local govern-ments beyond the boundaries of NewLondon. A call for legislation protectingNorth Carolina citizens from eminentdomain abuse was made after Kelo was decid-ed and news accounts that the GeneralAssembly planned to consider the issue werereported in September of 2005, just monthsafter the Supreme Court released its opinion.Thus, litigation on this issue may be ahead ofsome North Carolina practitioners, giving riseto a need for better understanding of theCourt's decision. Though the reader knows from the opin-ion that the city had been declared a "dis-tressed municipality" under state guidelines,mightn't it mean more to a practitioner repre-senting a similar client to know that the city ofNew London is only one mile by six and wasfully developed before the economic develop-ment plan considered by the Supreme Courtwas presented? The opinion clearly points outthat increased tax revenue was a goal of theplan but fails to include the fact that propertytax was the prime method of raising funds formunicipality functions and, before the plan,56% of the land base in the city was non-tax-able. For one representing a property owner, anattorney may wish to understand the life fac-tors that make one staunchly stand up for herright to retain herproperty. Perhaps itmakes a difference inasking yourselfwhether you wouldhave taken SusetteKelo's case to know that she was recentlydivorced, returning to the town where shegrew up, and that the house she fought so fer-vently to save was one that she watched sitempty for more than two years before she wasable to purchase it and fix it up as her own.One might care to know that Kelo's otherneighbors who decided to fight for theirhomes were older, in their 70s and 80s, anddepended on Kelo, as the younger andstronger resident, to help them wage theirfight. It might also matter that Kelo was pres-ent when one of her neighbors was physicallyremoved from his home, which had been con-demned and was subsequently torn down.From her account, one might imagine theresponsibility she felt and recall it when aclient facing a similar challenge walks throughthe door.For those who became lawyers to changethe world, consider documentaries about oneof the many cases that, according to Wood,were specifically selected to provide insightinto the use of litigation to affect policy. Thesehave been cases that involved prominent insti-tutions like the University of Michigan inGrutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 982 (2003), andsignificant legal interest groups like the ACLUin Earls. The documentaries study the meansby which these institutions position them-selves to challenge and change law. No matterthe incentive for sustaining a legal career, Voiceshas a case that will be relevant to one's goalsand practice.The reason that students have as much togain from the Voices of American Law series isclear for Metzloff:Even the most ardent supporters of the casemethod recognize that after many months(or years) of the same type of analysis, stu-dents can easily become bored or angrywith the case method. If the power of thecase method can be extended so that therichness of actual disputes can be exploredmore fully, certainly that is a worthy goal.Documentaries on the "master cases" offerthat possibility.This idea is easily extended to the practic-ing attorney. It is not a stretch to imagine thatpractitioners, having studied cases over manyyears, can become frustrated with the tradi-tional review of case law and are able to bene-fit from more information and detail to helpthem understand, embrace, and use legal opin-ions as precedent in their arguments. Thatfrustration is no longer an obstacle, at leastwith regard to the 17 pivotal US SupremeCourt cases that can now be studied in vividdetail through the Voices of American Lawseries. C O N T I N U E D O N P A G E 3 8Susette Kelo's home.

https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2546&amp;context=faculty_scholarship

Voices of American Law: US Supreme Court Cases Meet the 21st Century

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

bepress Legal Repository

Duke Law Scholarship Repository