Justice Sandra O'ConnorOur Eminent First ProfessorDean Carl B. Spaeth

44 FALL 1991

Cover: Detail of illustration for"Copyright in the Information Age,"the article beginning on page 4.Painted by Barron Storey, 1991.

FALL 1991 44 (VOL. 26, NO.1)

STAFF

Editor: Constance Hellyer

Associate Editor: Ann Dethlefsen

Editorial Assistants:Susan Infantino (AB '91),Jill Daniels (AB '92), andAnn Babb

Contributing Editor: Ruth Welch

Designer: Ev Shiro,Stanford PublicationServices

Production artists:Joanna McCleanPrisci lIa Johnson

STANFORD LAWYER (ISSN 0585-0576) ispublished semi-annually for alumni/reand friends of Stanford Law School.Correspondence and materials for pub­lication are welcome and should be sentto: Editor, Stanford Lawyt'T, StanfordLaw School,Stanford, CA 94305-8610.

Copyright 1991 by the Board ofTrust­ees of the Leland Stanford Junior Uni­versity. Reproduction in whole or inpart, without permission of the pub­lisher, is ptohibited.

Indexes: Articles published since 1980are listed in Current Law Index,LegalTrae, and Dialog's Legal ResourceIndex. Issues of the magazine since 1966are available on microfiche throughWilliam S. Hein & Co., Inc., 1285Main Stteet, Buffalo, NY 14209.

FROM THE DEAN

2A Matter of Trust

The campus speech issue has more than one sideand no easy answers.

By Paul Brest

FEATURE ARTICLES

4Copyright in theInformation Age

New technologies are expanding the natureand use of intellectual property.

Can the law keep pace?

By Paul Goldstein

10Our Professor, the President

Benjamin Harrison and his landmarklectures on the Constitution helped put your

alma mater on the map.

By Howard Bromberg

ALUMNI/AE WEE KEN D

16Friends, Football, and

a Famous FirstAn account of the festivities, including the

award to Supreme Court JusticeSandra Day O'Connor '52

Featuring Dean Brest and Justice O'Connor

DEPARTMENTS

24School News

42Class Notes

87In Memoriam

94Alumni/a: Gatherings

Back CoverComing Events

A MATTER o F T R U S T

PA UL BREST delivered the following message atthe Law School's 98th Commencement on June 16.It is based on a talk he gave at Swarthmore Collegeearlier in the month upon receiving an honorarydoctor of laws (LL.D.) degree.

HOUGH this is a day forlooking forward to life af­ter law school, I'd like toglance backwards for a mo­ment and consider a greatchallenge that faces

Stanford and other institutions ofhigher education-and that facesyou as well.

Let me begin by recounting re­cent conversations I had with twostudents here this spring. Lisa is anAfrican-American woman who isabout to graduate. She has donewell in law school, and is on herway to a clerkship with an excellentjudge, followed by a job with aprestigious law firm. She hopes even-

tually to become a law teacher-a realistic aspira­tion, which I strongly support. Our conversationfocused on the discussion of affirmative action in acourse she had taken this term. Lisa acknowledgedthat the class discussion had been both consideredand considerate, but said that it had made herphysically ill. "When people question affirmativeaction," she explained, "they're questioning myvery right to be here." Lisa went on to say-thisbright, capable young lawyer-that during her threeyears in law school there was no day on which shedid not feel that, because of her race, her qualifica­tions and ability were called into question.

Jeff is white. He just finished his first year andis going to spend the summer working for the firmthat Lisa will join after her clerkship. He came by myoffice to ask my views about affirmative action infaculty hiring-a hot topic around the Law School

There is reason for concern about

the state of free inquiry in American

universities, and equal reason for

concern about the well-being of

diverse students on our campuses.

2 STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991

this past year. Jeff, who described himself as politi­cally "middle of the road," did not come to arguebut to inquire. We spent the better part of an hourdiscussing some of the basic issues of affirmativeaction, such as the reasons behind it and the fairnessand constitutionality of different methods of pursu­ing it. Jeff's seeming naOivete led me to ask (in aroundabout way) whether he ever discussed theseissues with classmates-for Jeff is a gregarious sort;I often see him chatting with friends in the studentlounge. He replied that he was reluctant to-lest he

If you feel like you~re

walking on eggs,

imagine what it feels like

to be the egg.

say the wrong thing. "What could happen?" Iasked. "You know," Jeff replied, "some people rolltheir eyes and think you're insensitive or a racist."

There are lots of quick ways to dismiss Lisa orJeff. You can dismiss Lisa's feelings as the inevitableprice of affirmative action, not of any actual dis­crimination she has encountered. In any event, sheshould develop a tougher skin, for she'll never be asprotected in the "real world" as she is on thecampus. As for Jeff-no one is stopping him fromspeaking his mind, and if he espouses racist posi­tions, well then, he should have the courage of hisconvictions and take responsibility for his views.These facile responses are often accompanied bypopular slogans or cliches: "politically correct" tobrand any view to the speaker's left; "racist" todescribe almost anything that gives offense; and"privileged" as a redundant modifier of "whitemale" or even "white woman"-as if any Stanfordstudent were not privileged compared to the popu­lation at large.

These easy put-downs may embody somepartial truths. But they are conversation-stoppers.They obstruct any genuine understanding of theproblems.

My own view is that Lisa's and Jeff's stories areinterdependent. Though the apocalyptic talk in themedia is way overblown, there is genuine reason forconcern about the state of free inquiry in Americanuniversities. There is equal reason for concern aboutthe sense of acceptance and self-esteem-and eventhe safety-of students of color, women students,and gay and lesbian students on our campuses.

Paul BrestRichard E. Lang Professor and Dean

It is difficult for any of us to discuss, withacademic dispassion, issues that are central to ouridentity or existence. And if Lisa feels threatened inher everyday life, she's going to be especially reluc­tant to engage Jeff on controversial issues of racialjustice. It's no easy matter to create an environmentwhere Lisa feels at ease. The incidence of hate speechand violence is on the rise, and even if the campus isa relatively benign place, the world outside is not.Certainly not for poor people of color. And not evenfor upper-middle-class Black people. You may haveseen a recent newspaper article about the discrimi­nation experienced by Black consumers-rangingfrom suspicious looks to false arrests for shoplifting.When I asked a Black colleague whether she hadsuch experiences, she laughed bitterly. She said sheis often watched closely in department stores. Shehad just attended a convention in San Franciscowhere the hotel guards assumed she was a hookeruntil she started wearing her convention badgeconspicuously on her coat. These are common oc­currences for people of color in our country that Iand other whites seldom experience.

So, if Jeff feels he's walking on eggs when hetalks to Lisa about issues of racial policy, imaginewhat itfeels like to be the egg. Yet unless Jeff can talkwithout feeling that his every word and gesture willbe interpreted with a presumption that he is stupid,insensitive, or worse, it's a lot easier for him just toshut up. Both Lisa and Jeff will lose much of theopportunity that Law School offers them if they

Continued on page 41

STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991 3

work may someday outstrip tradi­tional modes of publication.

At first glance, this proliferationof media for transmitting informa­tion may portend crossed wires andinformation traffic jams. In fact, theopposite is true. As Charles H.Ferguson observed in a recent issue ofthe Harvard Business Review, "theunderlying technologies of printers,photocopiers, fax machines, tele­phone switches, computers, cameras,voice-mail systems, CD players, dataarchives, and televisions will soon beastonishingly similar. In some casesthey already are." Increasingly, in­formation will be embodied and trans-

mitred - with and without its owner'sconsent-across these and other me­dia in digital form.

For consumers, the prospect isexciting: more information faster,less drudgery in research and datagathering, new forms and choices ofentertainment. For producers, the glo­bal information economy is burgeon­ing, with the United States a majorexporter.

These developments pose impor­tant challenges to copyright law andpolicy. Copyright is a market-drivenmechanism, a property right that aimsto stimulate the production and dis­semination of information desired by

----------

consumers. Yet, new informationtechnologies promise to altercopyright's responsiveness to con­sumer demand.

To ask, as some do, whethercopyright will survive the new in­formation technologies is to get thequestion backward. Copyright lawis an instrument, not an end in itself;it aims to serve consumer welfare.The correct question is whetherthe new information technologieswill survive-and flourish-undercopyright. How must copyrightadapt if it is to serve consumer in­terests in an expanding informationenvironment?

©CONFIDENT prediction about thetechnologies that will shape the infor­mation environment of the future isof course impossible. Even at thismoment, a child may sit before acomputer terminal, not dreaming thatshe will someday invent a technologynow unimagined, one that will over­turn most of what we know aboutinformation's capacity to entertainand instruct. Consider: the revolu­tion wrought by the personal com­puter is today barely ten years old.

Copyright law's responses to thenew information technologies areeasier to predict. The copyright actnow in force is rooted firmly in thefirst United States copyright act passedin 1790. To be sure, two hundredyears of technological developmenthave tugged and pulled the law inseveral directions. Copyright's sub­ject matter has expanded from maps,charts and books to include musicalcompositions, choreography, dra­matic works, motion pictures, soundrecordings and computer programs.The law's original exclusive rights­to print, reprint, publish and vend­have grown to include the right toperform, display and adapt copy­righted works. Cable and satellitetelevision have come within copy­right'S net, as has the rental of soundrecordings and computer software.

The same institutions that haveshaped copyright law over the pasttwo hundred years seem likely toshape it over the foreseeable future.Because these are relatively conserva-

tive institutions, this means that copy­right will largely stay its course:Congress will balance the claims ofcompeting constituencies, courts willfill the interstices of the statute, andthe Copyright Office will continue toguide Congress and creators throughthe copyright maze.

Within these institutional con­straints, where will information tech­nologies pull copyright law in thecoming years? In what directions willcopyright channel technology?

©HISTORY TELLS us that copyright willcontinue to widen its subject matterto embrace the products of new in­formation technologies. Two issuescomplicate this trajectory-one shortterm, one long term.

For the short term, there is thequestion of protection for computer­ized databases. Copyright has pro­tected collections of data from thebeginning. But the fit, never felici­tous, has become increasingly awk­ward as data collections have grownin economic importance. The prob­lem is that one part of copyright lawaspires to protect works of high au­thorship, while another part bends toprotect the drudge work of data com­pilation. The Germans call the latterkleine Munze-small change-andmany countries consign it to the out­skirts of copyright. But it takes a lotmore than small change to createdata collections, and the outskirts ofcopyright may prove a dangerousneighborhood for their survival.

Apart from subsidy, some formof protection will be needed if firmsare to continue to invest in producingdata bases for consumer use. But copy­right may not be the answer. Theterm of copyright (typically 75 yearsfor databases) and the Jaw's robustarray of remedies may offer moreincentives-and more monopoly pric­ing-than database productionrequires. At the same time, copyright'srequirement of original authorshipmay undercut needed incentives. (TheUnited States Supreme Court hasheld, only this past Term, that one ofthe oldest forms of database-thetelephone directory white pages­is uncopyrightable.)

One possible development is adivision of intellectual property pro­tection into two tiers: conventionalcopyright for works like novels, paint­ings and musical compositions thatreflect an author's personality; and adifferent intellectual property regimefor databases and other products ofinformation assembly.

©COMPUTER-CREATED products seemlikely to test the boundaries of copy­right subject matter over the longerterm. Computer programs exist to­day that, with little or no humanintervention, can produce crosswordpuzzles, weather maps and even

Copyright law is

an instrument,

not an end in itself.

It aims to serve

consumer welfare.

other computer programs. The fu­ture promises more elaborate appli­cations, and the products will oftenlook no different than works createdby f1esh-and-blood authors. Whilegenius and labor may be required toproduce the programs that generatethese products, no more than the costof electricity will be needed to pro­duce the products themselves. Who isthe author of these automated works-the author of the computer pro­gram that generates them, or the com­puter program itself? And where isthe required originality to be found?

Congress may find the answer ina sui generis regime crafted specifi­cally to the investment economicsof computer-created products. Thequestion is sufficiently importantthat the World Intellectual PropertyOrganization-a United Nationsagency charged with oversight ofinternational intellectual propertyarrangements-held a worldwideconference on artificial intelligenceand intellectual property at StanfordLaw School in March of this year.

©TECH\iOLOGICAL advances can alsobe expected to create new ways toreplicate and use copyrighted mate­rial. The great drama of copyrightreform in the last century has been thelaw's effort to catch up with thedecentralization of economically sig­nificant uses of copyrighted works.

Home videotaping and audio­taping, computer downloading, andlibrary and office photocopying allthreaten copyright's basic incentivestructure, because the transactioncosts of enforcement against thesedecentralized uses will often exceedany eventual reward to producers.How should copyright's exclusiverights be tailored in a world where,increasingly, the most economicallyvaluable uses of copyrighted workswill lie outside the copyright owner'seffective control?

As with new information prod­ucts, the challenge will be to maintainproper rewards and incentives forinformation producers. Judging bythe past, Congress will respond byexpanding copyright to encompass atleast some new uses. But the expan­sion of rights has been-and maycontinue to be-more halting thanthe expansion of copyright subjectmatter. Recent failed efforts to bringhome videotaping within copyrightcontrol suggest a troubling pattern:By the time Congress or the courts arein a posture to act definitively, thenew use has become too widespread,too deeply entrenched in popularhabit, to be easily dislodged throughlegal rules. When Universal City Stu­dios filed suit in the Betamax case tohalt sales of videocassette recordersused to copy copyrighted programs

©

©

©UNDERLYING all this change is a fun­damental paradox: As the copyrightindustries increase in importance, sothe importance of copyright enforce­ment may in some quarters recede.We are still in the early stages of theInformation Age. The public's ac­ceptance today of private property

ages into full-blown works. Do youwant to enhance your musical abili­ties? Digital sampling will soon haveyou singing like a Caruso. Technol­ogy promises far richer audio andvisual enhancements for the future.

These developments spell signifi­cant changes for copyright law's un­derlying incentive structure. Littlecopyright incentive is needed to pro­duce a custom-tailored newsletter,still less for the subscriber to createhis own journal from available data.Contracts will facilitate the first ar­rangement, self-interest the second.Again, we may in some areas seea diminished role for copyright'straditional incentive structure andan increased need for protectionfocused on the information reposito­ries themselves.

As I FORMATION ASSUMES an in­creasing role in private and publiclife, access to information may beginto verge on necessity. If copyrightcontinues to be enforced, access willbe at a price-one that may, toooften, be too high for the poor topay. Copyright itself is an inefficientmechanism for redistributing wealth.Other means will need to be foundto repair the widening informationgap between society's haves andhave-nots.

A similar problem recurs on aglobal scale. The divide betweeneconomically developed nations thatare net copyright exporters, andeconomically less-developed nationsthat are net copyright importers,is today growing, not shrinking.But, unlike other trade commodities,information is a public good andperhaps deserves different treatmentin international treaty and tradearrangements.

public life,

on necessity.

begin to verge

information may

access to

assumes an

As information

in private and

increasing role

you interested in reading everythingabout developments in contemporarydance but nothing else? The technol­ogy exists for a search service to placea custom-tailored dance newsletteron your doorstep or in your com­puter mailbox.

Computer programs exist todaythat can manipulate sounds and im-

THE NEW digital environment willincreasingly allow the user, ratherthan the producer, to define the termsand content of access-a trend thatportends changed conditions forauthorship.

Repositories exist that collectvast bodies of information-finan­cial, demographic, legal, technical,scientific-making them instantlyaccessible through computer facili­ties. Vendors can assemble informa­tion into daily reports tailored to asubscriber's individual needs. Are

off the air, relatively few Americanhomes had VCRs. But by the time theUnited States Supreme Court heardfinal arguments in the case, VCRswere a fixture in the American home,posing a practical hurdle to a decisionfor the copyright owner.

©

PARADOXICALLY, some of the sametechnologies that have facilitateddecentralized uses of copyrightedworks may also help to solve thedebilitating problem of transactioncosts. Pay-per-view television is acurrent, rudimentary example oftechnology's ability to facilitatemarket pricing for dispersed uses ofcopyrighted works.

For the future, consider the celes­tial jukebox-a fantastic technology,to be sure, but also, realistically, onethat is not far from hand. A singlefacility will store great numbers ofcopyrighted works in digital form­sound recordings, motion pictures,novels, newspapers-anyone ofwhich can be summoned on com­mand, beamed up to a satellite,beamed down to a user, and paid forby the user through an automatedbilling system. It is 2 AM, and youwant to hear Bartok's Concerto forOrchestra. Which conductor do youprefer? Fritz Reiner? Zubin Mehta?Or perhaps Sergey Koussevitzky,in the historic 1944 Boston Sym­phony performance? Punch in yourselection and the system will bill youaccordingly-presumably at a pricethat reflects the relative demand forthat particular version.

The genius of the celestial juke­box is that it will pay a work's ownerfor every use of his work, at virtuallyno transaction cost. And, with infor­mation and entertainment readilyavailable whenever the user wants it,the temptation to make unauthorizedcopies should decline; correct pricing-low prices for a great number ofuses, rather than high prices for a few-should all but eliminate incentivesfor subscribers to copy and storeworks off the system.

PAUL GOLDSTEIN is one ofthe nation's leading author­ities on copyright law. Hismany publications includea landmark, three-volumetreatise from Little, Brown& Co., Copyright: Principles,Law and Practice (1989,supplemented annually) anda widely adopted law schooltext, Copyright, Patent,Trademark and Rela ted StateDoctrines (3rd ed., 1990).

Goldstein joined the fac­ulty in 1975 and was namedto the Stella Wand Ira S.Lillick Professorship in 1985.A popular teacher, he hastwice won the School's JohnBingham Hurlbut Awardfor Excellence in Teaching.Goldstein is Of Counsel toMorrison & Foerster, wherehe works with the firm's in­tellectual property group.

The present article grewout ofaddresses at the bicen­tennial celebration of thecopyright and patent laws inWashington, D.C., and atthe University of DaytonLaw School in connectionwith its Program in Law andTechnology.

but education. This prophecy-thateducation about copyright law'sability to increase net social welfarewill be an important focus of publicpolicy in the future-perhaps reflectsan educator's bias. But it is hardto imagine a more important or, ul­timately, a more liberating missionfor copyright discourse in the yearsto come. 0

broad array of consumer demand.Notions of private ownership­

particularly ownership of somethingso fugitive as information-are slowto take root in the popular conscience.Yet, as new technologies enable co­vert access to copyrighted works, andprivate enforcement increasingly be­comes cumbersome and inefficient,public respect for intellectual prop­erty may emerge as the single bestsafeguard against misappropriation.Just as travelers today instinctivelystay off a stranger's land, so travelersin the information environment ofthe future may instinctively observecopyright law's implicit "No Tres­passing" sign.

Ultimately, the great task forcopyright will be not enforcement,

in information is far less secure thanits acceptance of private propertyin land.

It takes no greatly refined moralsense to know that stealing a cassettefrom a music store is wrong. Buthaving paid for the cassette, you mayfeel no compunction about taping acopy to play in your car-or, per­haps, to give to a friend. Where, youmay wonder, is the harm?

The harm, of course, is that bymaking rather than purchasing theadditional copies, you deny incometo everyone from the retailer all theway back to the composer. The ulti­mate loser? The consumer. As therewards to creators, producers andsellers diminish, so too do their incen­tives to respond in the future to a

oDR PRO FESS0R,

The little-knownstory of how

a President of theUnited States,

Beniamin Harrison,helped launch

Stanford Law School.

-------------- -

"

By Howard Bromberg, J.D.

PRESIDENT

TANFORD'S first professor of law was a former President of the United

States. This is a distinction that no other school can claim. On March 2, 1893,

'-4I11P-' with two days remaining in his administration, President Benjamin Harrison

accepted an appointment as Non-Resident Professor of Constitutional Law at

Stanford University.

Harrison's decision was a triumph for the fledgling western university and its

founder, Leland Stanford, who had personally recruited the chief of state. It also

provided a tremendous boost to the nascent Law Department, which had suffered

months of frustration and disappointment.

David Starr Jordan, Stanford University's first president, had been planning a law

program since the University opened in 1891. He would model it on the innovative

approach to legal education proposed by Woodrow Wilson, Jurisprudence Profes­

sor at Princeton. Law would be taught simultaneously with the social sciences; no

one would be admitted to graduate legal studies who was not already a college

graduate; and the department would be thoroughly integrated with the life and

THE*************************************

*****************************************************************************

during Harrison's four difficult yearsin the White House.

In 1891, Senator Stanford helpedarrange a presidential cross-countrytrain tour, during which Harrisonvisited and was impressed by theuniversity campus still under con­struction. When Harrison wasdefeated by Grover Cleveland in the1892 election, it occurred to SenatorStanford to invite his friend-whohad been one of the nation's leadinglawyers before entering the Senate­to join the as-yet empty Stanford lawfaculty.

Few expected President Harrisonto accept. Not that Senator Stanfordhad failed to make the terms attrac­tive. Harrison was offered a limitedteaching schedule; the opportunityto lecture on any topic he chose; andthe then-fantastic salary of $10,000.But Harrison had already made itclear that he wanted to spend theyears after his presidency quietly.

The President also had toconsider the proper role of an ex­president. America had a strangelyambivalent attitude toward its formerchiefs of state: It was thought un­democratic to provide them withpensions, but degrading to theirformer office for them to acceptpaid employment. Certainly no ex­president had ever joined a collegefaculty. Teaching per se-much less,teaching at a struggling youngcollege-might not be an appropri­ate sequel to the nation's highestoffice.

Nonetheless, after several weeksof zealous effort by Senator Stanford,Harrison did accept. His reasonscan best be described as patriotic.Harrison had become convincedduring his presidency that Ameri­can public life had been corruptedby greed and selfishness. The rem­edy, he concluded, was to educateAmericans in the benefits of self­government and instill a "greaterreverence for law." If he could in­culcate in new generations the valuesof disinterested citizenship and ser­vice, he wrote President Jordan, hewould "accomplish a work morelasting than anything I have yet beenable to do."

would open in the 1893-94 acade­mic year without a single professor.

And then Leland Stanford man­aged one of the more spectacularcoups in the history of Americaneducation.

[JJ ELAND STANFORD and Ben­jamin Harrison had beenfirm political allies since thedays when they were both

United States senators. Their alli­ance ripened into a close friendship

Leland Stanford (left) entertained President Harrison (seated) and Postmaster General JohnWanamaker (right) at the Senator's campus home during the presidential tour of 1891.Wanamaker would later help Harrison prepare the Stanford lectures.

mission of the university. It was adynamic blueprint thatJordan hopedwould attract established scholars.

He was soon disillusioned. Mostof the well-known law professorsJordan approached showed interestin his plans, but no more than that.Two professors did accept offers ofemployment; but one subsequentlydecided to go to Cornell, and theother, after some thought, asked fora leave of absence to observe theprogress of Jordan's plans. It ap­peared that the Law Department

******************************************************************************************************************

12 STANFORD LAWYER F311 1991

of the gradual unfolding of thedistinctive elements in American con­stitutional government. He tracedthe Bill of Rights, separation ofpowers, checks and balances, judi­cial review, federalism, and otherfeatures of the United States Con­stitution to similar provisions inthe colonial charters, the stateconstitutions, and the previousconfederations. The two hundredyears ofexperiment and refinement­a process guided by the "compellinghand of Providence," the devoutHarrison was always careful to add­had brought forth "the most freeand perfect system of governmentthat men have ever enjoyed." Itwas an argument well suited toHarrison's purpose of making thestudents' "love of our institutionsdeeper and more intelligent."

LlJHE LECTURES were followedeagerly not only at Stanfordbut throughout the nation.People were curious as to

what a newly retired Presidentwould have to say about the formof government over which he hadjust presided. Seven stenographersattended Harrison's first lecture,and verbatim transcripts appearedin several newspapers. Subsequentlectures were also extensively re­ported throughout the country. Theseaccounts were nearly unanimous inpraise, with "masterful," "adroit,""charming," "lucid," and "schol­arly and dignified" among the enco­miums. Readers responded with aspate of excited and enthusiasticletters. Harrison seemed to have in­deed accomplished his purpose ofmaking the Constitution betterknown and respected.

The reactions of students-whohad to take in the dense and com­plex material in one-and-one-halfhour sittings-were more restrained.The editor of the Stanford Daily,writing some thirty years later, com­plained that he could not "recall onememorable utterance." And twobrothers-Encina residents who hadbecome acquainted with Harrison­described the lectures as the "least

Harrison's Stanfordlectures, which were

followed eagerlythroughout the

nation, introducedthe general public to

the evolutionarytheory of

the Constitution.

public, who would pay $1.25 a lec­ture ($6 for the series). The site wouldbe the University's largest hall, thetemporary chapel, which could seat800 people.

There, surrounded by reproduc­tions of Raphael Madonnas and witha Bible by his side, Harrison pre­sented his meticulously prepared lec­tures to packed audiences. In theselectures, Harrison boldly took upthe most vigorous scholarly debateof his day on the Constitution. Oneside of the debate-what might becalled the "revolutionary" theory­was epitomized in Gladstone'sfamous description of the Constitu­tion as "the most wonderful work

ever struck off at a given time bythe brain and purpose of man."The opposing view-"evolutionary"as it were-was advanced by thenew professional class of historians,trained in universities and writing inacademic journals, who had risen upin opposition to what they consid­ered a romanticized version ofhistory. Patiently poring througholder documents and records, theyattempted to show that the Consti­tution flowed from the long anddifficult experiences of colonialAmerica.

Reflecting his intensive study ofthe latest scholarship, Harrison tookthe side of the new historians. Hislectures were a careful exposition

Senator Stanford had encour­aged Harrison to lecture on the needfor an international code of law, butHarrison desired a subject moresuited to his inspirational purpose.The Centennial of the Constitutionhad fallen during his presidency, andHarrison had been greatly impressedby the effect of the celebrations onthe nation. What better way to in­spire Stanford students with a loveof American civil institutions thanby explicating the history of thatfundamental document of the re­public, the Constitution.

Harrison decided to present aseries of six lectures on the subjectand spent the summer and fall of1893 in diligent preparation. In thisundertaking, he had the benefit ofthe outpouring of scholarship sur­rounding the recent Centennial.Harrison devoted several hours aday to reading the latest treatiseson the history of the Constitution;commentaries by British scholarscomparing the American constitu­tion with their unwritten one; andthe letters, pamphlets, and debatesof the founding fathers. After orga­nizing his copious notes, Harrisondictated successive drafts to his per­sonal secretary, until he felt that hehad gotten his lectures just right.Exhaustively researched and care­fully composed, they were cogent,coherent, and forceful.

[JJ] N MARCH 5, 1894, the for­mer President, accompaniedby his secretary and a Pres­byterian minister, arrived

on the Stanford campus to the cheersof waiting students. He was given asuite of rooms in Encina Hall, thenthe men's dormitory.

From the time Harrison's fac­ulty appointment had been an­nounced, there had grown a greatclamor to hear him. It was thereforearranged that Harrison would de­liver each lecture twice: the first timeto the University faculty and tostudents in law and other social sci­ences; and the second time to theremaining students-all other classesbeing canceled-and to the general

******************************************************************************************************************

STANFORD LAWYER Fa1l199! 13

F~~~~~~~~~~~~~~----------------------------------

To Leland Stanford's young uni­versity, the appointment of theformer President brought a new andprecocious stature. Stanford Univer­sity and its influential founder hadaccomplished a feat that had eludedeven the most hoary and prestigiousof the eastern colleges.

But the greatest impact of Har­rison's tenure at Stanford was on thenewly launched law program. For­merly spurned and humiliated byseveral professors, the Law Depart­ment became the most glamorousdepartment in the University the in­stant Harrison joined. Enrollmentmore than doubled, the libraryexpanded, and the vacillating pro-

United States Senate."Harrison's tenure at Stanford,

though brief, was of great signifi­cance. From a national perspective,the Stanford lectures were a majoreducational and civic event, present­ing to a broad audience-apparentlyfor the first time-the evolutionarytheory of the Constitution. In addi­tion, Harrison's professorial under­taking established university teach­ing as worthy of an ex-President.Several of Harrison's immediate suc­cessors in the Oval Office would infact follow his example.

however, was the severe strain thatteaching exacted on the weary formerPresident. He had found the task ofpreparing definitive lectures-theywould eventually be published as abook-so draining as to be "workand not fun." Nor was delivering thelectures any easier. Harrison wasfamous for his oratorical abilities­one of the reasons why SenatorStanford was so eager to recruithim-and enjoyed the swirl andnoise of the political hustings. Butwhen he looked out on a hallpacked with 800 eager Stanfordstudents, notebooks open, pens inhand, Harrison felt "more trepida­tion" than when he "addressed the

removed the only University offi­cial with experience at the highestlevels of government. Without thefounder's guiding hand, theUniversity administration dismayedthe former President by allow­ing unauthorized publication ofHarrison's lectures, and by ineptlyhandling a theft of wine fromHarrison's room. (An account ofthis curious episode appeared inthe June 1991 issue of StanfordMagazine.)

Perhaps the most important rea­son for Harrison's change of plans,

enjoyable" that they had heard atStanford.

Perhaps more significant, how­ever, was the reaction of the apple­cheeked Stanford student who wouldsomeday himself be President:Herbert Hoover. "I profited by thelectures," he would recall. Harrison'sstay also gave the earnest 19-year­old his "first contact with a greatpublic man"-an amusing episodestill vivid to Hoover when he beganwriting his memoirs some twentyyears later [see opposite page].

Harrison, though at Stanford pri­marily to speak on constitutionalhistory, also participated actively inthe life of the University. The formerPresident delivered speeches onFounders Day, at the Students' Mid­winter Fair, and to the StanfordChristian Association and the Trust­ees; visited the Stanford chapter ofhis old fraternity, Phi Delta Theta;and gave several tender eulogies tohis friend, Leland Stanford, who haddied the previous summer.

Among his many get-togetherswith student groups, Harrison hada private meeting with 70 lawstudents. He encouraged them toengage in "profound study," notonly of the decisions of cases, butof the general principles that de­termined those decisions. The formerPresident also urged them, once theybecome lawyers, to put the well­being of society before their ownprofessional goals. They should be"influential ... on the side of justice,good morals, and right politics."

[PJ RESIDENT HARRISON leftStanford on April 16, 1894,for his home in Indiana­polis. His plan, he then an­

nounced, was to resume his lecturesthe following year, bringing the storyof the Constitution from its adop­tion to the present day.

It never happened. Harrisonremained officially on the facultyuntil 1896, but did not return tothe Stanford campus. There wereseveral reasons. Leland Stanford'sdeath had broken the strong link offriendship. Equally important, it

******************************************************************************************************************

14 STANFORD LAWYER Foil \99\

Once and Future Presidents

[STORY SOMETIMES takes curious turns. One such was

-Herbert Hoover, The Memoirs of Herbert Hoover,

Vol. 1: Years of Adventure (Macmillan, 1951), p.21.

institution and that he must take it. Justice must occasionally be

done even to ex-Presidents ... "

the encounter at a Stanford baseball game ofthe twenty­

third President of the United States and the impression­

able student who would eventually become the thirty-first in that

high office. Their meeting-described by Herbert Hoover in his

memoIrs-was both amusing and revealing:

came to the game. Either he ignored the collector or the collector

was overcome with shyness. Anyway that outpost reported to

me that Mr. Harrison had not paid. I collected the money. Mr.

Harrison was cheerful about it and bought also an advance ticket

to the next week's game. He would not take the 50 cents change

from a dollar. But I insisted that we were not a charitable

"Former President Benjamin Harrison had been induced by

Senator Stanford to deliver a course of lectures upon some phases

of government. I profited by the lectures. But then as manager of

the baseball team I had a stern duty to perform. We had no

enclosed field. We collected the 25 cents admission by outposts of

students who demanded the cash. One afternoon Mr. Harrison

*

*

*

fessor on leave came to teach. In thesometimes difficult years to follow,the Stanford Law Department, soonto be the Stanford Law School, couldalways take inspiration from the loftyexample set by its first professor. 0

HOWARD BROMBERG taught LegalResearch and Writing at StanfordLaw School from 1988 to 1990 andis currently a candidate for the J.S.D.degree. Trained in both history andlaw (Harvard B.A. 1980 and J.D.1983), he has been commissioned towrite the history of Stanford LawSchool's first 100 years. Readerswith papers, anecdotes, or photo­graphs from the School's past areencouraged to get in touch withBromberg at Escondido Village96-D, Stanford, CA 94305; tele­phone (415) 497-0887.

The LecturesAlthough somewhat dated by theirtoo-heavy emphasis on the evolu­tionary nature of constitutionalformation, Harrison's Stanford lec­tures still make interesting andinformative reading. They are con­tained in Views of an Ex-President(Bowen-Merrill, 1901), a posthu­mous collection of Harrison'sspeeches published by his widow.

The drafts of the lectures -over860 pages worth-are among theBenjamin Harrison Papers at the Li­brary of Congress (also available onmicrofilm). From these documents,it is possible to observe Harrison'spainstaking preparation, as well asthe extensive readings and authorshe used for authority. -H.B.

*****************************************************************************************************************

STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991 15

Friends, Football, and a Famous First

"T HE START was right here, andthe heart still is." With these

warm words, Sandra Day O'Connor'52-the first woman to serve on theU.S. Supreme Court-accepted theSchool's 1990 Alumni/x Award ofMerit.

The award ceremony, with DeanBrest as host, took place before some200 happy graduates and friends at theall-classes banquet on Saturday, Sep­tember 22, during the annual LawAlumni/x Weekend. Guests includedUniversity president Donald Kennedy,several alumni/x jurists, and the dis-

16 STA FORD LAWYER Fall 1991

tinguished attorney whom Dean Bresttermed "president of the most exclu­sive club in the world: the Men's Aux­iliary to the Supreme Court"-John].O'Connor III '53.

The O'Connors had spent timethe previous day with students at theSchool. On the invitation of Womenof Stanford Law, Justice O'Connorspoke to a standing-room-only audi­ence in Crown Quad's largest class­room. WSL co-chair Jamie Grodsky('92) and Professor Barbara Babcock(the School's first woman professor)joined in introducing the trail-blazing

justice. The session ended with a ques­tion-and-answer period, followed bya reception in Crocker Garden. (Ex­cerpts from the O'Connor events­Dean Brest's tribute and the Justice'stalks to students and alumni/x­appear on pages 20 to 23.)

Alumni/x Weekend proper waslaunched Friday at 5 PM with the now­traditional reception at the campushome of Paul and Iris Brest. Membersof ten classes (all from years ending inoor 5), plus the indefatigable Half­Century Club, then scattered for theirrespective reunion dinners.

FROM THE CAPITOLThe Saturday morning program be­gan with a talk by Professor-cum­Congressman Thomas J. Campbell(R-12th California) on what he haslearned as a freshman legislator. Somenuggets:~ "Process controls substance. There­fore, the person who controls theagenda has great power."~ "Thirty seconds wins over thirtyminutes any time."~ "As the proximity to an electionnarrows, the ability to affect votes bypositives decreases, while the abilityto affect votes by negatives grows."~ "Your influence in the House is in­versely proportional to the time youspend on C-Span. "~ "There is, at the end of the day, somejustice."

Congressman Campbell con­cluded this somewhat wry presenta­tion on a more serious note: "Whatreally matters is whether the votes youcast will be ones you would be com­fortable with twenty years hence."

YOUNG LAWYERSNext on the program was a panel ofgraduates from the Classes of 1980and 1985. Their assignment: to givetheir views, as relative newcomersto the legal profession, on their prac­tice and, more generally, their qualityof life.

The panelists represented a rangeofcareerchoices. Ramon Gonzales '80is a law-firm partner specializing inlabor and employment law litigationwith Sutin, Thayer & Browne of Al­buquerque. BradJones (JD/MBA '81)is involved in high-tech industry in­vestments with Brentwood Associatesof Los Angeles. Ascanio Piomelli '85is dedicated to legal services as direc­tor of the East Palo Alto CommunityLaw Project. And Nancy Rapoport '85specializes in bankruptcy law and liti­gation as an associate at Morrison &Foerster of San Francisco. ProfessorRobert Weisberg '79 served as mod­erator.

The perspectives of the panelistswere-as might be expected-varied.But interestingly, all seemed generallysatisfied with their choice of law as aprofession, their post-law-schoolcareers, and their lifestyles.

Top: Adam von Dioszeghy '70and companion, with Law Fund

chair William F. Kroener III '71.Above: panelists Ramon

Gonzales '80 andNancy Rapoport '8S.Right: Congressman

Tom Campbell.

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 17

VIEW FROM THE BRIDGEThe morning concluded with a "Stateof the School" report from Paul Brest.The Dean was happy to inform return­ing alumni/<E that student "disengage­ment" is no longer an issue and thatthe general atmosphere at the Schoolis one of a "community ofdiscourse. "Other good news included:~ Further advances in the law and busi­ness curriculum;~ Integration of legal ethics into thesubstantive curriculum (the "perva­sive method"), including many of thefirst-year courses;~ The establishment at the East PaloAlto Community Law Project of aguardianship clinic in which law stu­dents can assist grandparents andother relatives in gaining the legal rightto make decisions for children in theirprimary care; and~ Progress in and the need for continu­ing expansion of the curriculum in in­ternationallaw.

MUCH TO CELEBRATEA large contingent of the visitingalumni/<E and families then proceeded,box lunches in hand, to the StanfordStadium. It was quite a spectacle. TheCardinal, clearly on an upward tra­jectory, romped up and down the field,earning a 37-3 victory over the un­fortunate Beavers of Oregon StateUniversity.

18 STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991

Other alumni/<E took advantageof the chance to linger in sun-dappledCrocker Garden, talking with oldfriends and former professors­including the inimitable MoffattHancock.

The crowning occasion ofAlumni/<E Weekend 1990 was, ofcourse, the above-mentioned banquet.Held atthe Hyatt Palo Alto, it encom­passed not only the award to JusticeO'Connor but also plenty of time forconversation and dancing.

This year's Alumni/<E Weekendis scheduled for September 26-28.Members of all years are welcome,with special events planned forthe Half-Century Club ('40 or ear­lier) and for the reunion classes ofyears ending in 1 and 6. Feel free tocall Margie Savoye of the Alumni/<ERelations office, (415) 723-2730,for information. 0

Opposite page, lelt:Professor Robert Weisberg'79, panel moderator. Top:John J. O'Connor III '53 andJohn H. Bickel '60. Below:Former Associate Dean JackFriedenthal and Jo AnneFriedenthal '60.

This page, top: Thewelcoming party, hostedby (below) Dean Paul Brestand Iris Brest. Center:Professor emeritus MoffattHancock at the (rockerGarden luncheon. Below,lelt: Roderick Hills '55and Stanford presidentDon Kennedy at the 011­alumnif;l! banquet.

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 19

------------- Alumni/ce Weekend 1990 -------------

In Praise of Sandra Day O'Connor '52

ON SEPTEMBER 25, 1981-almostnine years to this day-Sandra

Day O'Connor became the nation's102ndJustice ofthe Supreme Court ofthe United States. She was the secondStanford Law School graduate namedto the Court and the first woman everto become a member of that body.

•I want to give you a sense of the

wonderfully whole person who lies be­hind these facts and transcends them.

Sandra Day was born in 1930 toHarry and Ada Mae Wilkey Day, whomade their home and their living on theLazy B Ranch, a large spread on theNew Mexico-Arizona border. Thedayshe was born, her fa ther was stuckin a federal courthouse in Tucsonbattling a bunch of lawyers in a casethat had dragged on for years. He re­counted: "I don't remember tellingSandra Iwanted her to be a lawyer, butafter dealing with slick lawyers for tenyears, I thought: 'Damn, I'd like tohave a little legal advice from some­where in the family.'"

While Sandra Day spent some ofher early years in El Paso, which hadthe best schools around, her real lovewas her home on the Lazy B. This wasa working ranch, and she worked. "Ididn't do all the things that boys did,"she recalls, "but I fixed windmills andrepaired fences. "

•Upon graduation from high

school at the age of 16, she applied toStanford, where she was accepted de­spite stiff competition from returningGIs. Sandra Day was the president ofher dorm and of Cap & Gown; shemajored in economics-not a typicalwomen's subject at the time-andgraduated with great distinction.

Sandra Day attended Law Schoolunder the so-called" 3-3 "plan, bywhich a student's senior year could

20 STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991

By Paul BrestRichard E. Lang

Professor and Dean

also be her first year of Law School.Needless to say, she excelled, and wasa member of the Law Review and theOrder of the Coif.

•One evening in her third year,

Sandra was working on a Law Reviewassignment together with a second­year student-one John O'Connor.They had dinner afterwards-and forthe following 41 evenings. Whenasked about this years later, shemused: "Beware of proofreading overa glass of beer."

•

Some years after her graduation,Justice O'Connor had occasion to re­flect on her years at the Law School.In a letter thanking law students whohad started a book fund in honor of herappointment to the Supreme Court,she wrote:

"It was at Stanford Law Schoolthat it all began; it was there that Icommenced my long, totally unex­pected walk into history. The LawSchool was such a joy to me (exceptpossibly during dead week). I mar­veled at the talents of great profes­sors. I developed some of the closestfriends I will ever have. I crammedfor finals at the end of my first yearwith my good friend Bill Rehnquist.I met my husband on a Stanford LawReview assignment.... Beyond thosepersonal relationships, my opportuni­ties for service as an assistant attorneygeneral, as a state senator and as ajudge all flowed from the school younow attend."

•Sandra O'Connor's life up to and

including Law School gave her goodreason to believe that the world wouldtreat her based on her own merits. Soher first efforts at finding a job as arecent graduate must have come as ashock. "I interviewed with law firmsin Los Angeles and San Francisco," sherecalled. "None had ever hired awoman associate before, and theywere not prepared to do so." (One firmactually counteroffered with a job asa secretary.) But, she said, "I wasn'tfrustrated. Iwas just redirected towardpublic service, and it hasn't been dis­appointing."

•From 1965 to 1969, Sandra

O'Connor served as assistant attorneygeneral of Arizona (she was the firstwoman, of course). In the words of acolleague: "She had a mind like a steel

trap. She drove a hard bargain anddidn't cave in."

From 1969 to 1975, she served inthe Arizona Senate, and was chosenmajority leader (needless to say, alsothe first woman). Senator O'Connor'sviews were described as in the Repub­lican mainstream with "moderate toconservative commitments, though onmany issues she disregarded politicalideology.... She was strictly an issue­oriented person. If the program wasgood for the state, it didn't make awhole lot of difference to her whichside initiated the issue." (Among otherthings, she supported the Equal RightsAmendment.)

A Democratic colleague describedSenator O'Connor's workstyle withawe: "She worked interminable hoursand read everything there was. Itwas impossible to win with her. We'dgo to the floor with a few facts andlet rhetoric do the rest. Not Sandy.She would overwhelm you withher knowledge."

•During this period Sandra

O'Connor decided to take up golf. Shetook daily lessons with the club pro atParadise Valley Country Club for sev­eral years, and only then played herfirst game-and shot under 90. Herbrother once said: "Whatever she did,whether it was important, unimpor­tant, or semi-important, or very im­portant, she just would do it withperfection.... If you said, 'The job isto wash the dishes,' she would do itbetter than anyone else." A friend saidthat "with Sandra O'Connor thereain't no Miller time."

•From 1975 to 1981 judge

O'Connor served on the MaricopaCounty Superior Court and then onthe state Court of Appeals, appointedto the latter position by GovernorBruce Babbitt, who spoke of her "as­tonishing intellectual ability" and her"great sense of judgment."

•

It was while serving as a court ofappeals judge that she received aphone call from William FrenchSmith, President Reagan's AttorneyGeneral. Mr. Smith had been a part­ner at the Los Angeles firm that hadmade the interesting counterofferwhen she had sought her first job af­ter law school. She recounts that whenthe Attorney General telephoned toask her if she could come to Washing­ton to talk about a position there, "I

Alumnif;e Award of Merit recipient

immediately guessed he was planningto offer me a secretarial position-butwould it be Secretary of Labor or Sec­retary of Commerce?"

The rest, as they say, is history-a history that is still unfolding.

•At her Senate confirmation hear­

ings, Senator Baucus asked the nomi­nee how she wanted to be remem­bered. She replied: "The tombstonequestion-what do I want on mytombstone? I hope it might say: 'Herelies a good judge.' If I am confirmed,"she went on to say, "I am sure that Iwould be remembered as the firstwoman to have served on the SupremeCourt. I hope that in addition I wouldbe remembered for having given fairand full consideration to the issues thatwere raised and to resolving things onan even-handed basis and with due

respect and regard for the Constitutionof this country."

•justice O'Connor has taken a

leadership position in at least two ar­eas of constitutional law. One is thelaw concerning the separation ofchurch and state. Even LaurenceTribe, not known for his lavish praise,says that" her religion test is the besteffort around. "

The other area is federalism. jus­tice O'Connor is the only member ofthe current Court ever elected to apublic office, the only one to serve in alegisla ture.

•Each Halloween, justice

O'Connor brings a pumpkin to herchambers for her clerks to decorate.Last year, in honor of the justice's firstgrandchild, the clerks fashioned aGrandmajustice, who sported yellowcurls and a pleased smirk. A blissful­looking pumpkin baby attired in apink dress lay in its arms. The justiceholds the affection not only of her chil­dren and grandchild, but of her clerksand, as she describes them, her grow­ing number of "grandclerks" as well.

•justice Sandra Day O'Connor­

for what you have given your State andthe Nation in an extraordinary careerdevoted to public service and for theexample you have given the students,both the women and men, of Stanfordand other law schools-it is an honorto present you with the Law School'sAlumni/a:: Award of Merit; and in thistenth year of your appointment to theSupreme Court, to wish you many,many more and extend my hope thatyou'll return to celebrate some of themwith us.D

Excerpted from Dean Brest'sremarks in presenting the seventhannual Alumni/a? Award of Me­rit, on September 22, 1990 at theAlumni/a? Weekend banquet.

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 21

------------- Alumnike Weekend 1990 -------------

The Making of a Justice

NINE YEARS AGO this very day[September 21,1981] the Senate

was voting on my nomination for theSupreme Court. I remember sitting ina little back room at the Senate, wait­ing for the vote. I could hear the pro­ceedings on a P.A. system. Thesenators' names were called, and theyall said, "pass." The names were calledagain, and again they all passed. Iwas in a near state of disarray, think­ing, "What's happening?" Finally, oneof the senators wandered in, and said,"Oh that happens all the time. Wenever get around to it until thethird roll call." Well, they finally didget around to it, and it was an aston­ishing and surprising day.

•I thought that I would share with

you a little commentary on the processof selecting a Justice. President JohnAdams once said, "My gift of JusticeJohn Marshall to the people of theUnited States was the proudest act ofmy life." Another less satisfied Presi­dent referred to one of his appoint­ments to the Supreme Court as "mybiggest mistake." Well, how do Presi­dents go about giving such gifts ormaking such mistakes?

Inalmost 200 years, only 104Jus­tices [105 counting Souter] have actu­ally served on the Court, which comesto about one nomination every otheryear. A nomination to the Court, then,is in terms of frequency about half asspecial as a presidential nomination.A nomination to the Court also in­volves infinitely less public participa­tion and releasing of balloons, but itis still the occasion for public interest.

•The constitutional requirement

that Supreme Court appointments bemade with the "advice and consent"of the Senate was inserted during theclosing days of the Constitutional

22 STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991

By Hon. Sandra Day O'Connor '52Associate Justice,

U.S. Supreme Court

Convention. It replaced the originallanguage, "reject and approve." Al­most all the debate at the Constitu­tional Convention concerning thejudicial branch focused on the processfor appointing Justices. The criteriafor selection were not debated. The dele­gates simply assumed that the sel­ection would be on the basis of merit.Doctor Benjamin Franklin suggestedthe Scottish mode of appointment inwhich the nomination proceeded fromthe lawyers, who always selected theablest of the profession in order to getrid of him and share his practiceamong themselves.

•

The activity of the Senate Judi­ciary Committee has certainly in­creased through the years in terms oftheir desire to actually question thenominees. For many, many years itwas thought improper for judicialnominees to be questioned at all. If Iremember correctly, the first time thata nominee actually appeared beforethe Committee was the appointmentof Justice Brandeis. Then it was doneonly a little bit; just a few questionswere asked.

With the nomination of JudgeBork we saw perhaps the most exten­sive questioning of a potential Justiceand very full replies by the nominee. Idoubt that the Senate is going to retreatfrom that involvement. It does providenational television coverage for theparticipants, and that's sometimes ir­resistible. I think the nation is quitefascinated with the process anywayand rightfully so, so I would be sur­prised to see any retreat from the cur­rent level of inquiry.

•What are the factors influencing

the selection of a nominee to theCourt? It is hard to generalize. JusticeHolmes once said the job of a juristrequires a combination of Justinian,Jesus Christ, andJohn Marshall. Thatcombination, as we all know, is rarelyattained. Because the nominee willusually outlast (in office at least) thePresident who makes the appoint­ment, there can be no doubt that thePresident generally seeks through theappointment to have a lasting effect onthe Court and the nation. Unsurpris­ingly then, all but twelve nomineeshave been of the same political partyas the President making the nomina­tion, but it's generally conceded thatPresidents are frequently disap­pointed.

When asked whether a personbecomes any different when he puts ona judge's robes, Justice Frankfurter

The honoree and her student introducer - Jamie Grodsky (3l) - following the Justice's September 21meeting with students.

responded, "If he's any good, hedoes." Presidents Jefferson andMadison were exceedingly disap­pointed at the failure of their appoin­tees to resist the influence of ChiefJustice John Marshall. TheodoreRoosevelt was similarly chagrined atsome of the rulings of Justice OliverWendell Holmes. When Holmes casthis vote against the government in animportant antitrust case, Roosevelt isreported to have said, "I can carve outof a banana a judge with more back­bone than that." As Alexander Bickelhas said, "You shoot an arrow into afar distant future when you appoint ajustice, and not even the man himselfcan tell you what he will think aboutsome of the problems he will face."President Truman captured the heartof the problem in these remarks:"Packing the Supreme Court simplycan't be done. I've tried it and itwon'twork. Whenever you put a man on theSupreme Court, he ceases to be yourfriend."

•The appointments to the Court of

another Stanford alum, PresidentHerbert Hoover, are illustrative oftheunexpected results of these appoint­ments. You will recall that PresidentHoover placed three Justices on theCourt in the four years of his presi­dency: Chief Justice Charles EvansHughes and Associate Justices OwenJ. Roberts and Benjamin N. Cardozo.They were still members of the Courtduring the years when a number ofPresident Franklin Roosevelt's NewDeal legislative proposals and enact­ments were struck down. This persis­tent habit led to the RooseveltCourt-packing plan and ultimately toJustice Roberts's switch in time thatsaved nine.

There is little doubt about the veryreal effect the switch has had on con­stitutional jurisprudence. The viewthat the Constitution allows extensivegovernment regulation of theeconomy was no temporary political

expedient-it has become settled law.The degree to which the SupremeCourt will interfere with economic leg­islation is now severely circumscribed.In a real sense the very structure ofourgovernment with its huge administra­tive apparatus was made possible bythe switch of the Hughes Court's ap­pointees of President Herbert Hoover.

It's always dangerous to play the"what if?" game with historical facts,but I think it is possible that constitu­tionallaw and perhaps the structureof the Supreme Court itself would lookdifferent today if President Hooverhad been more concerned with ideol­ogy and less with qualifications andbalance in making his appointments.Imagine if, instead of BenjaminCardozo, President Hoover had ap­pointed his conservative AttorneyGeneral William Mitchell; or if insteadof Charles Evans Hughes, the Presi­dent had appointed a free market ideo­logue. Ofcourse, one never knows; asI said earlier, service on the Court haschanged the thinking of many a Jus­tice. Owen Roberts came to the Courtas a well known, laissez-faire capitalistand yetchanged his mind. You shoot anarrow into a far distant future when youappoint a Justice.

•When we get a new Justice, it is

more than gaining a new Justice. In avery real sense, it creates a new Court.Each newJustice who joins us changesthe working dynamics in ways subtleand sometimes not so subtle.

•I think all of us as judges try to set

aside any personal concerns we haveand approach the issues that we haveto decide as objectively as we can. Butwe're all human, and no doubt each ofus is influenced in very subtle ways­sometimes ways which we ourselvesdon't recognize-in how we analyzeproblems, how we approach them, theweight that we give some argumentsto the exclusion of others. Try as wewill we are still the product of ourbackgrounds.

Continued on page 41

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 23

New Faces of 1991School Makes Three Notable Additions to the Faculty

IAN AYRESLawyer-Economist BringsCorporate Law Expertise

THE LAwand Businesscurriculum is gaining anew asset with the addi­tion of antitrust expert IanAyres. Previously a pro­fessor at NorthwesternLaw School, Ayres has ac­cepted the invitation ofthe Stanford Law facultyto become a permanentprofessor here.

A rising star in the fieldof corporate law, Ayresreceived a J.D. in 1986from Yale (where he wasarticles editor of Yale LawJournal) and a Ph.D. ineconomics in 1988 fromMassachusetts Institute ofTechnology. This feat wasforeshadowed by his Yale

24 STA FORD LAWYER Fall1991

undergraduate record,which included majors inboth economics (with dis­tinction) and Russian andEast European Studies(also with distinction),election in his junior yearto Phi Beta Kappa, andgraduation (B.A., 1981)summa cum laude.

In the five short yearssince law school, Ayreshas been admitted to theIllinois Bar, clerked on theTenth Circuit Court ofAppeals, spent a summeras scholar in residenceat a law firm (Chicago'sSonnenschein Nath &Rosenthal), written 12academic articles, co­authored a book for theOxford University Press,served as associate editorof the journal Law andSocial Inquiry, conductedan empirical researchstudy with the AmericanBar Foundation, and en­gaged in various pro bonoactivities.

This past academicyear (1990-91) he wasboth a visiting professorat the University of Vir­ginia and a guest scholarof the Brookings Institu­tion. Now at Yale for aterm as visiting professor,he plans to take up resi­dence at Stanford early inthe new year.

Ayres made news this

spring when the HarvardLaw Review (104:817)published "Fair Driving:Race and Gender Dis­crimination in Retail CarNegotiations." The ar­ticle, which was based onAyres's ABF researchstudy, showed that theproffered price of an auto­mobile can vary signifi­cantly depending on therace and sex of the shop­per. Car dealers (at leastin the study area of Chi­cago) offered the highestprices to black males andblack females, and thelowest to white males,even though all buyer­testers followed an identi­cally scripted bargainingstrategy.

Other articles by Ayresexplore issues where eco­nomics and law intersect.In a 1989 Yale Law Jour­nal piece (99:87), "FillingGaps in Incomplete Con­tracts," Ayers and co­author Robert Gertnerdiscussed how lawmakersshould establish legalrules that private partiescan contract around.Ayres has also writtenabout antitrust policy andthe increasingly subtleforms of collusion bywhich industries may de­feat the purpose of anti­trust laws.

His Oxford Press book,

written with John Braith­waite, suggests innovativemethods for delegatingregulatory authority toprivate actors. Now inpress, it is called Respon­sive Regulation: Tran­scending the DeregulationDebate.

Much of Ayres's workexhibits a concern for theless-privileged members ofsociety. The automobileshopping study is one ex­ample. Another is a paperfor the Northwestern LawReview on retail markupdisclosure. A third in­volves the price and avail­ability of insurance, withAyres serving as an eco­nomic expert to the attor­neys general of 18 statesfor the case In re Insur­ance Antitrust Litigation,C88-1688 (N.D. Cal.).

He has been continu­ously involved in probono work, participatingin such activities as theHarvard Prison Legal As­sistance Project and theNew Haven BatteredWomen's Temporary Re­straining Order Project.Just last September, heconvinced a judge to va­cate a death sentence in anIllinois case where he hadbeen counsel.

In a lighter vein, Ayresis remembered at Yale asmuch for his singing as his

scholarship. He was a so­loist with the Yale Rus­sian Chorus and withWiffenpoof. Also a mara­thon runner (Boston1984, in 3 hours, 12 min­utes), he placed first in the1989 five-kilometer run ofthe Law and Society Asso­ciation.

Ayres's first lap as aStanford Law professorwill be in the Spring termof 1991, as a teacher of thefoundation course inFinance Theory. 0

JANET E. HALLEYAttorney's Views

Illumined by HumanitiesScholarship

JANET E. HALLEY is enter­ing law teaching afterpractice experience withSkadden, Arps, Slate,Meagher & Flom of Bos­ton and, before that, a ju­dicial clerkship on theU.S. Court of Appealsfor the Sixth Circuit. Nostranger to teaching, how­ever, she has a doctoratein English literature andfive years in the classroomas an assistant professorat Hamilton College inNew York.

While in law school(Yale, J.D., 1988), Halleydrew these diverse strandstogether by founding and

serving as one of the firstexecutive editors of theYale Journal of Law andthe Humanities. And intwo published articles, shehas examined the way inwhich legal prohibitionsaffected expression andpersonal identity in Re­naissance England. "Her­esy, Orthodoxy and thePolitics of Religious Dis­course: The Case of theEnglish Family of Love,"appeared in the journalRepresentatives (15:98[1986]). The other article,"Equivocation and the Le­gal Conflict over ReligiousIdentity in Early ModernEngland," was publishedthis year in the above­mentioned Yale journal(3:33).

Halley spent her lawschool summers at theEmployment Law Centerin San Francisco (1986)and at Silverglate,Gertner, Fine & Good inBoston (1987). Duringthis period (1986-87),she was also a ThomasEmerson Fellow with theConnecticut Civil Liber­ties Union in Hartford.Her appeals court clerk­ship (1988-89) was withnow-ChiefJudge GilbertS. Merritt in Nashville,Tennessee.

As a Skadden, Arps as­sociate, Halley has beenworking mainly in thearea of litigation. She is amember of both the Mas­sachusetts and New YorkState bars. Other profes­sional memberships in­clude the Law and SocietyAssociation and the Mod­ern Language Association.

Halley holds degrees inEnglish literature fromPrinceton (B.A., 1974,summa cum laude), whereshe was elected to Phi BetaKappa, and the Universityof California at Los Ange­les (Ph.D., 1980).

Halley's activities andwritings-both before and

after taking up legal stud­ies-often focus on femi­nist concerns and sexualidentity issues. While atHamilton, she helped de­sign and implement itsWomen's Studies Pro­gram. Then, as a Yale lawstudent, she participatedin the Women's Tempo­rary Restraining OrderProject and the NianticWomen's Prison Project,becoming director oftraining for the first andcoordinator of the second.She also founded and or­ganized a Women's Read­ing Group on FeministTheory and the Law. Inaddition, she wrote suc­cessful grant proposalsraising money for a legalnetwork in Connecticutfor issues surroundingAIDS.

Her recent publicationsinclude "The Politics ofthe Closet: TowardsEqual Protection for Gay,Lesbian and BisexualIdentity," UCLA Law Re­view (36:915 [1989]) and"Constitutions of SexualOrientation Identity" (incollaboration with Chris­tine A. Littleton), JournalofLaw, Gender & SexualOrientation (forthcoming-see page 35). She is alsoco-editor (with SheilaFisher) of a book, Seekingthe Woman in Late Medi­eval and RenaissanceLiterature: Essays inFeminist Contextual Criti­cism (University of Ten­nessee Press, 1989).

Halley joins the facultythis fall as an associateprofessor. Her principalteaching subjects are civilprocedure, family law, Na­tive American law, and lawand symbolic systems. 0

KIM ANTOINETTE TAYLORPublic Defender is a Pro

in Criminal Lawand Procedure

KIM ANTOINETTE TAYLORjoins the faculty with tenyears of experience at thePublic Defender Service ofthe District of Columbia,the last three years as itsdirector.

The Washington, D.C.agency, which has 78 at­torneys on staff, is one ofthe country's leading PDservices. Its caseload in­cludes about two-thirds ofthe most serious feloniesin the nation's capital,with an increasing num­ber of complex murdercases. Taylor, in her threeyears at the helm, is gener­ally credited with havingimproved the moraleand effectiveness of theservICe.

Also recognized for herlegal expertise, Taylor ison the faculty of the Na­tional Criminal DefenseCollege and is a formerFellow in ProfessionalResponsibility at YaleLaw School (1990). Shehas also taught or lecturedat Yale, Georgetown, andHarvard, and in a numberof professional educationprograms. In 1988, shebecame a barrister of theAmerican Inn of Court.

Taylor is active in the

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 25

2010 Inquiry Goes Global

profession as a member ofthe American Bar Associ­ation's Criminal JusticeCouncil and vice chair ofits Indigent Defense Ser­vices Committee. She is onthe board of directors ofthe National Legal Aidand Defender Associationand chair of its DefenderCommittee. Also a mem­ber of the National Asso­ciation of CriminalDefense Lawyers, she isvice chair of its committeeon the Delivery of LegalServices to Indigent De­fendants.

Taylor was educated atBrown (B.A., 1977) andYale (J.D., 1980). EnteringBrown as a National

Board of Visitors

"SURELY the most ambi­tious meeting in the his­tory of the Board ofVisitors," said Dean Brestof the 33rd annual convo­cation, May 2-3, of theSchool's chief advisorycouncil. The agenda, puttogether by the Dean andthe 2010 Task Forceheaded by Kendyl Mon­roe '60, was indeed im­pressive (see box). Over

Associate Dean Ellen Borgersen

26 STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991

Merit finalist and a NewYork Regents Scholar, sheproceeded to earn depart­mental honors in Englishand American literature.Her courtroom ability andpublic interest concernemerged at Yale, whereshe was a semifinalist inthe Barristers' Union TrialCompetition and a par­ticipant in the DanburyPrison Project of the YaleLegal Services Organiza­tion.

Taylor was introducedto law firm practicethrough two summerassociate positions. Shespent the year after gradu­ation as an associate atCrowell & Moring of

the course of two days,some 30 speakers, panel­ists, moderators, andcommentators weretapped. These includednot only Board members,alumni/a:, and professors,but also a number of non­lawyers and foreign na­tionals.

The task of these manyexperts was to address aquestion vital to the future

Nancy Hicks Maynard '87

Washington, D.C., work­ing on litigation cases.

Her decade with thePublic Defender Service,which she joined in 1981,exposed Taylor to allphases of court proceed­ings in both criminal andfamily courts. Starting asa staff attorney, she ad­vanced to the PDS direc­torship in 1988 afterserving as deputy chief ofits trial division (1986-87)and director of its attor­ney training activities(1987-88).

The latter position-a short leap to law schoolteaching-involved con­ducting a six-week pro-

Thomas Elke '52

gram for the entering classof staff attorneys, runningmonthly sessions for out­side attorneys interestedin representing indigentsunder the Criminal JusticeAct, and some continuingeducation of staff attor­neys.

Taylor joins the Stan­ford faculty this fall withthe rank of associate pro­fessor. She will make herdebut in the first-yearCriminal Law course,while preparing an ad­vanced course for the nextterm on Criminal Prosecu­tion and Defense. 0

of Stanford Law School:What will be the roles ofthe legal profession twodecades hence?

AN ONGOING PROJECTThis inquiry representedthe second stage of aproject, recommended in1989 and launched in1990, to assist the Schoolin forecasting and meetingthe challenges of a chang­ing world. Last year, theBoard surveyed a broadrange of trends, both do­mestic and global, andidentified some of theirimplications for the con­tent and practice of law(Stanford Lawyer, Fall

Board of Visitors

AGENDAMay 2-3, 1991

Andre de Baubigny '58 andAnne Bingaman'68

1990, at pages 10 and 40).The next and final meetingof the series in 1992 willconcentrate on legal educa­tion and the role that Stan­ford Law School might bestplay.

In designing the current1991 meeting, the 2010Task Force chose to focuson a specific area of lawand policy: the environ­ment. Environmentalissues, it was thought,make good case studies­not only because of theirintrinsic interest and sig­nificance, but also becausethey raise challenges illus­trative of new demands onthe legal profession gener­ally. Such demands in­clude the need to relateto non-law disciplines(notably science andtechnology) and to extra­territorial economic, poli­tical, and legal regimes.

The format adopted foreach of three structuredsessions was innovative:an opening presentationby one or two expert"provocateurs," followedby a panel discussion inwhich a moderator woulddirect questions and hypo­theticals to appropriatepanelists, and a "wrap-up"by a member of the 2010Task Force. Questions andcomments from the 100­member Board were wel-

The Roles of Lawyers on the Domesti( S(ene

Presenter: Ralph Cavanagh, Natural Re­sources Defense Council, San Francisco

Moderator: Paul Goldstein, Stella W. andIra S. Lillick Professor, Stanford LawSchool

Panelists: Carl Anthony, Earth IslandInstitute, San Francisco; William H.Armstrong '67, McCutchen, Doyle,Brown & Enersen, Walnut Creek, Cali­fornia; Frank D. Boren '58, World Wild­life Fund, Washington, D.C.; Howard V.Golub, Pacific Gas & Electric, San Fran­cisco; Barton H. Thompson, Jr., ]D/MBA'76, Associate Professor, Stanford LawSchool

Wrap-up: James E. Bass* '87, Gibson,Dunn & Crutcher, Los Angeles

The Roles of Lawyers in the InternationalCommunity

Presenter: Ambassador RichardBenedick, Senior Fellow, World WildlifeFund, Washington, D.C.

Moderator: Joseph A. Grundfest '78,Associate Professor, Stanford Law School

Panelists: David M. Barnard, Linklaters& Paines, New York; John H. Barton"c'68, George E. Osborne Professor, Stan­ford Law School; Thomas C. Heller, Pro­fessor of Law and Director of OverseasStudies, Stanford; W. Brian Rose,Stikeman, Elliott, Toronto, Canada;Christoph von Teichman, Schon NolteFinkelnburg & Clemm, Hamburg, Ger­many; Edith Brown Weiss, United StatesEnvironmental Protection Agency, Wash­ington, D.C.

Wrap-up: William F. Kroener lIPJD/MBA '71, Davis Polk & Wardwell,New York

How Will the Legal Profession Respond tothe Challenge?

Co-Presenters: Roderick M. Hills"" '55,Donovan Leisure, Rogovin, Huge &Schiller, Washington, D.C.; EvaJ.Paterson, Lawyers' Committee for Ur­ban Affairs, San Francisco

Moderator: Deborah L. Rhode, Profes­sor, Stanford Law School

Panelists: Ronald J. Gilson, Professorand Helen L. Crocker Faculty Scholar,Stanford Law School; Ellie Goodwin,Natural Resources Defense Council, SanFrancisco; Peter W. Huber, ManhattanInstitute for Policy Research, Washing­ton, D.C.; Louise A. La Mathe '71, Irell& Manella, Los Angeles; RichardMallery"" '63, Snell & Wilmer, Phoenix

Wrap-up: Ellen Borgersen"", AssociateDean, Academic Affairs, Stanford LawSchool

Summary and Plenary Dis(ussion

Introduction: Miles L. Rubin" '52, Na­tional Direct Marketing Corporation,

ew York

Moderator: Nancy Hicks Maynard':" '87,The Tribune, Oakland, California

Summarizer: Edward D. Spurgeon"" '64,University of Utah, Salt Lake City

Penultimate Comments and State of theSchool Address: Paul Brest':" , Richard E.Lang Professor and Dean, Stanford LawSchool

Closing Comments: Kendyl K. Monroe""'60, Sullivan & Cromwell, New York

':" Member, 2010 Task Force

Fall 1991 STA FORD LAWYER 27

Lelt: Bruce Sattler'69and Sallie Kim '89.Below: (inco de Mayocelebrants

Garden. Though the date(May 3) was a bit early,the food and music weresabroso.

The Board's two-dayagenda concluded with adinner-dance at the Fac­ulty Club. Joining theVisitors were the mootcourt students and judges,most notably SupremeCourt Associate JusticeByron White.

Justice White, in after­dinner remarks, con­firmed the need forsearching inquiries such asthe 2010 project. "Thelaw schools of this coun­try are commanding prob­ably more than their fairshare of the extremely tal­ented people who gradu­ate from college," heobserved. This boon, thejustice declared, conferson law schools "a respon­sibility to use it wei!." 0

annual meeting. One wasthe Kirkwood MootCourt final competition­as always an impressivedisplay of mental agility(see page 30). The secondwas a Cinco de Mayocelebration in Crocker

Left: Gary Williams '76and Robert Garcia '78.Above: Roderick Hills '55.

CHANGE OF PACEThe Visitors enjoyed anumber of events in addi­tion to the official 2010proceedings. Lunch dur­ing the first day was takenwith second-year stu­dents, in small informalgroups designed to pro­mote easy interaction.Dinner that evening washosted by the Board itself,as a means of welcomingfirst-year students into thefellowship, privileges, andresponsibilities of mem­bership in the extendedStanford legal commu­nity. Judge Pamela AnnRymer '64 of the NinthCircuit Court of Appealswas the featured speaker(see page 29).

Two other studentevents were held in con­junction with the Board's

132

corned throughout themeeting, with the fourthand final session-theSummary and PlenaryDiscussion-being whollydevoted to input from theboard. This last sessionwas also informed by theDean's annual State of theSchool report.

Taken as a whole, theproceedings provided aninformative, intriguing,and insightful look intothe changing legal envi­ronment as it will affectnot only the lawyers oftomorrow but even thosenow well established inpractice. As NancyMaynard '87 observedduring the closing session:"Change is going to hap­pen. The question iswhether or not we will beready for it."

Credit for guiding thelong-range planningproject goes to the 2010Task Force, which in­cludes-in addition toDean Brest and KendylMonroe-Prof. JohnBarton '68, James Bass'87, Associate Dean EllenBorgersen, Roderick Hills'55, William F. KroenerIII '71, Richard Mallery'63, Nancy HicksMaynard '87, Miles L.Rubin '52, and Edward D.(Ned) Spurgeon '64.

28 STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991

First-year Dinner -------------------,

Rymer Provides Food for Thought

Judge Pamela Ann Rymer oftheU.S. Court ofAppeals for the NinthCircuit described the essence of"professionalism" to first-year stu­dents at a dinner given May 3 bythe Board of Visitors.

"I SUGGEST that what the pro-fession needs is a renewal of

personal professionalism. The val­ues that define our profession arethe one sure thing in changing times.Law firms come and go. Institutionschange character and composition.But the moral force that you bring to what you do isportable and immutable.

•What do I mean by personal professionalism?

First, to do everything with integrity. Second, to letthe accumulation of wealth be a happy, but inciden­tal consequence of the practice of law, never the prin­cipal objective. Third, to foster collegiality and totake seriously the role of officer of the court. Fourth,to maintain a sense of public duty. And fifth, to prac­tice so as always to have pride, tomorrow.

•Without integrity, nothing else matters. Our entire

system of justice is a search for truth-and truth de­pends on the integrity of every participant. Integritymeans honesty to the court, your clients, and yourconscience. That entails responsibility: the choice totake on a cause with merit, no matter what themoney involved-and the courage not to take on acause which has no merit, no matter what the moneyinvolved; to counsel this way, or that, having regardonly for what the law is or ought to be; and to bal­ance benefits against burdens-to litigate, to arbi­trate; to disclose, to conceal; to confront, tocompromise.

It requires perseverance and commitment, so thatamong competing priorities, devotion to the interestsof a client is paramount along with the public inter­est. And it requires perspective: to bring to eachproblem a broad-gauge understanding of the social,economic, political and philosophical context inwhich decisions are made.

Integrity means honor and civility as well: never tocut a corner or mis-cite a case, fudge a material fact,go back on your word, or take a position because youcan get away with it instead of because it is the right

and proper thing to do; always to behelpful, courteous, and professionalto the judge and the jury, and to beconsiderate of opposing counsel.Lack of civility does not win cases; itoften loses them.

To be honorable also means to putblinders on to matters that are, orought to be, extraneous: the law isnot, and must not be allowed to be, agame of pushing buttons that have todo with bias, or prejudice, inhuman­ity or insensitivity.

In court or out, integrity is thegreatest influence on reputation; and the reputationthat precedes and follows a lawyer is the single mostvaluable asset he or she can ever have.

•Integrity is one commodity that has no price. Yet

the economics of practice are staggering. Make nomistake: I am all for lawyers-even judges-makingmoney. But the profession will ultimately bottom outif the bottom line is the bottom line. Neither person­ally nor professionally should we allow the paperchase to become a "pecuniary chase."

•Equally important is our obligation to contribute.

As John Gardner put it: "Freedom and obligation,liberty and duty-that'S the deal. ... [I]t isn't in thegrand design that we can have freedom without obli­gation. Not for long." Law is inextricably affectedwith a public interest; to be a part of the profession isa privilege which comes from the state, and it is rightthat some measure of ourselves, our education andexperience be returned to the common good.

•Finally, it is necessary for tomorrow, to ask the

tough questions today: Are we doing enough to makethe legal process less of a maze, less of a morass, lessof a maddening experience for those who entrust tothe bench and bar their most serious problems? Arecourts too pricey for people of ordinary means? Arelawsuits too readily filed? Are the courts doing theirbest? Are other fora better? Do we-lawyers andjudges-serve the interests of the public in the fair,efficient and impartial administration of justice?

Whether you put professionalism into your pro­fession-that, ladies and gentlemen, is up to you." 0

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 29

Moot Court

Justices Nelson, White and Broussard, with competitors Levine andJustman {left} and Eaton and Meisel (right).

right law. The greatestemphasis in recent yearshas been in comparativelaw, particularly Euro­pean legal materials."There is a growing inter­est in the law of the Euro­pean Communities andthe new economic orderof 1992," Dickson notes."Our library is wellplaced to satisfy this inter­est, thanks to the supportand prescience of theFriends. "

The Friends organiza­tion was founded in 1959when the HonorableLouis E. Goodman,United States DistrictJudge for Northern Cali­fornia, invited a smallgroup of interested per­sons to join him in a ven­ture to strengthen andimprove the then-smallStanford Law Library. In­terestingly, the foundingmembers of the Friendsincluded a number ofpersons who were notStanford Law Schoolgraduates-a characteris­tic the group retains.

Judge Goodman waschosen to act as the firstChairman of the Friends,

Law Library

The UnderwritersSOMETIME during thisschool year, the RobertCrown Law Library ex­pects to acquire its350,000th book. Theidentity of that book isstill unknown. But onething is certain, says LawLibrarian Lance Dickson:"It will have been pur­chased with funds con­tributed by a remarkableassociation called TheFriends of the StanfordLaw Library."

The Friends is a quietgroup of behind-the­scenes library supporters.The organization has verylittle formal business. Allmembers pay dues (in oneof four categories of mem­bership), which are do­nated to the Law Libraryto develop its collections.Each added volume bearsa bookplate identifyingit as "Given by Friendsof the Stanford Law Li­brary." In the past sixyears alone, reports As­sociate Law LibrarianRosalee Long, more than5,000 new books werepurchased with contribu­tions from the Friends.

Friends funds havehelped build collections invarious fields, includingmaritime law and copy-

very challenging and in­teresting problem." And,one might add, current.The issues: random drugtesting of amateur athletesand prohibition of racistspeech on a campus.

The competitors ac­quitted themselves well,leading Justice Nelson tosay: "Stanford studentscontinue to be among themost outstanding in thenation. You all deservecredit for a truly superbjob."

Honors went to bothteams, with AnthonyJustman and RaleighLevine getting the awardfor best brief, while RobEaton and Ted Meiselwere declared the bestteam overall. Eaton wasalso the top oralist.(Asked later about his ex­ceptional composure andability to cite chapter andverse, Rob revealed thathe had spent eighteenmonths abroad as a Mor­mon missionary.) All fourwere in their final year oflaw school.

Pronouncing the per­formance of the partici­pants "very good, veryclose," Justice White con­cluded: "I'm just happy tobe here." 0

Kirkwood Finalists "Superb"

FOR THE THREE seasonedjurists, it was, perhaps,just another moot court.But for the four Stanfordfinalists, it was an unfor­gettable first: an appear­ance before a benchheaded by a member ofthe Supreme Court of theUnited States of America.

The High Court justicewas Hon. Byron R. White,whose 29 years of servicemake him a veteran ofboth the Warren andBurger eras. Joining himon the panel were twoother appeals court jus­tices: Hon. Allen E.Broussard of the SupremeCourt of California, andHon. Dorothy W. Nelsonof the U.S. Court ofAppeals for the NinthCircuit.

Their reason for en­couraging moot court ac­tivity was explained inpart by Justice White:"Oral argument makesjust enough difference justoften enough that wecan't afford to give it up."Noting that briefs oftenleave him with doubts toresolve, he said, "We useoral argument to help usfirm up our decision."

The Stanford hypo­thetical was, in JusticeBroussard's words, "a

30 STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991

Commencement 1991

Words to the Wise

assisted by an executivecommittee of Allan E.Charles '27, HermanPhleger, John A. Sutro,and Professor John HenryMerryman (as Secretary).Thirty years later, theFriends still include manyof the original founders.Sutro is the current Chair,while Charles and Merry­man currrently serve onthe executive committee,together with Richard J.Guggenhime, J. SterlingHutcheson '49, Stuart L.Kadison '48, and DavidVaughn (who recently re­placed Robert P. Hastings).

One of the treasures ofthe Law Library is a trulymagnificent folio editionof the Code de Napoleon.Printed on blue paper, it isone of only three suchcopies produced in Flo­rence by Molini, Landi in1809. The book-previ­ously part of the lateJudge Goodman's per­sonallibrary-was pre­sented in 1962 by Mrs.Goodman. The generosityof the Goodman familyhas continued to thepresent day with the par­ticipation of the founder'sdaughter, Mrs. DudleyBennett.

The Friends are not, ofcourse, the only benefac­tors of the Law Library,but their record of sup­port is impressive and sus­tained. "This is a groupwhich has had a vision oflibrary excellence formore than thirty years,"says Lance Dickson. "Theresults are real and tan­gible. The Friends are liter­ally in our good books." 0

Readers interested injoining the Friends of theStanford Law Libraryshould call or write toAnn Vogel, (415) 725­0198; Robert Crown LawLibrary, Stanford LawSchool, Stanford, CA94305-8610.

A RECORD 187 academicdegrees were granted in1990-91. Another recordwas set in commencementattendance, with 1,350well-wishers throngingthe lawn in front ofCrown Quad onJune 16to honor the degree recipi­ents and hear what thespeakers had to say.

Of the degrees con­ferred this past year, 179were the ].D. professionaldegree, 2 the advanced].S.M.,3 the doctoral].S.D., and 1 the M.L.S. (amaster's degree fornonlawyers). Nothing ifnot high achievers, theJ.D. graduates also tookwith them large numbersof honors, awards, andprizes (see pages 32-33).

The keynote speakerand winner of this year'sJohn Bingham HurlbutAward for excellence inteaching was Barbara H.Fried, an assistant profes­sor who has been teachingtax law since 1987. Shewas chosen for the honorby a vote of the graduat­ing class. "No reward forthis job could be sweeterthan this," said Fried, asshe accepted the award

from Class PresidentTimothy Fox.

Fried counseled thegraduates: "Life is shortand dear. Don't throw itaway on things that don'tmatter to you." Sheshared some wisdom thathad helped her at a signifi­cant decision point in herown life (when she left

"You have great

talents. Try to match

them with desire."

-Chinese cookie fortune

private practice for lawteaching). The source wassomewhat unorthodox­two Chinese fortunecookies-but the advicegood: "Make up yourmind what you want todo, and do it"; and "Youhave great talents. Try tomatch them with desire."

Fried went on to say:"Some parts of our liveswe choose; most partschoose us." The chal-

Barbara Fried, Hurlbut teachingaward winner.

lenge, she concluded, is"to take this life-eobbledtogether out of choice andnecessity-and make of ita life that matters."

Tim Fox, in a brief butmoving speech, told ofhow legal activism hadhelped improve theschooling available to hismentally disabled brother."Law is an incrediblypowerful tool to touchpeople's lives," Fox de­clared. "We have a tre­mendous opportunity tomake a difference. Let usaccept the responsibilityto use this opportunity."

In the final address ofthe ceremony, Dean Bresturged the departinggraduates to understandand support the commit­ment of Stanford andother institutions ofhigher learning to "creat­ing a nurturing environ­ment for a diverse studentbody and for the vigorousexploration of diverseideas."

His parting words: "Iwish you-and us-goodluck." 0

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 31

Commencement 1991

laurels to Graduating StudentsTop Lelt: The proces­

sional, lead by standardbearer Rhonda Reaves.

Above: Julie Matlof,William McCullough,

Alexandra McKay andThomas McLean,

in good order.Right: Dean Brest, withcongratulations for all.

Lower right: Lee Meiseland admirers.

Below: JoLani Hironakaand Lillie Hsu, in a

festive made.

The 18 new Coif mem­bers also graduated "withdistinction," an honorearned by a total of 47graduates for high aca­demic achievement duringtheir three years of lawschool.

Frank Baker BelcherAward for the best aca­demic work in evidence:William Glenn McCul­lough.

Hilmer Oehlmann, Jr.Prizes, for outstandingwork in the first-year Re­search and Legal WritingProgram: Kallman,Levine, Popov, Silverstein,Swanson, and Tarlton,plus Scott Applebaum,Abraham RubalcavaBrown, Gerald QuintonBrown, Philip JosephDeutch,James EdwinEarle, John AlexanderFandel, Timothy PatrickFox, Peter James Hama­saki, Anthony JohnJustman, Robert]' Klein,Thomas Patrick McLean,Bradley Peter Miller,Valerie Rae Park, DavidEnrico Reibel, JonathanHenry Sherman, Ethan S.Steinberg, and JeromeTheodore Will.

MEMBERS of the Class of1991 earned these honorsand awards:

Order of the Coif, the na­tiona I law honor society,to which were elected:Thornburgh and Feiner­man, plus Dan Levi Baga­tell, Michael James Dahl,Rob Eaton, Clark]. Fresh­man, H. Jay Kallman,Raleigh Hannah Levine,Alex Miller, Michael KevinMoyers, William J.Needle, Jay Pomerantz,Olga Popov, Peter Savich,Amy Lynn Silverstein, Ed­ward W. Swanson, Rose­mary Shea Tarlton, andMaria Tai Wolff.

Nathan Abbott Scholarfor the highest cumulativegrade point average in thegraduating class: JohnWinston Thornburgh,winner also of the First­and Second-Year Honorsfor the highest GPA ineach of his previous twoyears of law school.

Urban A. SontheimerThird-Year Honor, for thesecond-highest cumula­tive grade point average inthe class: Gary ScottFeinerman.

32 STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991

Steven M. Block Civil Lib­erties Award for distin­guished written work onissues relating to personalfreedom: Clark Freshman,first place; SusanElizabeth Holley,second place; PaulStephen Schmidtberger,third place.

Carl Mason Franklin Prizefor the best paper in inter­national law: john joseph

Moore,jr. (co-winner,1989-90).

Richard S. GoldsmithAward for the best re­search paper concerningdispute resolution: Ra­leigh Levine (1990-91)and Bradley RobertMozee (1989-90).

Olaus and Adolph MurieAward for the mostthoughtful written workin environmental law:Bradley Miller (first place)and Bradley Mozee (sec­ond place).

Board of Editors' Awardfor outstanding editorialcontributions to the Stan­ford Law Review: DanBagatell and MartinFrederick Hansen (1990­91); and jonathanSherman (1989-90).

Irving Hellman,Jr. Spe­cial Award for the out­standing student notepublished by the Review:Alexander EliasSilverman.

Jay M. Spears Award foroutstanding service to the

Top: The happy throng,01 fresco beforeGreen Library.Middle: James McPhail,savoring the moment.Bottom: Tim Fox, classpresident and spokesman.

Review during his secondyear of law school: JohnMoore.

United States Law WeekAward for outstandingservice to the Review:Dixie K. Koons Hieb.

Mr. and Mrs. Duncan L.Matteson, Sr. Awards, inthe 1991 Marion RiceKirkwood Moot Courtcompetition: Rob Eatonand Ted David Meisel asbest team. The MattesonAward for runner-upteam went to AnthonyJustman and RaleighLevine. (More on page30.)

Walter J. CummingsAwards, also in the MootCourt finals. For best oraladvocate: Eaton. For bestbrief: Justman and Levine.

R. Hunter Summers TrialPractice Award, presentedby officers of Sergeants-at­Law for outstanding stu­dent performance: BrianPaul Akers (1988-89).0

r311 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 33

Short Takes

Good Tidings (and Some News You Can Use)

ON THE MARKSTANFORD law Schoolwas the place to be onMonday, February 11,1991-at least if yourbusiness relates to the U.S.Securities and ExchangeCommission. For on thatday, just as the new SECregulations on insidertrading were released, oneof its leading drafters wasat Stanford to speak at aprofessional seminar onthe subject. Organized byAssociate Professor jo­seph Grundfest (a formerSEC commissioner), theevent was the first in thenation at which the impli­cations of the new regula­tions were explained.

The School's exquisitetiming was the result ofGrundfest's alertness todevelopments in Washing­ton, D.C. When the regscame down late the previ­ous week, Stanford­along with eleven SiliconValley firms recruited asco-sponsors-was readywith the full-day informa­tional program. SECCommissioner Edward H.Fleischman, the above­mentioned drafter, wasthe featured speaker. Rob­ert Singletary (SEC's act­ing regional administratorin San Francisco) andseveral knowledgeableattorneys from theparticipating firms com­pleted the program.

Designed for large in­vestors, officers in pub­licly traded corporations,and the attorneys, accoun­tants, and other profes­sionals who advise andcounsel them, the seminarattracted some 200 regis­trants from throughoutthe Bay Area legal andfinancial community. 0

34 STA FORD LAWYER Fall 1991

BUSINESS WORLDSTANFORD law School, ina move to add depth ofexperience to its programin law and business, hasenlisted a number ofseasoned attorneys to con­stitute a law and BusinessAdvisory Council. WalterL. Weisman '59 of losAngeles is the chair.

The purpose of the new

TOP PAPER-AGAINFOR THE THIRD consecu­tive year, the StanfordLaw Journal has beennamed in the nationalABA competition as thebest overall newspaper inits category (papers fromschools of 750 or fewerstudents). The Journalalso won three other1989/90 first-placeawards: two for featurearticles and one for an edi­torial cartoon.

The winning feature inthe category on internallaw school affairs waswritten by joan Krause(now 3l) about the lornaPrieta earthquake. Theother top feature won in

group, says Dean Brest, is"to provide the facultyand Dean with systematicfeedback on how theSchool's program in lawand business comportswith the real world of lawand business in which ourgraduates will practice,and to help us developideas for improving theprogram."

the category of substan­tive law. Written byWilliam Boyle '91, thearticle concerned discrimi­nation against homosexu­als in the military.

Peter Chadwick '90created the first-prize edi­torial cartoon on internallaw school affairs, as wellas placing second in thecategory for cartoons onbroader aspects of thelaw. (Readers may recallseeing Chadwick's win­ning cartoon from the pre­vious year's competition,in our Spring 1990 issue).

Other second- andthird-place prizes to the1989/90 Journal werewon for editorials and for

Marshall Small '51, DeaneJohnson'42 (speaking),G. Williams Rutherford '50,and Henry Wheeler 'SO wereamong the counselors at thefirst meeting of the Law andBusiness Advisory Council.

The foundation waslaid at the group's firstmeeting, March 1, withinformational talks by thechair of the School's lawand Business Program,Ronald Gilson, severalother law professors, andthe dean of the GraduateSchool of Business. TheCouncil plans to meetannually.o

an article by Krause, co­authored with lisaCuevas (3l), on the lateProfessor john Kaplan.

The editors of the win­ning volume were Car­mine Broccole, DavidVogel, and Carin Duryee.laurels also go to MattViola, whose sound busi­ness management kept thestudent paper in goodfinancial condition. Allfour graduated in june1991. 0

To advertise in or sub­scribe to the journal, call(415) 725-2569.

Tony West (3L)

LAW REVIEW PRESIDENTTHE MEMBERS of StanfordLaw Review have electedDerek Anthony (Tony)West as president. A 1987honors graduate of Har­vard, West has experiencein editing, publishing, andfiscal management. Hewas an editor last year ofthe Stanford Law & Po­licy Review, in addition tobeing an SLR member.And at Harvard, he waspublisher of the HarvardPolitical Review and chairof the Forum ProjectsCommittee of the Institute

of Politics atthe John F.Kennedy School of Gov­ernment.

West worked after col­lege in the Dukakis presi­dential campaign as chiefof staff to the treasurer, inthe campaign's Boston of­fice. Following the 1988election, he becamefinance director of theDemocratic Governors'Association in Washing­ton, D.C.

His comment, on be­coming head this spring ofthe law review: "I'm veryhonored and excitedabout the challenge. TheStanford Law Review is alaboratory from whichsome of the most provoca­tive ideas in legal scholar­ship are launched. Weshould continually lookfor new ways to bringthese emerging ideas tothe legal community." 0

Subscriptions to theReview are available at$30/year (6 issues). To or­der, call (415) 725-0181.

SEX, LAWS AND SCHOLARSHIP

NEWS is being made this fall with the publication of theinaugural issue of The Journal ofLaw, Gender &Sexual Orientation. The journal is remarkable for atleast two reasons. It is one of the first scholarly periodi­cals in this country jointly covering and linking legal is­sues of sex and sexual orientation. And, though itoriginates at Stanford, JLGSO is edited and publishedin conjunction with students of other law schools, par­ticularly Golden Gate and California Western. Also un­usual, though not unique, is the Journal's interest ininterdisciplinary approaches.

The Journal editors, seeking to encourage scholar­ship on the issues it addresses, are sponsoring a writingcompetition for students from any school or academicdiscipline, with three cash awards and publication asprizes. September 30, 1991, is the deadline for entries.Plans for future activities include a symposium on bi­sexuality and the law. 0

For a subscription to the forthcoming inaugural vol­ume (2 issues), call (415) 725-2569. Alumni/a: are alsoinvited to volunteer as editorial advisers, competitionjudges, or symposia planners.

LAW AND ECONOMICSSTANFORD'S interdiscipli­nary program in law andeconomics received a two­year renewal grant of$513,673 from the JohnM. Olin Foundation ofNew York. The pro­gram-named the JohnM. Olin Program in Lawand Economics followingthe foundation's initialgrant in 1987-is directedby A. Mitchell Polinsky,the School's JosephineScott Crocker Professor ofLaw and Economics.

Olin program activitiesinclude frequent seminars,"free lunch" discussionsfor students throughoutthe University, and a

working paper series. Inaddition, it has supporteda wide range of researchby students and faculty.Last October, the Pro­gram co-sponsored, withUC-Berkeley's law andeconomICs program, amajor conference on con­stitutionallaw and eco­nomics.D

Interested readers maycall Professor Polinskyor Barbara Adams, theOlin program's adminis­trative director, at (415)723-2575.

Hallahan: a new way to learn

CONTINUING EDUCATIONBY VIDEOCALIFORNIA'S ContinuingEducation of the Bar(CEB) has begun to makeavailable, for purchase orlease, the series of interac­tive video programs devel­oped at Stanford by

senior lecturer TimothyHallahan (Stanford Law­yer, Spring/Summer 1989,pp. 20-21). Under the title"LawQuest," the seriesteaches litigation skills toindividuals wherever and

Continued on next page

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 35

Faculty &Staff Noteswhenever a computer,videodisc player, andmonitor are available.The seven programs so farreleased deal with thefollowing subjects: inter­viewing, motion skills,rules of evidence (Califor­nia as well as federal),evidentiary foundations,direct and cross-examina­tion, opening statementsand closing argument, andlegal ethics. 0

Further information isavailable from CEB repre­sentatives. For NorthernCalifornia, call DeboraTempel, (415) 642-6642;for Southern California,Dave Simala (714) 964­6531.

STUDENT SCHOLARJAMIE A. GRODSKY (3L) isthe author of an article inthe Fall 1990 issue ofJurimetrics Journal, on thesubject "The Freedom ofInformation Act in theElectronic Age: The Stat­ute Is Not User Friendly."Grodsky, a former analystwith the U.S. Congress'sOffice of Technology As­sessment, concludes thatthe paper-oriented FOIAis not well adapted tocomputerized data andsuggests some amend­ments to the twenty-five­year-old statute. 0

36 STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991

Janet Cooper Alexanderearned national attentionfor a paper publishedin the February 1991Stanford Law Review(43:497). Based on em­pirical research, it is titled"Do the Merits Matter? AStudy of Settlements inSecurities Class Actions."Alexander found that­contrary to either com­mon assumptions oreconomic models-settle­ment outcomes did notapproximate expectedtrial outcomes, but in­stead were resolved re­gardless of the merits atan apparent "going rate."She gave invited lectureson the subject in April, forlaw and economics semi­nars at both Harvard andBerkeley, and was also apanelist in May for a fo­rum sponsored by theStanford Law and Busi­ness Society.

Earlier in the year,Alexander delivered "ATribute to JusticeThurgood Marshall" (forwhom she clerked in1979-80) at the Third An­nual Justice and Human­ity Award ceremony ofthe Legal Aid Society ofSan Diego. And in Octo­ber 1990, she spoke on thetopic "Women in theLaw: An Assessment andan Agenda" at a ScrippsCollege presidential sym­posIUm.

Barbara Allen Babcockcontinues to speak andwrite about the pioneeringwoman attorney who isthe subject of her historicbiography in progress. Ina May article, "ClaraShortridge Foltz: Consti­tution-maker" (IndianaLaw Review, Vol. 66),Babcock traced the originof the unprecedented sex-

discrimination clauses ofthe 1879 California con­stitution to the efforts ofthe Woman Suffragemovement and to Foltz'ssuit for admission toHastings School of Law.Foltz had been refused"on the sole ground thatshe was a woman," ex­plains Babcock. AlthoughFoltz eventually wonher suit in the CaliforniaSupreme Court afterHastings appealed an ini­tial decision in her favor,the long delay of litigationprevented her from com­pleting the course of in­struction. In June 1991,the Hastings faculty re­dressed this historicwrong by awarding Foltza posthumous LL.D.­bringing to a happy con­clusion a studentcampaign of rectifica-tion largely inspired byBabcock's research andwritings. Babcockreceived the degree onClara Foltz's behalf atthe Hastings graduationceremony.

John Barton has been ap­pointed to the NationalInstitute of Health's Re­combinant DNA AdvisoryCommittee. In addition,he is working with theStockholm EnvironmentInstitute to organize an in­ternational biotechnologyadvisory commission.Here at Stanford, heserves on the Administra­tive Panel for Human Sub­jects in Behavioral ScienceResearch.

William Baxter has beenparticipating in variousevents related to govern­ment controls of eco­nomic activity. Hepresented the closinganalysis for an ABA con-

ference titled "Competi­tion and Regulation­Compatible Bedfellows: ACompetitive Energy In­dustry," held in Washing­ton, D.C., and discussedantitrust issues at the Stan­ford Conference on HighTechnology Consortia.

Baxter, who is a formerchief of the U.S. JusticeDepartment's AntitrustDivision (1981-83), wasalso featured in the 60thAnniversary issue of Elec­tronics Magazine, wherehe gave an interview onthe impact of the AT&Tand IBM antitrust caseson the electronics indus­try. He continues to serveas counsel to New York'sShearman & Sterling, aswell as being an importantresource pro bono toStanford University's legalcounsel office.

Paul Brest received anhonorary doctorate(LL.D.) from SwarthmoreCollege during its com­mencement on June 3.The Pennsylvania schoolpraised the Stanford Deanas "a scholar and an inno­vative educator" who hasthroughout his career"shown a strong commit­ment to social service. "Brest, in his acceptancespeech, spoke of the needfor schools and universi­ties to be places wherestudents of diverse back­grounds feel free to dis­cuss and reconsider theirviews (the theme of sev­eral of his recent talks andwritings, including the"From the Dean" columnbeginning on page 2).

Frank Brucato, theSchool's Associate Deanfor Administration, hasbeen named chair of thefunding subcommittee of

the California State BarTask Force on Loan For­gIveness.

Tom Campbell-on leavesince his election in 1988to the U.S. Congress-wasa featured speaker at theSeptember 1990 Alum­ni/<£ Weekend (see page17). In March of this yearhe declared his candidacyfor the u.S. Senate seat be­ing vacated by CaliforniaDemocrat Alan Cranston.Campbell, a Republican,is running on a platformof "New Conservatism,"which he defines as em­bracing fiscal austerity,environmental conserva­tion, and women's right tochoose an abortion.

Mauro Cappelletti deliv­ered lectures in Brazil andMexico last fall that arebeing prepared for publi­cation in book form inPortuguese and Spanish.Another book, Le Pouvoirdes Juges, was released inlate 1990 by PressesUniversitaires d'Aix­Marseille and Economicain Paris. Recent articles bythe multilingual professorinclude an Italian worktranslatable as "New Is­sues in Constitutional Ad­judication."

Cappelletti is servinganother three-year termon the International Asso­ciation of Legal Science'sboard of directors, towhich he has been re­elected by the national as­sociations of twenty-fivemember countries. He hasalso been appointed "Aca­demic Consultant" to theInstitute of ComparativeLaw inJapan.

William Cohen has had anumber of articles pub­lished over the past year.The former William O.Douglas clerk contributed"Commentary: Douglasas Civil Libertarian" to a

volume on the legacy ofthe late Supreme Courtjustice, He Shall Not PassThis Way Again (1990),edited by Stephen L.Wasby. Cohen's "StateLaw in Equality Clothing:A Comment on AlleghenyPittsburgh Coal Co. v.County Commission" ap­peared in the November1990 UCLA Law Review(38:87). Three otherCohen pieces-"Eco­nomic Due Process,""Economic Equal Protec­tion," and "CongressionalEnforcement of the 14thAmendment"-were writ­ten for the supplement tothe Encyclopedia of Con­stitutional Law. And asixth work, "RationalityReview of Tort ReformLegislation Under StateConstitutions: JusticeLinde's Methodology ofJudicial Review," is inpress at the Oregon LawReview.

Lance Dickson was amember this past year ofthe AALS and ABA jointsite evaluation team to theUniversity of ChicagoLaw School. He alsoserved as library consult­ant to the Consortium forService to Latin America,in a proposal to establishan International Instituteof Justice.

A survey article byDickson on the develop­ment of law libraries inthe 1990s appeared in thejournal of the British andIrish Association of LawLibrarians. A longer ver­sion of the report wasoriginally presented at ameeting of the Associationin Oxford, England.Dickson and co-editorWin-Shin Chiang havealso completed the 12thannual edition of their Le­gal Bibliography Index.

Sally Dickson, theSchool's Associate Dean

for Student Affairs, is de­veloping a course, Crimi­nality and SubordinatedCommunities, for theSpring 1992 term. TheIrvine Foundation hasgiven her a grant for theundertaking. A criminallaw teacher for some 15years (most recently atGolden Gate University),Dickson looks forward tospending some time againin the classroom.

Dickson is also princi­pal investigator for theStanford Upward BoundProgram and a currentmember of the boards ofthe East Palo Alto Com­munity Law Project andthe Santa Clara Bar As­sociation's Public InterestLaw Foundation.

Albert Elsen, the art pro­fessor who co-teaches theSchool's course in Art andthe Law, shared a podiumon April 27 with QueenBeatrix of the Nether­lands. Elsen was there togive an address, "Rodinand the Torso in ModernSculpture," at the openingof an exhibition, TheTorso, at the DordrechtMuseum. The Frenchsculptor was also the sub­ject of a May 2 speech,"Rodin's Vision: ASculptor's Mentality andModernity," which Elsengave for the first HenryMoore Lecture at theUniversity of Leeds inEngland.

John Hart Ely received anhonorary doctorate fromthe Illinois Institute ofTechnology Chicago­Kent Law School at itscommencement on June 9.The previous fall, he spentfour days as the school'sCentennial Visitor. TheChicago-Kent LL.D.(hon.) is his second suchdegree; the first was con­ferred in 1988 by the Uni­versity of San Diego. Ely

also had the honor thisJune of being elected tothe influential Council onForeign Relations.

The former Dean isfocusing his current re­search and writing on warand the Constitution. No­table publications includetwo articles in StanfordLaw Review on the''American War inIndochina." Part I(42:877-926, April 1990)carried the subtitle "The(Troubled) Constitution­ality of the War TheyTold Us About"-Viet­nam-while Part II(42:1093-1148, May1990) dealt with "The Un­constitutionality of theWar They Didn't Tell UsAbout"-Laos and Cam­bodia. He also spoke onthe subject at the June 23Stanford Centennial Vol­unteer Conference in LosAngeles.

With events in the Per­sian Gulf giving new rele­vance to the issue, Elybecame a cosignator ofthe amicus curi<£ brieffiled November 26,1990,in the case of Dellums v.Bush, arguing that theConstitution requiredcongressional authoriza­tion before the Presidentsent armed forces into Ku­wait or Iraq; wrote an oped piece, "Perspective onthe Persian Gulf: 'War byDefault' Isn't the Law,"for the December 23 LosAngeles Times; and spokein this vein on January 18to the law faculty of theUniversity of San Diego.A related scholarly article,"Kuwait, the Constitutionand the Courts: TwoCheers for Judge Greene,"appeared in Constitu­tional Commentary(8:2901) this summer.

Ely has also been re­ceiving considerableattention for his past writ­ings on domestic aspectsof the Constitution. The

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 37

book for which he re­ceived the 1982 TriennialAward of the Order of theCoif-Democracy andDistrust-was the subjectof a seven-paper sympo­sium in the May 1991 Vir­ginia Law Review. (Elyhimself is the author of"Another Such Victory:Constitutional Theoryand Practice in a WorldWhere Courts Are NoDifferent from Legisla­tures" in that same issue.)

Two of Ely's early ar­ticles-a critique of Roe v.Wade and what he calls"my tome on legislativemotivation"-have be­come the third and fifthmost frequently cited ar­ticles in the history of theYale Law Journal. Thisfact was observed in theJournal's lOath anniver­sary issue with retrospec­tive comments-in Ely'scase, characteristically ir­reverent-by authors ofthe leading fifteen.

For good measure, Elyalso published "AnotherSpin on Allegheny Pitts­burgh," a comment on theconstitutionality of vari­ous real estate taxationschemes, in the October1990 UCLA Law Review.

Lecturers Randee Fennerand Lisa Pearson taught acourse entitled Introduc­tion to ConstitutionalDecisionmaking and theSupreme Court, for theFall 1990 session of theStanford ContinuingStudies Program. The twohave been co-advisers forseveral years of theKirkwood Moot CourtProgram.

Barbara Fried is the win­nerofthe1991JohnBingham Hurlbut Awardfor excellence in teaching(see page 31).

Ronald Gilson recentlylectured on "Corporate

38 STANFORD LAWYER Fall1991

Governance" at theWharton Conference onInvestment Management,and "The Interaction ofPolitics and Markets" at aBrookings InstitutionConference on Takeovers,LBOs, and Changing Cor­porate Forms. During the1991-92 academic year,he will serve as the HenleyProfessor of Law andBusiness at Columbia LawSchool and ColumbiaGraduate School of Busi­ness.

Paul Goldstein-author ofthe article beginning onpage 4-recently saw thepublication by Little,Brown of the first twosupplements to his three­volume treatise, Copy­right: Principles, Law andPractice. He served thispast March as GeneralReporter for a three-daysymposium sponsored bythe World IntellectualProperty Organizationand held at Stanford. Thefirst such symposium heldoutside WIPO's head­quarters in Geneva, it fo­cused on the IntellectualProperty Aspects of Artifi­cial Intelligence.

This spring Goldsteinalso delivered two namedlectures: the Donald C.Brace Memorial Lectureat Columbia University inNew York City; and theBrendan Brown Lecture atCatholic University LawSchool in Washington,D.C. Other invited talks(all on copyright law)were presented to law­yers, business executives,law librarians, andpolicymakers in Chicago,Los Angeles, Tokyo,Washington, D.C., NewYork City, and New Or­leans. Goldstein has (hesays) "taken a vow of si­lence for the next severalmonths."

Robert W. Gordon trav­eled to Moscow inJune1990 to deliver a talk, "Al­ternative Forms of Corpo­rate Organization inPost-Socialist Societies,"to the USSR College ofAdvocates. He was in AnnArbor, Michigan, in Octo­ber to present a paper,"Legal History as Stabi­lizer and Social Critic," ata conference at the Uni­versity of Michigan onThe Turn to History in theHuman Sciences. April1991 found him in Ithaca,New York, giving theFrank Irvine Lecture atCornell Law School. Hissubject: "Law Schools asPolicy Schools."

During the Stanfordwinter quarter, he alsotaught-in addition to hisregular law school teach­ing-an undergraduatecourse with third-yearlaw student JonathanSherman on Freedom ofExpression and the FirstAmendment.

William B. Gould IVspent the summer in SouthAfrica as a Fulbright Lec­turer at the University ofWitwatersrand Law Fac­ulty in Johannesburg.During the previousmonths he gave a speech,"The Struggle AgainstDiscrimination in the Le­gal System of the UnitedStates: The Evolution ofLegislation," at a confer­ence in Seville, Spain, onIndustrial Relations:Trends and Priorities inHungary, Poland, and[what was then] East andWest Berlin. He alsospoke at a conference onComparative Labor Law,at the Japan Institute ofLabor in Tokyo; pre­sented a paper, "Job Secu­rity Law and Practice inthe United States," at aconference on New Direc­tions in Worker Manage­ment Relations: Soviet

and United States Perspec­tives, in Moscow; and'de­livered two lectures atArizona State Universityin Tempe on "The Futureof Unions."

Gould's book, APrimer on American La­bor Law, appeared in aSpanish edition thisspring, with a Chinese edi­tion in work for this fall.Something of an interna­tional classic, the bookhas already been pub­lished in German andJapanese.

Henry T. (Hank) Greelyreports giving a number oftalks lately, of which fourstand out: "Withdrawaland Withholding of LifeSupport in Adults: BeyondCruzan," at an October1990 symposium of theStanford University Cen­ter for Biomedical Ethics;"Discrimination on theBasis of Genotype," at aJanuary 1991 StanfordCentennial symposium;"California Approval ofRU 486-State and Fed­eral Legal Issues," at aFebruary conference co­sponsored by the Stanfordand UCSF medical schooldepartments of obstetricsand gynecology; and "Is­sues in Implementing aBasic Benefit PlanThrough Clinical Guide­lines," at an April confer­ence sponsored by theCalifornia Public Em­ployee Retirement System.

Thomas C. Grey had anew book, The WallaceStevens Case: Law and thePractice ofPoetry, pub­lished by Harvard Univer­sity Press this June. Theprofessor continues to bein demand as an analyst ofthe issues surroundinghate speech on campus.He participated in a tele­vised Fred Friendly sym­posium on the subject inApril, and a First Amend-

ment symposium at the corporate governance and has served as its director Miguel A. Mendez is backUniversity of Virginia in the application of modern (on a pro bono basis) on campus after a stint asMay. His comments at a finance theory to legal since 1982. visiting professor at theFederalist Society meeting proceedings. University of San Diegoat Stanford were pub- Last but not least, a J. Myron Jacobstein, the School of Law.lished under the title "Dis- teaching honor: In May, School's Librarian Emeri-criminatory Harassment the Associated Students of tus, has an article with an John Henry Merryman,and Free Speech" in the Stanford University voted intriguing title-"Con- the School's Sweitzer Pro-Winter 1991 Harvard Grundfest the best "large gressional Intent and Leg- fessor Emeritus, received aJournal of Law & Public class professor" in the cat- islative Histories: Analysis rare tribute last year: aPolicy (14:1). egory for graduate profes- or Psychoanalysis?"-in festschrift. Titled Com-

sional schools (business, the Law Library Journal parative and Private Inter-Joseph A. Grundfest deliv- medicine, and law com- (82:297). With co-author national Law: Essays inered the keynote address bined). R. M. Mersky of the Uni- Honor ofJohn Henryentitled "Just Vote No" versity of Texas, he has Merryman on his Seventi-to the Council of Institu- Gerald Gunther has spent also produced a fifth edi- eth Birthday, the volumetional Investors, at their much of the past year tion of their now-classic contains 26 articles byannual meeting last No- writing the twelfth edition Fundamentals ofLegal scholars, some of themvember. His message: of his cornerstone book, Research. former students, from"Stockholders can influ- Constitutional Law. He thirteen countries on fourence corporate decisions, also prepared a paper for Mark Kelman presented continents. "Professoreven in the absence of a major conference at the Dunwody Lecture at Merryman is one of histakeovers and proxy con- New York Law School in the University of Florida generation's great com-tests, by casting a 'vote of April, assessing the work Law School, in March. parative law scholars,"no confidence' in an of the late Supreme Court His subject: "Emerging says David S. Clark, theincumbent board of Justice John Marshall Centrist Liberalism." University of Tulsa lawdirectors, even when it Harlan. His biggest cur- Later that month, at professor who edited thestands for reelection un- rent project is editing the George Washington Uni- volume. "For over 30opposed." basic manuscript (com- versity, he raised the pro- years he has, through his

Recent publications pleted in August 1990) of vocative question- teaching and his writings,from the former SEC com- his forthcoming biogra- "Antidiscrimination and widely influenced this fieldmissioner include "Inter- phy of Judge Learned Antimaterialism: Can in Europe, Latin Americanationalization of the Hand. Feminists Evade the Cri- and Asia." The festschriftWorld's Securities Mar- Professor Gunther has tique of Socialism?"-in a was presented to Profes-kets: Economic Causes once again made the Na- faculty seminar and public sor Merryman August 19,and Regulatory Conse- tional Law Journal list of address. 1990, in Montreal duringquences" (journal ofFi- the 100 "most influential Also this year, Kelman the annual meeting of thenancial Services Research, lawyers in America." had an article published in American Academy ofFall 1990), "The Subordi- The citation (March 25, the Harvard Law Review Foreign Law, of which henation of American Capi- 1991) noted, among other (104:1157), titled "Con- is president.tal" (journal ofFinancial things, that Gunther "has cepts of Discrimination in Merryman has also re-Economics, September become politically active 'General Ability' Job Test- cently traveled to Mexico1990), "Catch-22 Time" again," specifically in re- ing." City, to lecture on cultural(Mergers and Acquisition gard to the proposed property at the UniversityLaw Reporter, February national flag-burning sta- Charles R. Lawrence III of Mexico, and to Scot-1991), and "When Mar- tute (which he opposed) spent the past year deep in land, for an Internationalkets Crash: The Conse- and the issue of presiden- research and writing as a Bar Association meetingquences of Information tial war powers (which Fellow of the Center for in Glasgow. Though offi-Failure in the Market for he considers to be consti- the Study of Behavioral cially emeritus since 1986,Liquidity" (chapter in Re- tutionally limited). Sciences. He is serving he has continued to co-ducing the Risk ofEco- during 1991-92 as a visit- teach Art and the Lawnomic Crisis, a National Bill Ong Hing received a ing professor at the and, resuming in 1991-Bureau of Economic Re- special award last Decem- University of Southern 92, the broad subject forsearch volume edited by ber from the Immigrant California. which he was so impres-Martin Feldstein). Legal Resource Center, a sively celebrated by his

Grundfest is one of just San Francisco-based Gerald P. Lopez, in addi- festschrift colleagues:five public policy experts group that provides train- tion to his teaching activi- Comparative Law.nationwide to receive a ing and consultation state- ties, has been serving onJohn M. Olin Faculty Fel- wide to community the Stanford University Robert Mnookin waslowship for the 1991-92 agencies serving immi- Provost's Special Commit- away last year as a visitingyear. He plans to devote grants and refugees. Hing tee on Faculty Recruit- professor at Harvard. Be-the year to research on founded the center and ment and Retention. fore heading East, how-

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 39

ever, he delivered an in­vited lecture in Los Ange­les at the June 23 StanfordCentennial VolunteerConference. His topic: thework of the Stanford Cen­ter on Conflict and Nego­tiation, which he directs.

A. Mitchell Polinsky lec­tured in April at bothUCLA and Harvard onthe subject, "Decoup-ling Liability: OptimalIncentives for Care andLitigation." In May heparticipated in the Ameri­can Law and EconomicsAssociation's first annualmeeting and was electedsecretary-treasurer of theorganization. Also duringthe meeting, he chaired asession on the Economicsof Enforcement and pre­sented a paper (coau­thored with Steven Shavellof Harvard) on the ques­tion, "Should Employeesbe Subject to Fines andImprisonment Given theExistence of Corporate Li­ability?" In June, Polinskypublished (also withShavell) "A Note on Opti­mal Fines When WealthVaries Among Individu­als," in the American Eco­nomic Review.

Robert Rabin co-directedan interdisciplinary fac­ulty seminar and researchproject during the springsemester on tobacco liti­gation and regulation. Healso recently gave a talk atthe annual meeting ofAFL-CIO lawyers, on cur­rent asbestos litigation.Rabin continues his work,involving a number ofpresentations to lawyers'groups, on the AmericanLaw Institute tort reformstudy.

Deborah Rhode is the au­thor of three recently pub­lished articles: "TheNo-Problem Problem:Feminist Challenges and

40 STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1991

Cultural Change," in theYale Law Review; "TheDelivery of Legal Ser­vices by Non-Lawyers,"in the Georgetown Jour­nal of Legal Ethics; and"Women's Rights andSocial Wrongs," in theHarvard Journal ofLawand Public Policy. Her re­cent presentations include"Feminism in the 1990s:Bridging the Gap BetweenTheory and Practice,"given at an event cospon­sored by the Yale Womenof Color Collective andthe Yale Journal ofLawand Feminism.

Prof. Rhode was alsothe guest of honor at thefirst Deborah L. RhodeAnnual Lecture, presentedMay 21 by Stanford's In­stitute for Research onWomen and Gender. Thelectureship recognizeswomen and men whohave made "significantcontributions to the statusof women through theirscholarship," with the firstRhode Lecturer beingUC-Berkeley professorEvelyn Fox Keller. Hon­oree Rhode's own consid­erable contributionsinclude two books-Jus­tice and Gender (Harvard,1989) and TheoreticalPerspectives on SexualDifference (editor; Yale,1990)-and service as theimmediate past director(1986-90) of the Institute.

Kenneth E. Scott, thoughon sabbatical last spring,continued to do his bit forthe University by chairingthe Stanford JudicialCouncil. His article on thesavings and loan bailout,"Never Again," was re­cently republished in arevised edition by theHoover Institution Press.

Byron Sher has opted foremeritus status after some35 years of Stanfordteaching. Happily, he is

continuing in public ser­vice where, as a Californiaassemblyman for the pastdecade, he has brought hislegal expertise to bear onsuch issues as consumerrights, prison reform, andenvironmental protection.

William Simon has beenworking on a variety oftopics related to the legalsituation of workers in thebusiness enterprise. InJune he crossed theAtlantic to give a talk on"Worker Ownership" atthe Law and Society Asso­ciation meeting in Am­sterdam, and on "PensionFund Socialism" at a con­ference on CorporateGovernance at the Univer­sity of Warwick.

Simon is currently de­veloping a new unit on"workers as stakeholdersin the firm" for the intro­ductory Business Associ­ations course. Last year(1990-91) he introducedan advanced course de­voted to this theme, calledLabor and Capital. A re­lated article, "Social­Republican Property," isscheduled to appear in theAugust UCLA LawReview.

Barton H. (Buzz) Thomp­son is celebrating the pub­lication this summer of hiscasebook, Legal Controlof Water Resources (WestPublishing, 1991). JosephSax of Boalt Hall andRobert Abrams ('71) ofWayne State are the coau­thors. Thompson also hasan article, "Judicial Tak­ings," in the November1990 Virginia Law Re­view (76:1449).

His recent appearancesinclude a lecture on nego­tiation and court-super­vised settlements, at aconference of the Associ­ation of Business TrialLawyers, in Hawaii lastOctober. That same

month, he presented com­ments on the constitu­tional takings protectionsat a conference, Constitu­tional Law and Econom­ics, sponsored by theStanford Law and Eco­nomics program. And inMarch, he gave a presen­tation-"Interstate Trans­fers: Sporhase, Compacts,and Free Markets"-at aTucson, Arizona, confer­ence on Western WaterLaw in the Age of Reallo­cation, sponsored by theAmerican Law Instituteand the American BarAssociation.

Thompson is currentlypart of an interdiscipli­nary research team atStanford that is looking atthe economic effects of re­allocating water in Cali­fornia.

Robert Weisberg gave alecture at Amherst Collegelast December provoca­tively titled "Private Vio­lence as Moral Action:The Law as Inspirationand Example." Askedto explain, he replied:"Much crime, rather thanoffering a moral counter­claim to society's vision ofthe good, is a directly par­allel and purportedlysupplementary form ofmoral claiming and in­deed law enforcement.Some of the most appar­ently irrational and patho­logical criminals viewthemselves sincerely (ifunjustifiably) as executorsof the moral law and pre­servers of the social order-as ordained assignersof collective blame andprophets of collectivemeaning."

Weisberg's biggestpublishing event is the ap­pearance in February ofthe second edition of hisdurable volume with JohnKaplan, Criminal Law:Cases and Materials(Little, Brown, 1991).

James Whitman deliveredpapers at the AmericanSociety for Legal Historymeeting in October; atHarvard Law School inFebruary; and at the Sec­ond International Confer-

FROM THE DEANContinued from page 3

ence on Continental Influ­ences on Anglo-AmericanLaw in the 19th Century,held in January inLancaster, England. Healso co-taught a seminarat Boalt Hall last year on

JUSTICE O'CONNORContinued from page 23

the Law of Feudalism.Whitman holds a doctor­ate in history in additionto a law degree (J.D.).

Howard Williams, Para­dise Professor emeritus, is

preparing a new editionand supplement to Oiland Gas Law, his mag­num opus with Charles J.Meyers. He also continuesto consult and testify inthe field. D

cannot freely advance, experimentwith, consider, reject, and reconsidertheir views about the social and po­litical issues that divide the nation.

On retiring as the president ofPrinceton University in 1972, RobertGoheen wrote: "If an utter strangerto our civilization should ask, 'Wherein your society can a person disagreewith impunity from accepted prac­tices, dogmas, and doctrines?' theanswer should be, 'The universities.That is part of their being.... [T]heyare committed to freedom for the in­dividual, the dignity of the humanperson, and tolerance toward dissentwithin broad ... limits.'"

The challenge that faces us twentyyears later is to articulate an encom­passing vision that honors Lisa's andJeff's freedom and their personal dig­nity. The challenge is to create an en­vironment where they can argue witheach other and teach and learn fromone another. Because the intellectualstakes are so high, we must lower thepersonal dangers. This means that Lisaand Jeff must learn to trust one an­other. And that requires the school toearn their trust as an institutiongenuinely concerned with the needs ofboth.

You know firsthand from the pastthree years at Stanford how challeng­ing the task is. I truly believe it is pos­sible, however-and I know it isessential.

Although you are done with schoolfor now, you will continue to be in­volved with institutions of highereducation as trustees, alumni, parents,and some of you, I hope, as facultymembers. Wherever you will spend thecoming years, you will face similar is­sues in your workplace and commu­nity. I invite you to help develop andpursue a vision of higher education,and ofour society at large, where bothLisa and Jeff can flourish. D

•E.B. White said that democracy is

based on the recurrent suspicion thatmore than half of the people are rightmore than half of the time. In thenarrow view, the Supreme Court isbased on the suspicion that five Jus­tices are similarly correct. In thebroader view, I think the Justices docontribute, in a sense, to the wider de­mocracy. We struggle with nationalissues and we try to define from a na­tional perspective what it is that thefederal laws and the Constitution say.

If you don't agree with all theCourt's holdings you are certainly notalone, but I think you can be confidentthat the members of the Court neverstop trying in our writings on each caseto contribute appropriately to thefragile balances of our national re­public.

•I will leave you with one final hy­

pothetical. On March 12, 1930, justa few days before my birth-while thefight over the nomination of CharlesEvans Hughes was ongoing in theSenate and as President Hoover con­sidered a nominee to replace JusticeSanford-an editorial appeared in theChristian Science Monitor entitled, "AWoman on the Supreme Bench?" Itbegan with the following words ofwisdom: "In all the lists of eminentjurists thus far suggested for the vacantplace on the Supreme Court there hasbeen a missing element. Not once hasany newspaper or individual com­mentator mentioned the name of awoman. We suggest that the time hascome when the presence of a womanjurist upon the supreme bench must berecognized as an altogether normaland likely event."

What if President Hoover had a

subscription to the Monitor and foundits editorial persuasive? We will neverknow.

•I am deeply appreciative of this

award that I have received tonight[September 22]. Stanford and Stan­ford Law School have provided mewith the background to carve out acareer in the legal profession. WhenI enrolled in law school, I certainlyhad no preconceived ideas aboutwhere that might lead. Never for amoment did I think it would lead toa seat on the nation's highest court norto the very wonderful award whichyou have just bestowed on me. Butthe start was right here, and my heartstill is; and I thank you from thebottom of it for letting me have thisweekend with you. D

Excerpted from Justice O'Con­nor's talk with students, September21,1990, and from her address at theAlumni/ce Banquet, September 22.

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 41

94 STANFORD LAWYER Fall1991

Top: The New YorkCity reception.

Right: Moster ofceremonies Kendyl

Monroe '60.Below: Abicoastal

group includingPeter Cannon '82

and John Gilliland.

ACTIVITIES for graduates of theSchool continued in full swing

these past months. On November 1,New York City alums got together fora twilight reception at the elegantCrystal Pavilion in Manhattan. DeanPaul Brest was on hand for the affair,as were Development officers JohnGilliland and Elizabeth Lucchesi.Kendyl Monroe '60, who had chosenthe location, provided welcoming re­marks, and the Dean gave an updateon the School. That ended the formalprogram, but not the party, which­thanks to the fine setting, live pianomusic, and good company-lastedwell into the evening.

The Stanford Law Society ofSouthern California met on Novem­ber 19 for a Century City lunch atJade West in the ABC EntertainmentCenter. Professor Hank Greely, thefeatured speaker, discussed healthlaw and doctor-lawyer relations.

On December 6, the San Fran­cisco Law Society held a luncheon forBay Area graduates. The event tookplace at the lofty Bankers' Cluh. As­sociate Professor Joseph Grundfest'78 gave a talk-"The S&L Crisis: Arethe Banks Next?"-that inspiredmany comments and questions fromthe audience.

The following month, Dean Bresttraveled to Washington, DC. for theannual meeting of the AmericanAssociation of Law Schools. TheStanford Law reception on January 5at the Washington Hilton was wellattended. Held yearly in conjunctionwith the AALS meetings, the eventbrings together the widespread mem­bers of the School's academic family,that is, Stanford Law School profes­sors (present and former) and Stanfordlaw graduates who have themselvesentered teaching.

The Stanford Law Society ofSouthern California reconvened on

Top: San Franciscoluncheon with ProfessorJoseph Grundfest '78at the podium.Center: AngelenosTerry Hughes '84,Debra Roth '81,Bill Weinberger '81,and Doug Post '78 atthe Century City lunch.Left: Prof. Hank Greely,the L.A. speaker.

March 8 at its traditional Los Angeleslocale, The Dragon, for the annualluncheon honoring graduates recentlyadmitted to the California Bar. Presi­dent Frank Melton '80 introducedProfessor Deborah Rhode, who gavea talk entitled "The 'No Problem'Problem: Gender and Law."

Alums in the Seattle area gath­ered for a reception on April 9 at theSheraton Seattle. Paul Brest flew upto report on School doings. The Deanwas introduced hy the indispensahleGeorge Willoughby '58.

The inaugural luncheon of the SanJose Law Society was held on May 22at the Silicon Valley Fairmont Hotel.Dean Brest was there to welcome lo­cal graduates and celebrate the estab­lishment of an alumni/a: group in theburgeoning high-tech community."Stanford Law School now has a pres­ence in the South Bay," the Dean de­clared. Richard Wylie '58 presidedover the landmark affair, which fea­tured a talk by Judge James Ware '72of the u.s. District Court in San Jose(see page 71). Ware's topic: "A NewDefinition of Thinking like a Law­yer." Credit is due Anthony (Tony)Anastasi '40 for helping to launchthe new law society and serving asits first president. Interested alumsare encouraged to call him at(408) 294-9700 or Margie Savoyeof the School's Alumni/a: Relationsoffice at (415) 723-2730.

Closing the season, the Washing­ton, D.C. Law Society met on June 26for a wine tasting on Capitol Hill.Former Associate Dean JackFriedenthal, currently Dean of theGeorge Washington University LawCenter, was on hand to talk with al­ums. Many thanks to Neil Golden '73for all his hard work as president, anda warm welcome to his successor,Anne Bingaman '68. n

Fall 1991 STANFORD LAWYER 95

TORT THOUGHT

White House FellowshipsPROFESSOR RABIN, in "ThinkingAbout Tort Law" (Fall 1990),Joesn't mention punitive damagesawarded in tort cases. I suggest thatany reform of tort litigation providethat punitive damages, like fines ina criminal case, be made payable tothe state and not to the plaintiff.Money extracted from :m offendingdefendant to teach him and others alesson should benefit society ingeneral, rather than be the basis ofpersonal enrichment to an indivi­dual plaintiff.

William Knapp '39Greenhrae, California

Robert Rabin replies: There is astrong argument for having a por­tion of any punitive Jamage awardset aside for public purposes. How­ever, some portion of the awardprobably must go to the plaintiff ifthere is to be an incentive to seckthe damages in the first place.

Readers are encouraged to com­ment on and critique the contentsof this magazine. Letters selectedfor publication may be edited forlength. Published or not. all com­munications will be read with inter­est. Please direct letters to: Editur,Stunford Lawyer, Stanford LawSchuul, Stanford. CA 94.105-86 W.

The Fellowship Program

The White House Fellowshipprogram is heginning itstwenty-seventh year and isJesigned to provide gifted andhighly motivated Americansfirsthand experience in theprocess of personal involve­ment in the leadership of theirsociety.

Who Is Eligible

U.S. citizens are eligihle toapply during the early anJformative years of their careers.There are no basic educationalrequirements and no specialcareer or professional catego­ries. Employees of the FederalGovernment are not eligible,with the exception of careermilitary personnel of theArmed Services. The commis­sion seeks candidates ofdemonstrated excellence intheir professional roles as wellas significant breadth ofinterests and communityinvolvement.

What Fellows Do

During their one-year assign­ments in Washington, Fellowsserve as special assistants toCabinet secretaries, or seniormembers of the White Housestaff. Additionally, Fellowsparticipate in an extensiveeducation program indudingseminars with top governmentofficials, leading scholars,journalists anJ private sectorleaJers.

How to Apply

Application forms and addi­tional information can beobtained from:

President's Commission onWhite House Fellowships

712 Jackson Place N.W.Washington, D.C. 20503

(202) 395-4522

The application deadline isDecember 15.

96 STANFORD LAWYER Fall 1990

PUBLIC SEAVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

Thank You

The students, staff, and board of the

East Palo AltoCommunity Law Project

gratefully acknowledgethe generous financial support':- of

the following law firms and organizations

Brobeck, Phleger & HarrisonCooley Godward Castro Huddleson & Tatum

Heller, Ehrman, White & McAuliffeMorrison & Foerster

Palo Alto Area Bar AssociationTownsend and Townsend

Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati

*Donations of $2,000 or more in the past year.

East Palo Alto Community Law Project1395 Bay Road

East Palo Alto, CA 94303Telephone: 415/853-1600

PUBliC SERVICE ADVERTISEMENT

1991

1992

September 16

September 26-28

May 7-8

California State Bar annual meetingStanford Law School luncheon12:30 PM, Anaheim HiltonIn Anaheim, California

Alumni/x Weekend 1991With reunions for the Half-Century Cluband Classes of 1941,1951,1956,1961,1966, 1971, 1976, 1981, and 1986At Stanford

Board of Visitors annual meetingAt Stanford

For information on these and other events, callMargery Savoye, Alumni/x Relations, 415/723-2730

STANFORD UNIVERSITYStanford Law SchoolStanford, CA 94305-8610

Nonprofit OrganizationU.S. PostagePAIDStanford UniversityPermit No. 28