Law clinics under fire from special interests Forum

[nymets123]

interesting write up in the Times about problems growing with clinics at public universities. Thought I'd share it. Deep pocketed interests making trouble...

One small reason to go to a private school instead of public I guess

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/us/04 ... ol.html?hp

[kalvano]

Hitting a little close to home I guess.

[twert]

this is really interesting.

[1ferret!]

insidious ....

[soullesswonder]

Silver Lining: obviously students are getting great practical experience and actually making a difference; otherwise they wouldn't be pissing people off.

[vanwinkle]

From the Virginia Law Weekly's April 1 edition: VA Attorney General declares UVA Law unconstitutional

It's supposed to be a joke, but maybe we're not too far off after all...

[jks289]

Yikes. The most disturbing part of that article is the suggestion that privilege doesn't extend to law students working in clinics under the supervision of a lawyer, especially in criminal cases. Privilege extends to medical students at teaching hospitals, why wouldn't the spirit of confidentiality extend to this?

[270910]

Yikes. The most disturbing part of that article is the suggestion that privilege doesn't extend to law students working in clinics under the supervision of a lawyer, especially in criminal cases. Privilege extends to medical students at teaching hospitals, why wouldn't the spirit of confidentiality extend to this?

While I don't know the answer to your question, I do know that as a lawyer or lawyer to be you should probably actually learn the detail and nuance of those two doctrines before making arguments about their validity. There may or may not be a good reason, it may or may not be that way in all jurisdictions, it may or may not even be true.

Seeing 'the spirit of confidentiality' just makes my skin crawl. Once you start digging into how the legal world actually works, people making these broad glosses over issues (don't even get me started on the average comments re: HCR constitutionality) gets kind of maddening.

[jks289]

Yikes. The most disturbing part of that article is the suggestion that privilege doesn't extend to law students working in clinics under the supervision of a lawyer, especially in criminal cases. Privilege extends to medical students at teaching hospitals, why wouldn't the spirit of confidentiality extend to this?

While I don't know the answer to your question, I do know that as a lawyer or lawyer to be you should probably actually learn the detail and nuance of those two doctrines before making arguments about their validity. There may or may not be a good reason, it may or may not be that way in all jurisdictions, it may or may not even be true.

Seeing 'the spirit of confidentiality' just makes my skin crawl. Once you start digging into how the legal world actually works, people making these broad glosses over issues (don't even get me started on the average comments re: HCR constitutionality) gets kind of maddening.

I was making a general observation about the notion that a law student working under the supervision of a professional being called to testify regarding the case. I didn't make any representations about either doctrine, other than to ask if anyone could shed light on the "detail and nuance" of the respective situations. You're obviously brilliant and sophisticated (re: HCR constitutionality, etc ) so I can imagine how it must pain your intellect to see someone gloss over issues by not using adequately precise language on internet message boards.

[bluebonnet21]

interesting write up in the Times about problems growing with clinics at public universities. Thought I'd share it. Deep pocketed interests making trouble...

One small reason to go to a private school instead of public I guess

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/us/04 ... ol.html?hp

Tulane is private, and it was mentioned too.

[existenz]

Yeah that article pissed me off. Basically corporations are lobbying politicians to shut off money to law schools where students actually go after corporate crooks.

Their justification is that taxpayer money shouldn't be going to politically-sensitive tasks such as criminal defense, death penalty, environmental law, etc. I wish someone would point out that law students are paying $45,000 a year in tuition EVEN AT STATE SCHOOLS and thus are not getting paid by taxpayers to do this stuff. If anything, most law clinics are extracurricular and optional. It's part of the damn education.

Many of these lawmakers are just stupid enough to ruin their state law schools on behalf of these corporate lobbyists. Ridiculous.

[soullesswonder]

Many of these lawmakers are just stupid enough to ruin their state law schools on behalf of these corporate lobbyists. Ridiculous.

it's Louisiana and Maryland - would you expect anything better?

[vanwinkle]

Many of these lawmakers are just stupid enough to ruin their state law schools on behalf of these corporate lobbyists. Ridiculous.

it's Louisiana and Maryland - would you expect anything better?

After spending Spring Break volunteering in New Orleans, the Louisiana parts of this article sounded downright ordinary to me.

[legalease9]

Many of these lawmakers are just stupid enough to ruin their state law schools on behalf of these corporate lobbyists. Ridiculous.

it's Louisiana and Maryland - would you expect anything better?

After spending Spring Break volunteering in New Orleans, the Louisiana parts of this article sounded downright ordinary to me.

One of the many reasons never to apply to Louisiana law schools.

[Borhas]

get used to it, the only way to effect policy nowadays is through special interest. Luckily, there is one for every group, so you just have to be more persuasive/corrupt than your competitors.

[vanwinkle]

get used to it, the only way to effect policy nowadays is through special interest. Luckily, there is one for every group, so you just have to be more persuasive/corrupt than your competitors.

AMURICA

FUCK YEAH!

[Cupidity]

Poor fools don't know who they are messing with. All judges were once law students. Anyone who goes after law schools is in for a world of hurt.

[vanwinkle]

Poor fools don't know who they are messing with. All judges were once law students. Anyone who goes after law schools is in for a world of hurt.

Judges in Louisiana are elected, and are not required to recuse themselves from cases due to conflict of interest to the same extent they are in many other states. Pwned.

[Cupidity]

Poor fools don't know who they are messing with. All judges were once law students. Anyone who goes after law schools is in for a world of hurt.

Judges in Louisiana are elected, and are not required to recuse themselves from cases due to conflict of interest to the same extent they are in many other states. Pwned.

let it make it to the supreme court.

[soullesswonder]

Poor fools don't know who they are messing with. All judges were once law students. Anyone who goes after law schools is in for a world of hurt.

Judges in Louisiana are elected, and are not required to recuse themselves from cases due to conflict of interest to the same extent they are in many other states. Pwned.

judges who get elected in LA probably weren't good enough students to work in any law school clinics, anyway.

[vanwinkle]

let it make it to the supreme court.

Which it might and it might not.

[koehn2]

let it make it to the supreme court.

Which it might and it might not.

Excellent observation!!!

[chris0805]

Poor fools don't know who they are messing with. All judges were once law students. Anyone who goes after law schools is in for a world of hurt.

Judges in Louisiana are elected, and are not required to recuse themselves from cases due to conflict of interest to the same extent they are in many other states. Pwned.

[strike]let it make it to the supreme court.[/strike] Try to challenge it as a violation of federal law and remove to federal court

[nuss3]

pretty outrageous. kind of sad when something so important as checking special interest is left to students (although the opportunity for the students is obviously great).

gotta love this:

“Like the hapless Wizard of Oz, the clinics want all attention directed elsewhere, while they struggle mightily to keep concealed their actual use of public funds,” Kevin Kelly, the lawyer for the developer, Sussex Commons, wrote in his brief.

because all law school clinics are conspiring to waste funding and subvert the governments that fund them...

[Z3RO]

This is more than a little troubling. I like the part where they accuse the students of "act[ing] like regulators," because they are bringing valid issues to trial.

I guess the moral of the story is that you can't expect an unfettered education if you go to a school fettered by public money.

Yikes. The most disturbing part of that article is the suggestion that privilege doesn't extend to law students working in clinics under the supervision of a lawyer, especially in criminal cases. Privilege extends to medical students at teaching hospitals, why wouldn't the spirit of confidentiality extend to this?

While I don't know the answer to your question, I do know that as a lawyer or lawyer to be you should probably actually learn the detail and nuance of those two doctrines before making arguments about their validity. There may or may not be a good reason, it may or may not be that way in all jurisdictions, it may or may not even be true.

Seeing 'the spirit of confidentiality' just makes my skin crawl. Once you start digging into how the legal world actually works, people making these broad glosses over issues (don't even get me started on the average comments re: HCR constitutionality) gets kind of maddening.

I know what you mean, but you're being a little glib. These kinds of clinics cannot exist if there is no assumption of confidentiality. It undermines the entire project.

Maybe I'm overreacting, but I am really looking forward to participating in clinics as part of my legal training, and it's discouraging to see them subjugated to public interests like this.