Archived Faculty News
We, the undersigned law deans, are appalled by the January 11, 2007 statement of Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Charles "Cully" Stimson, criticizing law firms for their pro bono representation of suspected terrorist detainees and encouraging corporate executives to force these law firms to choose between their pro bono and paying clients.Link: http://www.law.yale.edu/news/4055.htm
CORPORATE boards remain, for the most part, clubby and male-dominated worlds where members have attended many of the same schools, dress the same and represent a single social class, says Douglas M. Branson, a professor of corporate governance at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
N&C: You testified in favor of the bill, and now you're happy it's dead? AH: I thought there were justifiable concerns. Nevertheless, I also think the judiciary's latest recommendations and the Breyer Committee Report went a long way toward doing what needed to be done. I also think that those actions would not have come about without some pressure from Congress. I don't think it's a coincidence that you see the judiciary being more aggressive and more proactive after a period of congressional inquiry. N&C: What actions did the Judicial Conference take? AH: In response to instances when judges failed to disqualify themselves despite financial conflicts, the conference adopted a policy that mandates the use of conflict-checking computer software. In response to concerns about the expense-paid attendance of judges at education programs, the conference now requires greater disclosure and public posting of the sponsorship information. The Judicial Conference also has the Breyer Report in their hands. That committee studied the effectiveness of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, which laid out the system for filing and resolving complaints of judicial misconduct or disability. What's interesting to me is that there were strong parallels between the Breyer Report and the Inspector General bill. The report calls for a greater central role in the handling of complaints of judicial misconduct. The theory of the 1980 law was that judicial misconduct complaints would be handled almost entirely at the Circuit level. The underlying premise behind the Sensenbrenner bill was that that had to be changed a little bit - the focus of misconduct investigations would still be in the Circuits, but you would have additional authority at the national level to look into these matters. The Breyer Report makes the same recommendation but stops short of recommending that a new office be developed.