VIRGINIA LAW WEEKLY

Friday, 20 March 2009
Volume 61, Number 21
www.lawweekly.org
INSIDE
UVA Alum Elected NFL Union Head................................................... 2
Reading Allison’s Column Will Make You Look Thin........................... 6
Alumna Provides Inside Scoop on DOJ Programs............................... 3
Tom Seider Tells You How to Pick up Chicks...................................... 8
VIRGINIA LAW WEEKLY
The Newspaper of the University of Virginia School of Law Since 1948
DICTA
A Case for D.C.
Voting Rights
Thomas M. Davis III ’75
While America has spent almost
a trillion dollars in attempts to bring
democracy to Baghdad, Iraq and Kabul, Afghanistan, a fiery debate rages
in Washington over whether the residents of our Nation’s Capital should
be given voting Representation in
the U.S. House of Representatives.
Currently, voters in the District of
Columbia elect a non-voting delegate
to the House (voting only in Committee). This is akin to the rights given
delegates from Guam, Samoa, Puerto
Rico and the Virgin Islands.
The major difference of course is
that D.C. residents pay federal income
taxes (the others do not) and are subject to conscription when the draft
is in effect. In fact, District residents
have fought and died in 10 wars.
Supporters of the legislation argue
that it is a historical anomaly that the
capital of the free world gets taxation with no representation. Article
I, section 8, clause 17 of the Constitution, known as the “District Clause,”
provides Congress the authority to
exercise exclusive legislation in all
cases whatsoever over the District
of Columbia. Both the ratification
commentary and Supreme Court
decisions suggest that this power is
plenary and, absent a distinct prohibition elsewhere in the Constitution,
provides Congress the ability to grant
D.C. residents the same freedoms
(e.g., trial by jury, diversity jurisdictions, prohibit laws that interfere
with Interstate Commerce, allow full
faith and credit, and in this case the
right to vote) that are enjoyed by citizens “of the several states.”
Two related Supreme Court cases
confirm the breadth of Congressional authority under the “District
Clause”. In Hepburn v. Ellzey, the
court construed diversity jurisdiction
in suits “between citizens of different STATES” (emphasis added) to
exclude citizens of DC. But the Court
also invited Congress to craft a solution, opining that the matter was a
subject for legislative, not judicial
consideration.
Over a century later, Congress answered the Supreme Court’s invitation and granted D.C. residents access to diversity cases. The Supreme
Court in 1949 upheld that statute in
National Mutual Insurance Company
v. Tidewater Transfer Company. The
Court’s plurality, led by Justice Jackson, held Congress could treat District
residents as though they were state
residents pursuant to its authority
under the District clause, for this purpose. (The concurring Justices went
even further, arguing D.C. should be
considered a state for purpose of Article IV.)
The Constitution says that imposing federal income taxes shall be ap► DICTA page 5
Thefts of Laptops, Other Valuables
Envelop Law School
Andy Howlett ’10
News Editor
Has the community of trust at the
Law School been punctured?
If an important part of it was the
ability to leave valuables unattended at the Law School without fear of
them being stolen, then the answer
is yes. The problem has grown to
the level where thefts of laptops and
other expensive materials is no longer one that can be ignored or even
cast as a string of isolated incidents.
Rather, an investigation by the
Law Weekly shows that the thefts
exhibit an awareness of the level of
trust in the UVA community, and a
desire and an ability to exploit it.
Swiped From Withers-Brown
and Slaughter
Last Tuesday started out as a
normal day for third-year student
Ellen Bognar. She woke up, drove
to school, went to class, and then
decided to go work out. As she had
done before, she left her bag with
her laptop, a sleek black MacBook,
near the bench outside WithersBrown 116 around 1:20 p.m. When
she returned at 3:40 the bag and the
computer were gone.
Bognar informed both Dean Ballenger and the Charlottesville police, and a search for her laptop is
ongoing. For reasons related to the
investigation effort, the Law Weekly
is unable to provide any further details on the incident at this time.
Suffice it to say, the entire experience has been stressful for Bognar.
Not only did she lose an expensive
computer, which retails at over
Last Friday, Professor Doug Leslie
sent an email denying allegations
of discrimination and misconduct
that has since sparked a reaction not
seen at the Law School for almost 20
years.
A professor of employment law,
labor law, sports law, contracts, and
property for over 30 years at UVA,
Leslie is a popular professor whose
elective classes, according to Dean
Cary Bennett, “fill relatively quickly.”
Leslie sent the email, which has since
been posted in redacted format on
uvalawblog.com, to all of the students
he taught as first-years who are currently enrolled at the Law School.
As a result of complaints made
against him by students, Leslie disclosed the possible consequence that
he might no longer be allowed to
teach first-year courses. Among the
allegations discussed by Leslie in his
letter were unfair class participation
practices and classroom demeanor
towards African-American students,
inappropriate sexual remarks and
Congratulations
to
Carrie Wellman (1L)
on her engagement to
Justin Stanton. Congratulations
to
Amal Dave (3L) on his
engagement to Shital
Desai.
Congratluations
to
Chuck Bowen (2L)
and his wife Desiree on
the birth of their son
Chase, who joins older
sister Natalie.
photo by Ben Grosz ’11
Three computers have been stolen in recent months after being left unattended on Law School grounds.
$1400, but she also lost all of the
information she had stored on the
unit. “I’ve lost all my notes, music,
photos, and bar application,” said
Bognar, frustrated.
“And,” she continued, “I’ve
learned not to trust people, which
sucks.”
Another third year student, Gabe
Walters, also had his laptop and bag
stolen. On Wednesday, September 9,
2008, at around 6:00 p.m., Walters
left his laptop and a casebook in his
bag by his locker carrel on the first
floor of Slaughter Hall. He went to
go print something at the computer
lab in Withers-Brown. When he returned sometime near 6:30, his bag
and his computer were gone
“I lost all my files, documents,
music videos, tax returns, everything,” said Walters. “All of my work
product from my summer internship
with the ACLU was on there, too,
and some of that was confidential.”
Could it have been another UVA
Law student? Maybe, says Walters.
“You don’t want to assume that it is
a fellow student, but you don’t want
to assume that random people are
just coming into the Law School, but
it seems strange that random thief
would go after a casebook.”
Walters never recovered his computer or casebook, and had to use
loan money to purchase a new one.
Law Library Not Safe
► LAPTOPS page 5
Divisive Professor Sparks Controversy
Allen Abrams ’10 and Smitha Dante ‘10
Editor-in-Chief and Executive Editor
around north
grounds
hypotheticals, and discriminatory
comments regarding the absence of
Jewish students on major religious
holidays.
When asked for further comment,
Leslie declined by email, writing,
“[e]verything that I know about this
matter went into the email.” In his
reply, he denied the accusations and
outlined the steps he would take to
achieve a more transparent classroom
in the future. First, he said that he will
no longer cold-call students. Second,
he stated that all classes will be audiorecorded. As the final part of his
email, Leslie invited students to send
their comments to Academic Associate Dean Jim Ryan ’92.
According to his email, Leslie
learned of the complaints through
a conversation and subsequent correspondence with Dean Mahoney.
When asked to comment on what
transpired, Dean Mahoney wrote, “A
few weeks ago, Dean Ryan informed
me that several students had complained about Professor Leslie’s classroom behavior. At my suggestion, he
followed up with informal conversations with students from Section B.
Several students independently reported similar incidents, which were
sufficiently troubling that I decided to
investigate further. I met with Professor Leslie to give him a general sense
of the allegations and provided him
with a written summary of student
complaints. Professor Leslie chose to
make my confidential communication to him public.”
Leslie’s grading policy was
brought to the forefront by his email,
in which he wrote that he was alleged
to have unfairly not called on AfricanAmerican students, either through
cold-calling or volunteering. This
would likely have a detrimental effect
on students’ grades because participation and the final exam make up equal
portions of the final grade.
According to Leslie, he calculates
participation—which he defines as
any degree of contribution in class—
by marking a seating chart with pictures of each student after class each
day. At the end of the course, class
participation is tabulated and categorized as either low, medium, or
high. Leslie then matches the class
► LESLIE page 4
Thumbs down to ANG
for not knowing that
Professor Kraus had foot
surgery when critiquing
his footwear. Incidentally, ANG
is also going under the knife—to
remove ANG’s foot from ANG’s
mouth.
Thumbs down to the
North Grounds Gym
card-swipers who eat
Raising Cane’s at the
front desk while ANG tries to work
out. ANG is convinced that this
must be one of the forms of torture
banned by the Geneva Convention.
Thumbs up, however,
to the U.S. military’s
practice (as reported in
this week’s NY Times)
of blasting Eminem and Metallica
at the detention center at Guantanamo Bay. This constitutes an act
of mercy compared to the alternatives—for instance, multiple sets of
Law School Band covers.
Thumbs up to a professor who busted a
student in front of the
whole class for passing
notes. Unfortunately, the professor
did not make the student read the
note aloud, which is too bad considering it revealed which boy in
the class is, like, totally the cutest.
Thumbs up to Professor
Sprigman for teaching
all his classes despite
having facial injuries
that look to have been suffered
while bare knuckle boxing. ANG is
impressed, having missed classes
this week because it was: raining,
St. Patrick’s Day, the morning after
St. Patrick’s Day, sunny, Friday.
Thumbs up to the assasins costumes, which
are apparently worn for
‘immunity.’ ANG is not
sure what that means, but those
people ANG has seen with paper
clipped to their heads certainly
seem immune to normal social interaction.
2
News & Letters
VIRGINIA LAW WEEKLY
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
SCOTUS Clinic Coverage
Editor’s Note: The Law Weekly received this letter last Friday as a response to its coverage of the Supreme
Court Clinic’s successful representation in Vaden v. Discover Bank. Per
its editorial policy, the Law Weekly
welcomes comments from readers in
response to its content.
Hi,
The paper looks great this week;
congratulations on your first issue.
We’re writing because we think
the Supreme Court Litigation
Clinic’s recent victory deserved
significantly more coverage than it
received. Our disclaimer is that we
are currently students in the clinic
and participated (minimally) in
helping Professor Ortiz prepare for
his oral argument. (The bulk of the
work was done by the 2007-2008
clinic members.)
The clinic’s victory is, in short,
a big deal. Aside from the importance of the legal rule the case established, the clinic’s success shines
extremely brightly on Virginia Law.
The accomplishment is this: Last
year, students scoured cases in every federal appellate and state supreme court across the country to
pick out those that appeared certworthy; when the students found
one, the clinic contacted the client
and successfully persuaded her
(and her attorney) to let the clinic
represent them; then the clinic
wrote a petition for certiorari to
the Supreme Court; then the Court
granted the petition, which itself
is a remarkable triumph given the
extremely small number of cases
the Court hears each year; then
the clinic wrote opening and reply
briefs on the merits; then Professor Ortiz argued the case in the Supreme Court in October; and at last
the Supreme Court decided—with
a majority of justices that have apparently never been in a majority
together (Ginsburg, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, and Thomas)—in
our favor. What makes the case
particularly remarkable is that the
clinic’s opponent at oral argument
was Carter Phillips, the managing
partner of Sidley Austin’s DC office and one of the most prominent
members of the Supreme Court
bar today. So, winning this case is
a huge achievement and a real testament to the ability and efforts of
last year’s clinic members and the
professors.
We appreciate, of course, all of
your past coverage of the clinic.
But particularly because this is an
admitted students weekend, the
Vaden victory gave the Law Weekly
a chance to highlight a unique aspect of Virginia academics. We
were disappointed that the story
was relegated to a small box on the
bottom of page two (whereas the
“drinking rum in the classroom”
line makes page one).
Take care,
Mark Hiller, Mike Seitz, Michael
Akavan, Lara Loyd
Virginia
Law Weekly
COLOPHON
COLOPHON
Allen Abrams
Editor-in-Chief
Smitha Dante
Executive Editor
Dipti Ramnarain
Managing Editor
Sabrina Guenther & Mary Niemann
Production Editors
Andy Howlett
News Editor
Tom Seider
Columns Editor
Gary Lawkowski
Features Editor
Kara Allen
Reviews Editor
Neal Hayes
Web Editor
Veronica Bath
Associate Production Editor
Matt Farmer
Associate Columns Editor
Chris Mincher
Associate Features Editor
Jordan Fox
Associate Reviews Editor
Contributors: Thomas M. Davis III, Dan Rosenthal
Columnists:
Kurt Davis, Allison Muth
Reviewer:
Craig Smith
Published weekly on Friday except during holiday and examination periods and serving the
Law School community at the University of Virginia, the Virginia Law Weekly (ISSN 0042-661X) is not
an official publication of the University and does not necessarily express the views of the University.
Any article appearing herein may be reproduced provided that credit is given to both the Virginia Law
Weekly and the author of the article. Advanced written permission of the Virginia Law Weekly is also
required for reproduction of any cartoon or illustration.
Virginia Law Weekly
580 Massie Road
University of Virginia School of Law
Charlottesville, Virginia 22903-1789
Phone: 434.924.3070
Fax: 434.924.7536
[email protected]
www.lawweekly.org
EDITORIAL POLICY: The Virginia Law Weekly publishes letters and columns of interest to the Law
School and the legal community at large. Views expressed in such submissions are those of the author(s)
and not necessarily those of the Law Weekly or the Editorial Board. Letters from organizations must bear
the name, signature, and title of the person authorizing the submission. All letters and columns must
either be submitted in hardcopy bearing a handwritten signature along with an electronic version, or
be mailed from the author’s e-mail account. Submissions must be received by 5 p.m. the Monday before
publication and must be in accordance with the submission guidelines. Letters over 500 words and columns over 700 words may not be accepted. The Editorial Board reserves the right to edit all submissions
for length, grammar, and clarity. Although every effort is made to publish all materials meeting our
guidelines, we regret that not all submissions received can be published.
Friday, 20 March 2009
Experts Discuss Issues
in International Arbitration
Law Weekly Staff
On Friday, February 27, the J.B.
Moore Society of International Law
hosted a symposium on International
Arbitration at Caplin Pavilion. The
event brought together expert academics and practitioners for two panels and a lunch.
Following introductory remarks
by Dean Mahoney, the first panel focused on issues in private commercial
arbitration, and was moderated by
Law School Professor Paul Stephan
’77. The panel consisted of Stacie
Strong, a professor at the University of
Missouri School of Law, who focuses
on international commercial arbitration; Henry Burnett ’97, a partner at
Fulbright & Jaworksi and co-head of
the firm’s international arbitration
group; and Greg Williams, a partner
at Hughes Hubbard & Reed, who specializes in international arbitration
and other, related areas.
The panelists examined the effects on companies and consumers
of increased private commercial arbitration on the international stage.
“Many companies do not resort to
international arbitration because
they are concerned about the lack of
appeals,” said Burnett. Strong, in presenting an overview on the subject,
seemed to agree, but also noted that
international arbitration is becoming
more and more common. Williams
explained some of the basic modes
of analyzing the typical international
arbitration case. Professor Stephan, in
questioning the panel, noted that “the
direction seems to be . . . making arbitration a bit more like litigation.”
After lunch, the second panel met
to discuss the topic of sovereign states
and investment arbitration. Professor
Stephan again moderated. The panel
featured Elodie Dulac, a member of
Shearman & Sterling’s international
arbitration practice; Oscar Garibaldi,
a partner at Covington & Burling,
who specializes in investor-state dispute resolution and also represents
clients in international commercial
arbitration and trade disputes; and
William Burke-White, a professor at
the University of Pennsylvania Law
School, who studies the intersection
of international law and international
politics.
Professor Stephan and members
of the J.B. Moore society organized
and coordinated the event. “I relish
this student-run event,” said Stephan,
thanking the volunteers for their hard
work. Attendance was moderate, as
many students had already left for
spring break or were busy with the
unified journal tryout.
“The planning committee was really happy with the way the symposium went,” said third-year Elizabeth
Lim, President of the J.B. Moore Society. She thanked the panelists, the
sponsors, and all of the Law School
community in attendance. “Unfortunately, we planned the symposium
on the last Friday of February . . . but
spring break came early this year,”
Lim noted. “Next year, we’ll be sure to
schedule the symposium earlier than
the weekend before spring break.
However, I’m not too worried about
the attendance; those who couldn’t
make it can always catch the podcast
[available on the Virginia Law website].”
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
BLSA Reacts to Leslie Allegations
Professor Leslie’s recent decision
to send a mass email soliciting student feedback in connection with
a recent, confidential investigation into his teaching performance
raises several concerns.
In providing details about the
recent investigation, Professor Leslie unfortunately failed to preserve
the anonymity of those students
involved. Professor Leslie volunteered information reported to the
Dean in confidence by students.
His email discussed three specific
issues raised during the confidential investigation and referenced
the students involved by gender,
marital status, race, religion, or
some combination thereof. Given
our close-knit environment, identifying the few racial minority students in a specific thirty-member
class is tantamount to revealing
their actual identities to the Law
School community.
It is not clear why Professor Leslie opted to circumvent a process
designed to protect all parties involved in favor of a broad-based
appeal for additional student feedback. Additional feedback could
have been solicited in a number of
other ways. Specifically, Professor
Leslie could have requested that
the existing confidential process
encompass students from his other
classes. Instead, other students
may now be unwilling to engage
in this investigation out of concern
that their comments will be disseminated to the greater law school
community and other forums such
as Law School blogs.
Additionally, an unintended
consequence of Professor Leslie’s
email is its polarizing effect. A
confidential process established
to address specific concerns has
been transformed into a referendum on Professor Leslie. By
sending the mass email, Professor
Leslie has inadvertently created
a speculative debate about what
took place in his classroom, which
has isolated some members of the
law school community. This result
is contrary to the student environment at UVA Law and undermines
a well-structured process administered by the Dean to fairly address
the issues raised about Professor
Leslie. We hope that Professor
Leslie and other administrators involved in this process will respect
the privacy of those involved and
the integrity of the Law School’s
review process.
Last, Professor Leslie’s decision has implications that extend
beyond current students. The
timing of the email, sent the first
day of Admitted Students Weekend, highlights this critical issue.
As admitted students, particularly minority students, consider
UVA Law, they are currently confronted with a unique situation,
which is not representative of our
student experience. BLSA, along
with many members of the student community, has worked to
dispel the negative stereotypes
that undermine the multicultural
community of UVA Law. Given
the public nature of this investigation, it would be impossible for
an admitted student to ignore an
instance where private student
concerns are now trivialized by a
professor’s exploitation of authority and electronic resources to create a forum outside of the investigative process.
-Black Law Students Association
University of Virginia School of Law
Alum Heads NFL Players Association
Gary Lawkowski ’11
Features Editor
This past Sunday, the National
Football League Players Association chose Virginia Law grad
DeMaurice Smith to serve as its
Executive Director. In response
to the news, Dean Paul Mahoney
commented, “The Law School is
particularly proud that its graduates excel in many types of careers. Running the NFLPA is very
different from being a partner at a
law firm, but DeMaurice Smith’s
example reminds us that the Virginia experience is a path to many
different types of success.” Smith
graduated with honors from the
Law School in 1989.
According to published reports,
Smith beat out three other final-
ists for the Executive Director job.
Smith was initially considered an
unlikely choice because he did
not have prior professional football experience, nor did he have
a background in labor law. Before
becoming NFLPA Executive Director, Smith served as a partner at
Patton Boggs, where his areas of
focus have been white collar criminal defense, representing clients
in government investigations,
and handling complex tort litigation. Despite his lack of labor law
or football experience, Smith was
elected on his first ballot.
Smith assumes the role amid
what are likely to be challenging
times for the Players Association.
Like the rest of the nation, the
League and the Players Association
must contend with the impact of
the ongoing economic downturn.
According to reports posted on
ESPN.com, Smith will also need
to enter negotiations with league
owners following a decision by the
owners to opt out of the current
collective bargaining agreement.
If an agreement is not reached, the
players face the lurking specter of
a lockout impacting the 2011 season.
Smith was unable to be reached
for comment prior to the paper going to press. However, in a statement released by the Players Association, he said, “I’m humbled
by their decision. I’m honored
and proud to lead a great group
of men. I think we understand the
challenges that face us but we also
understand the strength of our
unity.”
Friday, 20 March 2009
VIRGINIA LAW WEEKLY
SBA Notebook
Dan Rosenthal ’10
SBA President
I want to start off this week’s column by thanking everyone for making last Friday’s Admitted Students
Open House such a great success.
Other than a minor verbal gaffe in my
welcoming remarks to the prospective students on Thursday night when
I momentarily forgot what school I
attend, I think everything went off
without a hitch. Rest assured, for
the second Admitted Students Open
House, I will have the correct answer
written on the back of my hand so I
will not make the same mistake again.
A special thanks needs to go out to 1Ls
Mike Sullivan and Kat Allen who did
a fantastic job organizing this event—
job well done, guys.
I want to devote the rest of this column to the Career Services Town Hall
meeting that occurred on March 11th
and the upcoming changes to OGI
that were discussed at the meeting.
First off, I want to address the timing
of the meeting. Although we were
under several scheduling constraints
when we picked the time for the meeting, I wish we could have found a time
that worked better for all students’
schedules. I want to stress that this
first Town Hall meeting will not be
the only opportunity that you have to
discuss these important changes. This
really is the start of the dialogue, not
the end of one. With that being said,
I am quickly going to lay out the three
main changes that were discussed at
the meeting. (For a copy of the minutes and a summary of what was
discussed at the meeting, please visit
the SBA website at www.virginiasba.
com) The changes are: (1) moving
the OGI calendar up to Aug. 12; (2)
increasing the percentage of lottery
slots to 50 percent; and (3) increasing
Career Services programming generally.
Although I could probably write
a great deal about the pros and cons
of each of these modifications, I believe that I have two main objectives
in this process. The first is to listen to
your opinions and provide a setting
where you can voice any concerns
and/or objections you may have as to
any of these changes. My hope is that
by bringing these issues into the public domain each of us will take ownership of this process and feel confident
that any changes being made will help
us secure a job. My second objective is
to increase the amount of information that the student body has going
into the OGI process. On that front,
Career Services will be meeting individually with each 1L section over the
next two weeks to discuss changes to
next year’s OGI. Further, Career Services will be increasing the amount of
programming they provide for all facets of the job search. This will include
assisting students in securing offers of
employment at the end of their summer program, deferrals, and what to
do if you are not offered employment
at the end of the summer. These are
issues and concerns that affect all students regardless of what class you are
in, so I hope that 2Ls and 3Ls will feel
engaged in this process as well.
Most importantly, I want to
stress that the door to the SBA office
is always open. (Well, almost always.
I don’t have a life so I am here most of
the time.) I encourage you to stop by
and speak to me personally about any
questions/concerns you may have
about this or any other issue. That is
about all the room I have this week, so
till next time, have a great weekend.
Law School Gears Up for 101st Libel Show
Christine Mandell ’10
Contributor
The 101st Annual Libel Show is
this week, March 18, 19, and 20. The
doors and beer service open at 7 p.m.,
and the show starts at 8 p.m.. A ton
of work has gone into the show, and
everyone is excited for this year’s Libelwood theme!
Almost 15 percent of the student
body is somehow involved with the
Show as tech, dancers, actors, singers, band members, and writers. This
year, ticket prices were reduced to $15
from $19. A substantial portion of the
proceeds go to help PILA. Last year,
the Show raised $10,000 for PILA.
To see skits from past years, visit
the Libel Show website: www.libelshow.com.
Editor’s Note: We will have full coverage and pictures from the 101st Libel
Show next week.
Alum Explains How to Get DOJ Employment
Law Weekly Staff
Even though, for the sake of her
three growing daughters, Jennifer
Rivera ’88 wishes she “was more motivated by money,” she firmly believes
that, after twenty years working in
the Department of Justice (DOJ), she
has the “best legal job in the world.”
During her hour-long presentation
on March 13, she offered her advice
on how to get at a job at the DOJ as
either a paid summer intern or a fulltime entry-level attorney.
Rivera, who is the Director of Federal Programs, a section in the DOJ’s
Civil Division that defends the U.S.
whenever it is sued, explained how
DOJ hiring ranges from student volunteers through experienced attorneys. Through the Legal Intern Program, for instance, students apply
directly to the practice group where
students would like to volunteer for
the summer following their first or
second year of law school. At the opposite end of the spectrum, lateral
hiring takes place through Experienced Attorney Recruitment.
Rivera’s main focus, however,
was on the more competitive positions available to rising second and
third-year students. For rising second-years, the Summer Law Intern
Program (SLIP) is a compensated position for which students must apply
online by September 8, 2009 in order
to be hired for the summer of 2010.
For rising third-years, the DOJ
hires its entry level attorneys through
the Attorney General’s Honor Program. The Honors Program also has
an online application deadline of
September 8, 2009 and looks favorably on students who participated in
the Legal Intern Program and SLIP.
Because the Honors Program hires
students after graduation from law
school, judicial clerkships, according
to Rivera, “will help you get a leg up.”
Rivera, who clerked for the Honor-
able T.S. Ellis, III of the Eastern District of Virginia, stressed the value of
clerkships. She said that even though
it would be necessary to reapply to
the Honors Program if the clerkship
route was taken over an offer from
the DOJ, she “can’t imagine” not taking the clerkship.
While Rivera explained that all
of the programs are looking for students who are both genuinely interested and qualified, including being
in the top half of their class, she also
gave insight into some of the nuances of the hiring process. For example,
both SLIP and Honor’s Program applicants are required to rank their top
four divisions. She said that some of
the divisions are more “thin-skinned”
than others and that certain ones,
such as the Criminal Division, will
only consider applicants who rank
them as their first choice. The best
way to strategize, according to Rivera, is to talk to someone who works
in the DOJ and find out what the different divisions are looking for.
An added benefit of having these
discussions, according to Rivera,
is that they help the applicants understand the substantive work performed by each section, but also “the
nature of the practice.” Rivera noted
that, in fact, she was originally interested in the Civil Rights Division, but
found that, in reality, the “day-to-day
practice [in the Civil Division] suits
me.” Because “every division is going
to have its own character,” actually
speaking with someone who is familiar with a particular division will
prepare applicants to convey in an
interview what skills they have that
match up with that division.
On the application, students can
also demonstrate their interest in a
certain division through their personal statement. All of the divisions
look at resumes for writing ability,
commitment to public interest, and
a demonstrated ability to be inde-
pendent and think quickly. But the
personal statement, Rivera stressed,
is a way for students to shed light on
their own personality and to show
their genuine interest in the particular division. Students should share
specific challenges or valuable experiences to do so, rather than discuss
general traits, such as work ethic, or
use the cliché of wanting to represent
the United States in court.
Rivera also warned that students
should “be careful how you respond
to questions.” Typos are treated as
grounds for disqualification, and so
is misrepresentation. Rivera advised
that students avoid the risk of disqualification and “err on the side of
. . . being modest.”
In addition to advising students
on how to get a job, Rivera also described some of the characteristics of
working for the DOJ. While “the stability of federal employment is a big
draw,” the DOJ is looking for people
who “want to do work that matters”
because they “work just as hard, if
not harder” than people in law firms.
She noted, though, that hours are
more flexible, mainly because the
culture is “work-driven” rather than
focusing on “punching a clock” or
“showing your face to a partner.”
Another contrast to firms is the
training. New lawyers get a mentor,
but most of the training at the DOJ
is on-the-job, with everyone in court
on their own within a year. Rivera
highlighted the comparison with
her remark that students “handle
that case, rather than carry the briefcase.”
Rivera will return on March 30 to
give a similar presentation for those
who were unable to attend. She indicated that she is eager to see applications from UVA return to their
levels of a few years ago and that,
as a proud alumnus, “I love to come
back” to UVA because it “reminds me
how much I love my job.”
News
3
Shipping Out: How to Get the
Clerkship You Want
Rogan Nunn ’10
Senior Staff Writer
For any second-year law student, reading the headlines these
days can be a depressing affair.
For those wishing to defer entry
into firm life for a year in hopes
of riding out the current feeding
frenzy, clerkships are looking like
an increasingly attractive option.
Of course, the dearth of firm jobs
is predicted to markedly increase
the competition for the class of
2010, and hopeful students may
need to get started sooner than
they think.
On Monday, March 16, Ruth
Payne gave a presentation laying
out the nuts and bolts of the clerkship application process, as well as
some candid advice. Payne, who
joined the Law School last year
as Director of Career Services for
Clerkships and Programs, apologized for the dry material but emphasized its importance. The application process is complicated,
stressful, and at times counterintuitive, she admitted, and attention to detail is crucial.
First, some basic information:
There are three separate systems
for getting recommendation requests to professors and applications to judges, and applicants will
need to be familiar with each.
OSCAR
OSCAR, an external website run
by Symplicity, is open to all federal judges and follows the federal
clerkship application guidelines.
Currently about half of the federal
judiciary uses this system, with
more judges signing up every year.
Check on the site to see if your
chosen judge uses OSCAR; it is the
easiest of the three options, and
judges who have signed up will
likely be annoyed at receiving an
application in another form. Keep
checking, as well—judges have
been known to opt in mere weeks
before the application deadline.
OSCAR requires a student to
type in their grades (no transcript
required) and to upload all documents in .pdf format (don’t use
the OSCAR converter; applicants
should convert before uploading).
It will also helpfully mail merge
contacts for cover letters, though
Payne counseled caution for those
determined to customize their letters. “Be really careful,” she said,
“or a judge in Illinois can read
about how it’s your dream to work
in California.”
The site will open for registration of new applicants on May
18, at which point students should
create an account and become familiar with the system. Payne suggested reading the user guide and
the FAQ section, both of which
are extremely helpful. Log on at
https://oscar.symplicity.com/.
CARS
Students may apply to judges
who do not use OSCAR through
the Law School’s own clerkship
system, CARS, which Payne described as “basically a mail merge
program.” This will include all
state court judges and remaining
federal judges. “People hate the
system,” Payne confessed. “It’s
clunky. But it’s a million times better than what we used to have.”
To add to the complexity, CARS
handles applications to state courts
according to the different hiring
plan applicable in each state. Only
about a third of states follow the
federal plan, and many judges fail
to follow the plans laid out by their
state. To find out which states are
hiring when, and for other useful information, students should
consult the clerkship blog, The
Shipping News (http://uvalaw.typepad.com/shippingnews/). The
Virginia Supreme Court, for example, has already begun hiring,
so anyone interested needs to begin the process immediately
CARS contains a fairly comprehensive list of judges, but students may have to add their own,
especially if the judge has been
recently confirmed. It contains
dropdowns indicating which professors are writing the student
recommendations for each judge.
If a student has more recommenders than spots, he or she will need
to fill out multiple applications for
the same judge.
Payne took care to emphasize
that requests are not actually submitted as they are created. Applicants must visit the “My Requests”
page to submit.
Paper Applications
Students choosing to do so
may create and submit their own
hard copy applications, which the
clerkship office will then send
out to judges. These should include a cover letter and resume
on good paper, a writing sample,
and an unofficial transcript in a
9x12, self-sealing envelope. The
return address label should have
the applicant’s name, but the law
school’s address. All such applications must be submitted by August
17.
General Advice
Payne offered several recommendations to the hopeful clerk.
First, get things done early. Start
thinking now about which judges
you’d like to apply to, and begin
putting together a preliminary list.
Payne counseled realism, especially in light of the tough job market.
Students are limited to 75 judges,
and Payne warned that “if all 75
are reaches, you’re probably going
to get no offers.” The average UVA
Law GPAs for various clerkships are
as follows: 3.75 for Circuit Courts;
3.5 for District Courts; 3.35 for
Federal Magistrate Judges; 3.25
for State Courts.
Second, start talking to professors about recommendations.
“Professors disappear like vapor
the day after graduation,” Payne
said, deadpanned. Most students
will need three recommendations.
Use as many stellar ones as you
can get, but don’t take anything
less. “If they’re not going to write
you a fantastic, over the top letter,” said Payne, “you don’t want
them.”
Third, talk to the clerkship office. They are there to help, and
possess an amazing amount of information and experience. When
in doubt about any part of the process, ask. Students can get advice
on everything from which writing
sample to use (incidentally, Payne
recommends getting in on one of
the upcoming journal notes pools
if you can) to what certain judges
look for in a clerk. Most of the
above information, and more, is
available at the clerkship website
(law.virginia.edu/clerkships).
Finally, students should think
long and hard about the judges
for whom they want to clerk. This
is the only way for any applicant
to be happy with the results of the
process. “There’s no wrong choice
if you know what you want to do,”
said Payne. “There is a wrong
choice if it’s just uneducated.”
4
News
VIRGINIA LAW WEEKLY
Friday, 20 March 2009
Etiquette Expert Teaches Students to Dine Professionally
Benjamin Grosz ’11
Staff Writer
Last Wednesday nearly a hundred
law students filled Caplin Pavilion for
a formal dinner in order to learn and
practice professional dining under the
tutelage of Sharon Meit Abrahams,
Director of Professional Development at McDermott Will & Emery.
Dr. Abrahams has for years traveled
to top law schools around the country
to teach the etiquette of professional
dining and this was her third visit to
Virginia. Students paid twenty dollars for the dinner from UVA Catering
and dressed up for the opportunity to
learn appropriate dining behavior. It
should be noted that Dr. Abrahams
called out the sharp attire of the attendees as distinguishing UVA from
some of the other schools at which
she has presented.
One of the first and most important
points she raised is that professional
dining is not about the food. Students
were advised to focus on making engaging and interesting conversation,
and she said that if the conversation
was great, students wouldn’t even
have time to eat. Carrying a granola
bar or eating it in advance is one smart
way to prepare for this situation.
As Dr. Abrahams reviewed appropriate table manners and etiquette for
dining out with business associates,
students began to eat a meal specially
selected to present dining “challenges.” The salad had both olives with
pits and cherry tomatoes that were
too large for one bite but too small to
gracefully cut. Students learned that
it is acceptable to use their fingers to
transfer an olive pit from their mouth
to their bread plate and that tomato
slicing should be done carefully.
The purpose of the event was to
prepare students for dining situations that they will encounter while
interviewing and working in the law,
according to organizers Martha Ballenger ’69, Assistant Dean for Student
Affairs, and Ruth Payne ’02, Director
of Career Services for Clerkships and
Programs. Payne noted that many
employers select “elegant restaurants”
for pre- and post-interview meals and
that students will be more comfortable
in those situations if they are familiar
with “common dining dilemmas.”
Dean Ballenger noted that although
UVA law students are “generally quite
well-mannered,” many would benefit
from a “timely refresher” in advance
of summer experiences.
The session was interactive, with
students asking and answering questions throughout. These included
how to eat rolls/bread (rip off one
bite at a time to eat), whether jackets
can be removed when dining (men
should follow the lead of the senior
person present, women should never
remove their jackets unless they have
a proper blouse underneath), what to
do about special dietary restrictions
(alert recruiter or host in advance of
the function), and on which side to
wear nametags (the right side).
As the main course of spaghetti and
meatballs was served, students were
told which foods to avoid ordering
when dining professionally. According to Dr. Abrahams, all types of finger
foods should be avoided including pizza, ribs, hamburgers, sandwiches, and
burritos. Also to be avoided are messy
foods, such as spaghetti, and any-
Top Five Dining
Dos and Don’ts
Sharon Meit Abrahams, Ed. D.
1. Put away or turn off electronic devices so you can give
your undivided attention to the
person(s) you are with.
2. It’s not about the food, it’s
about being an engaging and interesting person.
photo by Ben Grosz '11
Sharply dressed first-year students received a first-class etiquette education.
thing that might lead to bad breath,
including garlic or very spicy dishes.
Students were advised to also consider cost when ordering, and to not
select the most expensive or cheapest
item on the menu. (Although if all the
associates and partners are ordering
steak, you are welcome to indulge.)
When the topic of alcohol came up,
Dr. Abrahams recommended never
drinking at lunch when returning to
work after a meal or on an interview
day. She then emphasized that students should think of a summer associate job as one long interview and be
wary about ever imbibing more than
they can comfortably handle.
Finally, for dessert, students enjoyed a mousse served in a chocolate
bowl, raising the question whether
the chocolate could be eaten. (Students were pleased to learn that they
could.) As they completed the meal,
Dr. Abrahams gave an overview of
professional attire, suggesting that
students always wear their best suit
on the first day and then see how colleagues dressed. She also implored
students to remember to always have
polished shoes.
Dean Ballenger said the selection of
Dr. Abrahams was based not only on
her expertise, but also on her affiliation with a law firm. Her legal experience enabled her to tailor her tips to
students and comment on etiquette
for other firm activities including
cocktail parties and events hosted by
partners. For these “mix and mingle”
events, she called out the importance
of always keeping one’s right hand
free for a greeting, requiring attendees
to choose either a drink or food. She
also noted that while guests should
generally bring a small gift when invited to someone’s house, gifts should
3. Order food that will not
cause problems; stay away from
foods you eat with your hands
(sandwiches), smelly foods (garlic), and potential disaster foods
(anything with a red sauce).
4. Limit your alcohol because
you want to be clear-headed and
sharp in case the managing partner asks you a clever question.
5. Remember what your elders taught you; say please and
thank you, and don’t talk with
your mouth full!
not be brought to firm functions, even
if hosted at a partner’s house.
Many students were engaged by the
lecture, lining up to ask personal questions after it concluded. The etiquette
dinner “helped a lot,” according to
Wesley Sawyer ’11. He noted that he
felt much more prepared to “avoid potentially hazardous situations.” Given
the state of the economy and the legal
job market, every bit helps.
Controversial Professor Under Investigation
► LESLIE
continued from page 1
participation category with the lowest, median, or highest exam score,
respectively; this is the final class
participation score. This final score
is then subsequently added to the
student’s written exam score, meaning that a student’s class participation
and exam performance are weighted
equally in determining a final grade.
The results are then curved. Leslie
added that he does “not necessarily
assign equal numbers of students in
to the three levels of participations.
If, as has never been the case, all the
students participate regularly, I would
put them all in the top group, and the
final grade would depend entirely on
the examination essay.”
Leslie defended himself in his
email, indicating the range of participation groups into which three
African-American students from one
class fell. One former student, pointing to the small amount of data and
calling it insufficient, added that
“[t]he idea that Professor Leslie discriminates against African-American
students is also absurd.” Based on
experience, the second-year student
called the lack of calling by Leslie
“probably more student-specific than
anything racial.”
Everyone reached for comment
was similarly reluctant to unequivocally say that Leslie acted in a discriminatory manner when calling
on students. Wrote Dean Mahoney,
“I continue to try to determine the
underlying facts and have not yet
reached any conclusions. I do, however, think it is important to clarify
one point. A few students have concluded that the complaints originated with the three students whose
classroom performance he discussed,
which is not true. I have not, incidentally, identified to Professor Leslie the
students who came forward or those
whom Dean Ryan subsequently interviewed.”
One first-year student, who had
Leslie for multiple classes, even suggested a regression analysis, advocating the need for more data and also for
consideration of other ways in which
Leslie’s grading may be discriminatory. Indeed, the student said that
investigation is necessary to determine whether Leslie favors students
who frequently take his classes. The
student said that, using participation
records, the facially non-discriminatory grading policy should be tested
for favoritism that may occur through
the use of cold-calling of supposedly
shy students to boost participation,
as well as recognition of some volunteers who “need only flinch to be recognized, while others seem to have to
wave frantically for several minutes
before being called upon.”
Despite the concerns about Leslie’s grading and the serious allegations, some students have also been
critical to Leslie’s email as a means
to respond to his allegations. Said
one second-year student, “Professor
Leslie included the amount of participation of African-American students,
which based on his grading methods,
amounts to exposing the relative
grade of each of the African-American students to countless peers,”
adding that “[u]nless these students
consented to have their information
so publicly distributed, such actions
are troublesome.”
Although the Law School has
changed dramatically in the last few
decades, the current dialogue concerning Leslie’s classroom demeanor
bears a strong resemblance to similar
discussions in 1988 and 1990. In Sep-
tember 1990, at the end of a comparison between negotiation of “for cause”
employment contracts and prenuptial
agreements, Leslie asked a student to
turn off a tape recorder before making an allegedly sexist comment. Letters to the Editor published in the Law
Weekly over the next few weeks show
that students disagreed about the offensiveness and context of the statements; at the time, there was a strong
movement for greater diversity at the
Law School as it tried to shed its “good
ol’ boy” image.
In 1988, debate regarding Leslie’s
alleged conduct constituted six pages
of an eight-page Law Weekly. This included a one-and-a-half page letter in
response to allegations that he made
racist and sexist comments brought to
the administration’s attention by a petition from Virginia Law Women, the
Jewish Law Student Association, the
National Layers Guild, and the Black
Law Student Association. The allegations divided students and faculty,
with Professor Gary Peller publishing a column calling for further investigation and disagreeing with the
defenses raised by Leslie in his letter.
Among the issues debated were the
freedom of faculty—regardless of tenure, which Leslie had already earned
at the time—to speak freely in the
classroom and the appropriate course
for students to take when they have
concerns regarding faculty conduct.
A similar concern about how students should raise issues with faculty
has been introduced in the present
context. According to Dean Ryan, the
general policy for handling students’
concerns “depends on the nature
of the complaint. If the complaint is
about something relatively minor and
isolated, I look for ways to help the
student and faculty member involved
resolve the issue. If they are more se-
rious and more widespread, which
thankfully rarely happens, I will bring
the complaints to the attention of the
Dean.”
Dean Mahoney added, “We put
considerable trust in our professors
just as we do in our students.” While
he seconded the aim to resolve any
possible conflicts through a private
conversation with the student and
the involved faculty member, he
added, “Obviously that route is not
possible when the faculty member
chooses to make the matter public.”
Students have expressed similar
uneasiness. One former Leslie student
remarked that, because of Leslie’s letter, “it is doubtful that students who
have concerns about the environment
in which they are taught will feel comfortable approaching anyone in the
administration to voice their concerns
related to this situation and in future
matters that arise with different professors.”
Dean Mahoney said that the appropriate resolution for any concern
a student has “depends on what the
student feels comfortable with. The
vast majority of student concerns are
addressed by a simple conversation
between the student and professor.
If the student is not comfortable
with that or feels that it is not a viable alternative in the circumstances,
of course that student should talk to
a Peer Advisor, Dean Ballenger, or
anyone in the Law School administration with whom he or she feels
comfortable.”
Although future investigation is
pending, and the Law School’s administration has yet to determine what it
will ultimately do in terms of Leslie’s
right to teach, student concerns seem
to be the primary focus. When asked
what factors are taken into consideration when deciding whether to deny
a professor the opportunity to teach
first-year students, Dean Mahoney
said, “The single most important factor is what is in the best interests of
our students.”
Students seem to have responded
well to the steps taken so far, with a
third-year former Leslie student commending the administration “for acting on these troubling complaints.
The fact that [the administration]
would undertake such an inquiry
makes me a lot less jaded and cynical.”
/‡-…ˆÀÌÃÊUÊ-Üi>ÌÃÊUÊ/i>“Ê7i>ÀÊUÊ>ÌÃ
œvÊ-…ˆÀÌÃÊUÊ/À>ÛiÊÕ}ÃÊUÊ-Ì>`ˆÕ“Ê
Õ«Ã
>˜˜iÀÃÊUÊ-̈VŽiÀÃ
4OLL&REEs&AX
[email protected]
Friday, 20 March 2009
► LAPTOPS
5
► DICTA
continued from page 1
Your Stuff May Not Be Safe
Bognar’s computer was stolen
from the halls of the Law School—
where the sight of an unattended
laptop is a rarity. But what about the
Law School library, where a solitary
laptop with no owner in sight is a
common occurrence? Are students’
belongings any safer there?
Not really, as third-year Ray Hafner will tell you. During the exam
period last period Hafner was putting long hours at the Law Library
preparing a brief for the arbitration
competition. After working straight
up until the library was closing at
2 a.m., Hafner decided to call it a
night. Since he knew that he would
be back the following morning, he
placed his laptop under some of his
belongings so it was not visible and
then headed home.
When he arrived the next morning, his computer was gone. “My
first thought was that someone in
the library had put it somewhere for
safekeeping,” said Hafner, adding
that he did not panic until he realized that none of the library staff
knew anything about his missing
computer.
Worse still, the circumstances
of the theft indicate someone with
fairly detailed knowledge of the
Law School. “I left when the library
closed at 2 a.m.,” explained Hafner.
“But someone logged on to the UVA
network with my computer at exactly 2:07 a.m. So it was someone
who was either in the building after
closing or someone who had access
to it. [That person] opened my computer and logged on to the wireless
network just that one time—[he]
never showed up afterward.”
Hafner had to get a new computer
as well as rewrite his brief. Luckily,
he took his class notes by hand, and,
since he had a Law School bundlecomputer, he was able to obtain a
loaner replacement for exams right
away; Hafner credited the LawITC
people as being “excellent” in handling the matter.
Unlike Walters, Hafner doubted
that it was another law student. “If
you think about the consequences,
I’m positive it’s not a law student . .
. but it was someone who knew the
law school pretty well.”
Reflecting on the experience,
Hafner noted that “of course, it’s absolutely stupid to leave your laptop
unattended overnight, but you just
get to feeling comfortable leaving
belongings around unattended at
UVA Law, because you trust everyone here and everyone else is doing
it.”
Thief Targets Mailboxes, Textbooks
Laptop computers are an attractive target, but also a problematic
one: They can be traced by media
access control (a.k.a. MAC) address
and other online markers, and can
be conspicuous to steal, as even at
the Law School students have tended to guard them more closely than
their other possessions.
Some of those other possessions—like casebooks—are pretty
expensive themselves. With a new
Corporations textbook costing
$147.50 at Courts and Commerce,
casebooks are valuable items, and
there is an easy market for them as
well: not only can they be resold
back to Courts and Commerce during finals week, but there is also an
active market for them on the Internet.
Third-year Gwen Kern has twice
been the victim of a stolen textbook.
News & DICTA
VIRGINIA LAW WEEKLY
“The first was a brand new Secured
Transactions textbook, last semester
during the textbook return period. I
stuck it in my mailbox in Scott Commons after class on Wednesday and
it was gone by Friday afternoon.”
“To add insult to injury,” Kern continued, “I had a two-year-old used
Federal Income Tax casebook stolen
from the same mailbox over winter
break. I had lent it to a friend, who
put it there to return it to me after I
had left for the break. The day I got
back, I looked, but it was gone.”
Clare Wuerker, another thirdyear student, had a similar situation
befall her. Wuerker’s brand-new
Secured Transactions textbook was
also swiped form a mailbox, sometime during the add-drop period.
Where do the casebooks go? Maybe back to Courts & Commerce, but
probably on the Internet, to websites like half.com, where buying
and selling textbooks can be a lucrative endeavor.
The Law Weekly caught up with
second-year student Joe Tavery,
who admits that he does pretty well
buying and selling textbooks—legitimately—on half.com, a website
that allows users to name their own
price for items they wish to buy. “I
buy low and sell high,” said Tavery,
explaining that the interface was
easy to use and he could often sell
books on half.com for five times as
much as he could selling them back
to Courts & Commerce.
“I set the price I want to sell for,”
Tavery continued. “For example,
I’ll put a book up the week before
the semester starts, and it’s usually
snapped up at a pretty high price,
though not as high as what the
bookstore charges. If they haven’t
sold in a week, I’ll probably lower
the price a bit.”
Tavery’s angle, however, is a legitimate one. “I only sell books that
I’ve acquired legally, of course; I’ve
never stolen a book.” He added,
though, that based on his experiences, it would not be difficult for
someone to sell a stolen textbook
online and profit handsomely from
it, especially if it were a current edition in good condition. “It [would
be] so easy,” Tavery said.
Perpetrators Face Stiff Punishments
Last semester, after one of the
thefts occurred, Honor Committee members and second-year students Sarah Robertson and Andrew
Lloyd penned an editorial in the
Law Weekly urging students with information about the theft to contact
them, noting the applicability of the
University’s “single-sanction” punishment to the person responsible,
and explaining the process of conscientious retraction.
When contacted for this article,
Robertson reiterated the significance of the single sanction. “Any
University of Virginia student who
is found guilty of lying, cheating or
stealing is expelled permanently
from the University,” Robertson
said, which include the perpetrators of both the laptop and textbook
thefts.
However, Robertson noted that
Honor Committee members like she
and Lloyd cannot initiate the proceedings themselves—not until students or faculty members who have
information about an alleged violation of the Honor Code file a report.
For that reason, Robertson strongly
encourages anyone who has any information about any of the thefts to
contact them, or, alternatively, contact the honor office.
For those responsible, Robertson
explained that there is a process of
“conscientious retraction,” which,
if effective, would be a complete affirmative defense to honor proceedings. The process, however, is only
valid so long as it is not filed “after
the student knows that anyone suspects that he or she committed the
Honor offense.” More information
about the subject is available from
Honor Committee members, or the
Honor Code website, virginia.edu/
honor
A conscientious retraction will
not protect the thief(s) from the Virginia Criminal Code, however. Va.
Code § 8.2-95 defines Grand Larceny as the theft not from the person
of any item valued at over $200. The
offense is “punishable by imprisonment in a state correctional facility
for not less than one nor more than
twenty years or, in the discretion
of the jury or court trying the case
without a jury, be confined in jail
for a period not exceeding twelve
months or fined not more than
$2,500, either or both.”
A felony conviction in Virginia
also strips one of the right to vote, as
well as several other privileges, such
as the right to hold public office and
the right to own a firearm.
Administration Advises Caution
Martha Ballenger, in an email to
the student body after one of the
thefts, said that students should be
extra cautious regarding their personal belongings at the Law School.
Commenting to the Law Weekly
last Monday, Ballenger expressed
her dismay that yet another laptop
was stolen. “It is extremely distressing that losses like this can occur
in the Law School,” said Ballenger.
“Since this is a public building, people not affiliated with the school are
free to come here, and I sincerely
hope and trust that a stranger and
not a member of our community is
responsible for these crimes.”
“Students should report any such
loss immediately to the University
Police,” Ballenger added, “in case
they have information as to a possible perpetrator or can use the new
information toward identifying a
pattern that might lead to the recovery of the property.”
In any event, one thing is clear:
The halcyon environment, in which
students were able to leave their
belongings—even their expensive
ones like computers—unattended
without fear of them being taken is
gone forever. In its place is a brave
new world where nothing is safe,
and anyone who leaves their computer in the law library or casebook
in a mailbox is at risk of falling prey
to thieves who are all too ready and
able to play on our sense of trust and
community.
Still, at least one student thinks
the sense of community at the Law
School remains strong: “When I
told my friends about what had
happened they were extraordinarily supportive, and even friends
of friends were offering class notes
that they had lost, one friend sent
out an email asking if anyone had
the casebook I could borrow,” said
Walters. “People at the Law School
really came together around me in a
real supportive way, which is great
after a theft . . . their support helped
to restore the Law School’s sense of
community in a very moving way.”
continued from page 1
D.C. Residents Deserve
Congressional Voting Rights
portioned “among the several states,”
but courts have allowed Congress to
treat the city as a state for purposes of
taxation under the District Clause.
As the original author of the D.C.
Voter Rights Amendment, and former Chairman of the House Government Committee (which has jurisdiction over the District of Columbia) I
tried, on a Bi-Partisan basis to rectify
this historical anomaly.
It is important to remember that
between 1788 and 1800, voters in
the present boundaries of the District
of Columbia voted for voting House
members (the Virginia part of D.C.
voted in Virginia, and the section
taken from Maryland voted in Maryland). They did not vote for Senators.
Senators were elected by state legislatures, and Senators represent “states.”
But House members represent people.
This is a significant distinction.
It was only after the hotly contested
election of 1800, when the seat of
government moved from New York
to Washington, that D.C. voters lost
their elected representative. Congress never got around to addressing
Congressional representation. Nevertheless, opponents of this bill read a
distinct prohibition against extending
District residents the right to vote into
Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution—which requires that the representative be chosen by the “people of
the several states.”
In their view, this clause impliedly
prohibits Congress from authorizing
voting for District representatives
because they are not residents of a
“state.” The argument is challenged
at the threshold by the fact that
Congress has already twice granted
voting representation to citizens not
actually living in a state. In Evans v.
Cornman, the Supreme Court held
that residents of federal enclaves
within states—such as the National
Institutes of Health—have a constitutional right to congressional representation. And through the Overseas
Voting Act, Congress has provided
Americans living abroad the right to
vote in federal elections, as though
they were present in their last place of
residence in the United States. There
is no reason to suppose that Congress
has less ability to provide voting representation to the residents of the
Nation’s capital.
Constitutional arguments aside,
the D.C. Voter Rights controversy
boils down to the one issue that often
gridlocks Congress: Partisan Politics.
There is a little dispute that the D.C.
Congressional representative will be
a Democrat, and in a fiercely partisan
town, asking Republicans to vote to
add a Democratic seat to the House
seems to trump “democratic” (with a
small d) concerns.
In an attempt to mitigate the partisan concerns, my legislation added
two sections to give it a broader political appeal.
First, the legislation increases the
size of the House of Representatives
from 435 to 437 members. This addition was intended to assuage members from states with declining populations who feared the D.C. Voting
representative could take a District
away from their state after the 2010
census. By adding two seats, these
members would help ensure the continuation of their own districts instead
of contributing to their demise.
Secondly, under the current formula for state apportionment, the
next state eligible for the 436th District is Utah, the nation’s most Republican state. Thus, the immediate
effects of the legislation would be
to add one Republican seat and one
Democratic seat. This is a traditional
gambit for Congress. In the 1950s
the additions of Alaska and Hawaii
added one Republican state (Hawaii)
and one Democratic state (Alaska).
Interestingly, as the partisan winds
shifted, a generation later Hawaii
became solidly Democratic state and
Alaska, a Republican bastion. Also,
adding two seats instead of just one
keeps the House at an odd number to
prevent ties when fully voted.
Even with these additions, the
sharp partisan contrasts continue to
permeate support and opposition to
the legislation. Republicans believe
that a semi-permanent Democratic
seat in the District of Columbia is not
worth a two year Republican gain in
Utah. (In 2012, Utah is likely to get a
fourth seat anyway, because of population growth. No one can predict
which state or party will pick up the
436th seat.) Thus, voting in the Senate
and House broke down along predictably partisan lines. In the Senate, all
but two Democrats supported the additions, (out of 58) while only seven
Republicans (out of 41) supported it.
In the House, lopsided Democratic
support and lopsided Republican opposition continue to be the rule.
As the original author of the legislation, and two term Chairman of the
House Republican Campaign Committee, I became convinced that the
lack of congressional voting rights in
our capital city was wrong and a subject for international ridicule while we
are holding ourselves out to the world
to be the beacon of democracy. It was
a great disappointment, though hardly a surprise that the new seat became
a partisan football. If the District were
a Republican bastion, I have little
doubts the roles would be reversed.
Many of my Republican colleagues, including myself, were willing to take a chance on the Constitutionality of the Partial Birth Abortion
Ban, the Communications Decency
Act, and the Line Item Veto, all of
which were struck down as unconstitutional. Similarly, many Democrats
became strict constructionists using
constitutional arguments to oppose
bills they didn’t like, but believe Congress should move ahead here.
Moreover, opponents of D.C. Voting Rights have used the legislation
to attach gun rights to the legislation. Supporters of the Amendment
have no intention of voting for the
legislation, even with the gun rights
amendment, but the Bill offers an
opportunity to make mischief and
pose embarrassing votes for some
supporters.
My 14 years in Congress prepared
me for many such legislative maneuvers, and long term Congress watchers shouldn’t be surprised. My only
regret is that, as the original author
of the legislation (along with District
Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton),
who helped shepherd it through the
House two years ago, (only to see it
die in a Senate filibuster), that I will
be watching from the sidelines this
year when it becomes law.
For me, this issue should transcend
partisan politics.
Editor’s Note: Thomas M. Davis III
’75 served for seven terms as the Representative for the Eleventh Congressional District, located in Northern
Virginia. The D.C. House Voting Rights
Act passed in the Senate on February
26, 2009, and a vote is pending in the
House of Representatives.
6
Columns
VIRGINIA LAW WEEKLY
Friday, 20 March 2009
Diet: The Greek Word for “Way of Life” Oddly Includes the English Word “Die”
Sometimes, you plan in advance. Far in advance. You think
to yourself, “I am going to write
Allison Muth ’09
Senior Columnist
a column about
diets. Everyone I
know is on a diet.
Spring break just
happened and people wanted to
look good. I will turn this diet
column in on time, much like all
of the columns I have written for
the Law Weekly. No problem. I
will be the only columnist writing about diets.” Then, bam!
Next thing you know, you are
lying in a student health center bed with an IV in your arm.
Lots of thoughts cross through
your mind. Oddly enough, Tom
Seider is prominent in many.
“Tom has probably emailed me
several times today asking why
I have neglected to comply with
the 8 p.m. last night deadline. I
would answer those emails explaining my situation if I was
able to move either of my arms,”
you think. Unfortunately, however, your arms are incapacitated. Also, you are bawling like
a small child because the last
twenty minutes involved a close
correlation between the words
“needles” and “digging.”
Also, you start thinking in
depth about your unintentional
personal commitment to procrastination. “Gee, self, maybe
if you had spent the night you
appointed as ‘column-writing
night’ actually writing your column, you would be done right
now.” Instead, you signed up for
eHarmony. After you finally got
home from the health center,
you had thirty-five emails waiting from men in the VA, MD, DC,
NJ, NY, CT, and RI areas. Absolutely nothing related to this
was positive.
Okay, but now on to “diets.”
It’s already too late to look good
for SB ’09, but summer is coming quickly, and the Ivy pool is
highly competitive, considering
first-years are up to three years
younger (twenty years older)
than you are.
Atkins
Atkins is something about
“net carbs.” From a completely
unknowledgeable perspective, I
like to think of this as meaning
that I can eat anything I would
possibly want as long as I make
up for it in celery. Celery is like a
negative integer in an equation.
Chocolate cake? I see the chocolate cake and I raise you approximately eight heads of celery.
In addition to this “net carbs”
idea, dieters are allowed to eat
large amounts of eggs, meat and
cheese. Reading about Atkins
allows a dieter to think of “diet”
as a synonym for “heaven.”
Become Famous and Get a
Personal Trainer
This is fairly self-explanatory.
From a distance, I don’t find it
surprising that celebrities look
good. If I could pay someone to
force me to work out and prevent
me from eating entire blocks
of mozzarella in one sitting, I
would be surprised and furious
if I weren’t hot.
The Zone
I just looked up The Zone web-
photo courtesy of Ben Grosz ’11 and Allison Muth ’09
Before, as lumpy as an old pillow. After, a whole different person.
site, and I might be in love!! Anything that starts out its explanation with a citation to Greek
language roots immediately
wins me over. Either that or, my
inability to keep food down this
weekend has left me temporarily susceptible to strong swings
of emotion. Hmm, and reading
further, the crash comes as I attempt to understand what the
word “eicosanoids” means. No
idea.
7-11 Foods
I believe credit for this “diet”
goes to some third-years. The
idea is that for one week, you are
only allowed to eat foods from 711. But, the key limitation is that
you are only allowed to eat each
food once. I’m not sure if the effectiveness of this diet would be
entirely dependent on grease-induced bulimia, but without test-
ing it, that would be my guess.
South Beach
South Beach is another one of
those “impractical during spring
semester of law school diets.”
Giving up alcohol is an integral
part of at least a few weeks of it.
Considering the back-to-back-toback linking of Feb Club, spring
break, and Pong for PILA, you
have probably already failed. (If
you like reading recipes though,
the South Beach Diet book is superfun!)
Tabasco/Honey/Saltwater
Again, 3Ls shouldn’t be allowed
to come up with diet plans. I’m
not sure if I was told about this
purely as a joke to see how gullible a twenty-four-year-old girl
could be, but . . . “very gullible.”
Nothing about this sounds less
than disgusting. Saltwater/Honey/TEXAS PETE might be okay,
but Tabasco? Are we slumming?
Anorexia
There are so many positives!!!
I mean, the inability to conceive
children might be a good thing
for a lot of people right now. Beyond that . . . stunted growth?
Probably cute. Constantly feeling
cold? Hello, sweaters! Decreased
libido? That’s what alcohol is for!
Nerve deterioration, leading to
difficulty in moving your feet?
Fortunately, the legal profession
is a desk job. (I am not serious.
Do not do this. Eat. Food is delicious.)
Randomly Selected Foods to
be Cut Out of Your Normal Eating Plan
Thank some 2Ls for this one.
Quickly brainstorm the five foods
that you each love the most, and
then impose a fine to be paid to
the group if you screw up and eat
one of them. Also, obnoxiously
talk about your diet ALL the time
until people contemplate pouring
ranch down your throats while
you sleep. In conclusion though,
this diet seemed to work for them,
aside from the rebound effect
that occurred on SB ’09, where
at least one of them was eating
pizza, chips, or fries continuously
for the entire week.
Tapeworm
Yeah. . .but wouldn’t it be SO
easy.
Anyways, my personal favorite would be to make up your
own, sell books about it, and
make millions! Model yourself
off of Robert Atkins. But without
the bankruptcy and death parts.
Downer.
Email: [email protected]
Law School Grades: Pass/Fail? Maybe.
Law school grades. The very
thought of them stirs up nightmares (literally) and anxiety.
Kurt Davis ’09
Columnist
I’m still waiting
on one grade
from the Fall . . .
okay I just got my
final grade in the past week. My
story is not uncommon; many
students waited into March to
get all their grades. Some firstyears—applying in a severe
economic downturn—have disturbingly waited until March to
get a grade that, for some, was
important to securing one of the
diminishing number of summer
of positions available. Just like
the professors, the students are
barraged with numerous obligations throughout the semester.
Yet, many students would be
punished if they turned in papers so many days past the deadline, let alone one day late. Several top law schools are
radically altering (or have altered) their grading policies,
moving away from letter grades
or, less drastically, allowing professors to give out more grades
at the top end of the curve. Harvard and Stanford are switching from the traditional grade
and letter policies to pass/fail
systems. Yale and Berkeley are
continuing with similar systems
already in place. NYU allows
professors to give more As. Rumors have it that NYU has even
considered the pass/fail option
along with its uptown rival, Columbia. Is it time for the UVA to
make the change to a pass/fail
system? Schools have provided several reasons why modification is
needed. First, they argue that the
changes create fairer evaluation
systems and better convey their
students’ accomplishments to employers. However, many employers privately express annoyance
with the differing grading scales
employed by law schools and the
confusion such scales add to interpreting a potential employee’s
performance. Second, schools point to decreased competitiveness. Many
administrators and professors
believe that the hostile environment engendered by letter grades
and their annoying cousin—the
curve—undermines the overall
legal educational experience. Accordingly, they further argue that
the increasing liberty and autonomy to explore intellectually
without concern for academic
penalty betters the academic experience. The time may be coming for
the University of Virginia School
of Law to give deep consideration to the idea. Although the
environment at this school is famously known for its congeniality, many students have privately
complained about the changing
environment cultivated by the
changing composition of the student body to a more competitive
bunch. The curve leaves many
students struggling to comprehend where they stand compared
to their peers inside and outside
the Law School. Strict adherence
to the curve becomes ridiculous
when Student Records has to
send grades back to professors
to be adjusted to meet a specific
class average.
Another quickly growing argument in favor of this change is the
need for quicker turnaround with
grades, specifically for first-years.
Student Records could expect
turnaround to be a little quicker
under this system . . . the grade
would be one of four options:
Honors, Pass, Low Pass, or Fail.
This past semester has left many
1Ls frustrated as employers withdraw potential positions or toss
out their fellowship applications
under the impression that the
student is simply holding back on
releasing certain grades because
they are not good enough. Numerous 2Ls and 3Ls can relate to the
situation. Schools worry that the decreased focus on student GPAs
could be a disadvantage for students with potential employers.
Yet, this has not been the case
for Yale or Berkeley lawyers and
likely will not be a problem for
new Stanford or Harvard lawyers.
The comparison between students
based on grades was already complicated. If anything, this system
may just make it easier for employers because of the more comparable systems. Comparable grading
systems between elite schools also
may ease the inter-school competition when recruiting the best
students. Other concerns remain with the
enhanced ability to coast through
classes. Yet, this seems to be the
case either way for certain students. Understandably, many students would be bothered by the
fewer opportunities to distinguish
themselves from their peers. Thus
far, however, the absence of letter
grades has not undercut students
at other law schools. In a dream
world, these two concerns would
be countered by smaller class sizes where students could not hide
amongst 90-100 plus students but
would rather be spotlighted in a
room of 20-30 students. Not surprisingly, the debate
has been confined to the top 14
law schools. This is likely because
schools outside the top 14 might
find it advantageous to stay the
course with letter grades, if only
to provide students with the opportunity to distinguish themselves from their law school
peers at higher ranked schools.
Whatever the case—the growing frustrations of grading, the
challenges to comparing students and schools, and the consistent concerns about the legal
academic environment—all lend
support for the pass/fail system.
Email: [email protected]
Friday, 20 March 2009
VIRGINIA LAW WEEKLY
Columns & Reviews
To the Beach and Back: Worst Spring Break Ever
I was not one of the lucky many
who took an exotic trip for Spring
Break. Besides being afraid of deKara Allen ’10
Reviews Editor
capitation by Mexican drug lords, the
choice not to go
became easy when
I realized the combination of Scott
Commons tater tots and free themed
drinks had left my midriff unsuitable for public viewing. Instead, I
decided I would use the break to
get into shape and watch Lifetime
original movies. I considered doing
research about nutrition, but that
seemed like a lot of effort, and I’d
heard from friends of friends that
the South Beach diet had worked
for their friends. Plus I figured a diet
involving the word ‘beach’ involved
a lot of lying around and drinking
pina coladas.
Day 1: At the gym a guy is lifting weights while drinking out of a
two-liter soda bottle. As bafflement
grows inexplicably into rage, I realize I am addicted to caffeine. Only
13 more days without it. As I am
packing to drive home my mother
calls to tell me the roads are bad,
but I ignore her, considering that
normally means it’s raining and less
than five hours before sunset. An
hour later, I discover the terrifying
truth—she actually meant there’s a
blizzard, and my chance of survival
is decreasing by 20 percent every
hour. After I get to the house and
collapse in a snowdrift in a brief
prayer of thanks to whichever deity
let me live, her first words are, “We
don’t have any food.” When you cannot eat bread or leftover Halloween
candy, this statement becomes very
literal.
Day 3: I go to lunch with my
grandmother. Seven photo albums
later, I remember I’m supposed to
eat every three hours, so I head to
the grocery store. That’s where I
make my mistake. Sugar free candy.
Great, I thought, it’s like sugar, only
I’m allowed to eat it. Unfortunately,
it turns out eating more than a piece
is only a good idea if you’re curious
about what pregnancy labor contractions feel like.
Day 5: I have kicked my caffeine
addiction. Unfortunately this means
I am now fully aware of my stomach
pain rather than just dully semi-conscious of it. I make a South Beach
Dinner for my family—stuffed red
peppers. The mixture looks so pathetic I add tomato paste so there’s
something kind of holding it together—Mom: I’ll eat it tomorrow. Dad:
will anyone trade me their cheese on
top? Dessert is peanut butter cookies, which are peanut butter, egg,
and sugar substitute. You wouldn’t
think those ingredients could go
wrong. Only my mother is willing
to try them (my dad now claims to
be on the North Beach diet in which
he eats everything I can’t). She eats
half of one, then asks, “How much
longer is this diet?”
Day 8: My stomach has found a
new way to rebel against a complete
lack of carbohydrates—I can no longer be within a five-foot vicinity of
other people. Well, except for people I hate, and since it’s spring break
none of my law school nemeses are
around. I go to the grocery store,
but have to leave quickly because
there are Easter candy displays
everywhere. Kroger is just flaunting the Cadbury and Reese’s eggs.
I almost quit when the scale at the
gym reveals I have gained a pound,
but think better of it when I remember my journalistic integrity/lack of
funds to purchase non- South Beach
food.
Day 9: In my seminar, I compare
the difference between marijuana
and methamphetamine to the difference between sugar and Splenda.
The girl across from me has a piece
of Easter Candy in a purple wrapper.
I spend half the seminar debating
whether it is a Russell Stover chocolate bunny or a Peep. Ordinarily, I
would have only spared such second-rate candy a scornful glance.
Everyone knows Peeps are the candy corn of Easter.
This food baby is no bundle of joy.
photo by Ben Grosz '11
Day 11: The hardest part about
this diet is that it renders my natural
scavenging instincts useless. I spot an
oasis of free snacks in the Lexis Lab.
I lead a two-man expedition there,
only to discover that none are diet
approved. To comfort myself, I take
a sugar cookie to add to my stockpile
of candy, one of those Walmart soft
cookies that are surprisingly delicious. As I sit in the library staring
at it, hungry, I realize it’s no use. I
give it to a 1L sitting across from me.
I don’t even like pork, but I spend my
seminar class engraged by the sight
of my classmates with food from
the Admitted Students BBQ. The
situation is not improved when my
neighbor, who is religiously fasting,
abandons me by tearing into some
Snickers after sunset. I suspect they
are from the Westlaw lab.
Day 12: At my annual checkup,
the scale reveals that I am exactly
the same weight I have always been.
I want to throw the scale out the
window, but I remember the doctor has access to a lot of sharp metal
instruments. I go to a trial lawyer
convention in Colonial Williamsburg (educational, but ultimately
disappointing since we didn’t get
to make wax drip candles). A presenter shows pictures of car accident
victims that are so horrifying some
people leave the room. I consider
dropping out of law school to become an alehouse wench so that I
never have to drive again, but realize
I lack the forearm strength to carry
those heavy metal mugs. There’s
only one thing to do­­—I call my best
friend in Richmond, and on the way
back to Charlottesville, we meet at
midnight at Krispy Kreme. The first
bite of doughnut was what it must be
like to hold your firstborn child, after they’ve scrubbed off all the gross
stuff. Life might be short, or it might
be excruciatingly long, I don’t care as
long as it’s delicious.
Email: [email protected]
Blue Ridge Pig: Welcome to the Real World of Virginia
Smitha Dante ‘10
Executive Editor
One Antitrust professor makes one
offhand reference to a middle-of-nowhere shack that happens to sell barbecue, and a certain friend of mine,
who shall remain unnamed, becomes
obsessed with going to check it out.
After two days of being snowed in during spring break, I gathered the aforementioned friend and my downstairs
neighbor, and we headed off into the
mountains in search of some ‘cue.
Forty-five minutes of two-lane state
highways later, we knew we were
there when we saw the giant smiling
pig on a pole on the side of the road.
Based on appearances alone, it looked
promising. Much like some of the best
food to be found in Charlottesville
(Wayside Chicken, Dürty Nellies, Bellair Market), it was in close proximity
to a gas station. The fact that there was
also a car wash adjacent to it seemed
like icing on the cake.
We stepped inside, where we were
greeted by a strangely lifelike Santa
Claus to the left as we were hit by
the smell of smoked meat. In front of
us was the ordering counter, behind
which was a very utilitarian kitchen,
consisting mostly of metal countertops. To the right of the counter was a
chalkboard which housed the menu.
The options were pretty simple:
chicken, pork, beef, or ribs; sandwich
and/or platter; 1 lb. platters available.
Platters come with potato salad, cole-
slaw, and baked beans on the side.
The downstairs neighbor and I ordered the pork sandwich platters; the
unnamed friend ordered the chicken
(no sandwich) platter.
We sat down and began to look
around at the décor, which consisted
of strange stylized pig statues, other
random crap, and business cards in
lieu of wallpaper. The minute I sat
down, my ongoing quest to stay hydrated, combined with the 45 minute
drive, hit me hard. I went up to the
counter and asked for directions to
the restroom.
Turns out I needed directions. The
good news was they had a restroom.
The bad news was the restroom was
out the door, across the parking lot,
down a gravel path, and behind the
car wash. And just like the décor inside the restaurant, the restroom was,
shall we say, rustic. There was a space
heater running, and instead of paper
towels, there was one of those old
school circular pull-towel contraptions. I decided to risk the wet hands
in the cold, and high-tailed it on back
to the restaurant, where our food had
arrived.
The food all came in Styrofoam
containers, with the sandwiches/
chicken wrapped in foil. The pulled
pork sandwiches were on the biggest
Kaiser roll I have ever seen. However,
the pork itself was strangely disappointing. I’m not sure what style of
barbecue it was, but it involved what
appeared to be a tomato-based sauce.
The sauce was strangely salty, with
none of the sweet tang that I would
expect from a barbecue sauce. And as
much as I love the flavor of smoked
meat, the pork tasted like it had been
soaking in liquid smoke for the past
week. It was just overwhelming. My
downstairs neighbor agreed. So the
pulled pork, while not bad, was not
great either.
The unnamed friend’s chicken was
also overwhelmingly smoky. Even
the white meat parts were strangely
grey and dark, presumably from being smoked. He didn’t seem to mind
it as much as the downstairs neighbor
and I did, but he also was not the biggest fan. According to him, the jerk
chicken at Eppie’s on the downtown
mall both tastes better and has the
advantage of being closer.
As for the sides, they were a disappointment as well. The baked beans
appeared to be in a sauce that was
substantially similar to the barbecue
sauce. In other words, they were
strangely salty, without enough of
that sweet tang. None of us made
much of a dent in our small servings.
The coleslaw was in a vinaigrette
sauce, with no mayonnaise. All three
of us thought it was fine, but unremarkable. We did eat it, though. As
for the potato salad, I’m just not sure
what was going on. I rarely meet a potato in a form I don’t like, but the Blue
Ridge Pig managed to introduce me
to one. I couldn’t tell whether there
was any mayo; there was maybe
some dill. But it was boring and not
tasty at all. We each took a bite and
decided to leave it.
So all in all, the food was mediocre at best. Also of note, the Blue
Ridge Pig charges 15 cents for a cup
of water in a Styrofoam cup. And I
would be remiss if I did not give you
fair warning that your clothes will
reek of smoke until you wash them,
as will your hair. The smoked meat
smell may be an aphrodisiac in certain quarters, but I don’t spend a lot of
time hanging around kennels. Therefore, it didn’t do me much good and
might have actually had the opposite
effect on men in my close physical
proximity.
While I wouldn’t sign up to make
the trip again anytime soon, I do think
it’s worth checking out at least once.
For less than $10, it’s an ok but very
filling meal. If you have two good
knees and like to ski (for which I envy
you), it’s on the way to Wintergreen,
and you can refill your gas tank and
your stomach in one stop. But the
ultimate reason for going is anthropological. The unnamed friend is from
New York, and to him, Blue Ridge Pig
fulfills all Virginia stereotypes.
So it’s a great place to take out-oftown visitors from more cosmopolitan locations (read, ANY visitors). If
you want to show them what George
Allen would call “the real world of Virginia,” drive them 45 minutes to the
middle of nowhere, and force them to
eat at a rustically decorated barbecue
shack attached to a gas station, where
the nearest bathroom is out behind
the car wash.
7
Basketball
and Clothes:
A Sartorial
Sweet Sixteen
Craig Smith ’09
Senior Reviewer
March Madness, clothing style.
Here’s a NCAA-style seeding of the
college basketball commentators
you’re going to see over the next
month on ESPN and CBS. (Thanks
to 3L Liz Carter for the idea that
eventually inspired this column.)
16: Dick Vitale—Things I don’t
like tend to start with the letter
‘D’: Duke, Dallas Cowboys, Doug
Leslie (how timely!), Dan Snyder, dogs. Vitale is no exception,
though with respect to his wardrobe he’s more boring than he is
aggravating.
15: Mike Gminski—My dad was
in Cole Field House in 1992 when
Richmond became the first 15 seed
to ever defeat a 2 seed (Syracuse).
Coincidentally, this appears to be
the last time Gminski purchased
an article of clothing.
14: Verne Lundquist—His shirts
and ties seem to emphasize his
turkey neck, rather than minimize
it. Like many a 14 seed, he’s oneand-done.
13: Bill Raftery—Like Vitale,
too many dark blue shirts that rob
his face of color and too many ugly
ties.
12: Tracy Wolfson (sideline)—
Let’s see how her girl-next-door
look and preppy wardrobe will
translate to indoor events. If it
works, then like many 12 seeds
she’s going to be a dangerous
matchup in the first round.
11: Clark Kellogg—Moving
to the chrome dome was good;
graduating from the Greg Gumbel
Bland Tan Suit Collection would
be even better.
10: Digger Phelps—Some call
the tielighter gimmicky. Perhaps,
but I like how the bright colors
liven up his ruddy complexion.
8-9: Ian Eagle and Jim
Spanarkel—Like most 8 and 9
seeds in the tournament, it’s impossible to separate the two, and
the winner is losing over the weekend anyways.
7: Len Elmore—A threat to advance past the first weekend, but
sometimes his shirts call for a first
round exit.
6: Dan Bonner—His outfits
aren’t bad, but like many 6 seeds
you just feel he could do better.
5: Jim Nantz—How wide was
that tie he wore during the Selection Show? Five inches across?
Ten? Nantz doesn’t peak until the
Masters, when it’s all blazers all
the time.
4: Greg Anthony—Has improved
each year on TNT and ESPN. His
three-piece number on Selection
Sunday was very promising.
3: Lesley Visser (sideline)—
How Visser maintains a continually fresh look while dressing her
age must be a trade secret. Especially love her scarves.
2: Gus Johnson—He makes that
CBS blazer look cool, and it fits
him well, to boot. Always expect a
pocket square and sharp tie.
1: Jay Bilas—How often do you
see a 6’8” man wear suits cut so
well that he looks like an even
six feet? Coupled with his strong,
simple furnishings and early adoption of the white linen square, he
narrowly edges out Johnson for
the top line.
8
The Back Page
VIRGINIA LAW WEEKLY
Seider House Rules: An Advice Column for 1Ls
I know it’s only mid-March,
but I’m already starting to dread
the end of the year. Not just beTom Seider '10
Columns Editor
cause of the exams
and papers that go
along with it, but
also because this
means all of the 3Ls are leaving
soon. Aww, you say, that’s cute.
Well, yes, it is, I’m adorable. But
less adorably, I’m concerned by
the fact that exactly half of my
friends are leaving, which will
make me (somehow) even less
cool. This unfortunate percentage loss is a result of the fact that
I have still not met a single 1L.
Not one.
I’m not sure how this is possible. I have one 2L friend; let’s
call her “Minoo” (it could be anyone!), who has managed to get a
whole flock of 1Ls beholden to
her. Every time we talk, I need
only wait a few minutes before
the flock begins to form around
her, eagerly clamoring for her attention and breadcrumbs. I don’t
know how she does it.
In any event, I’ve decided I
need to make more of a conscious
effort to meet some 1Ls. Rather
than try and have an awkward
conversation with one at a social
event (trust me, no one wants
this), I chose instead to force interaction with the entire class by
writing a 1L advice column and
opening myself up to questions,
which they definitely submitted,
and I didn’t just make all of them
up. A disclaimer: 95% of my
time was spent coming up with a
catchy title (worth it!).
Q: Tom, I’m just a typical
1L guy, one who is definitely
real, and I’ve been having some
trouble meeting girls at the law
school. How did you manage to
date someone so much more attractive than you are?
A: Someone once said that
“everything is relative.” Possibly
Einstein, but I’m not sure. It sure
seems like something he would
say. In any event, I cannot think
of a more appropriate statement
to describe dating in law school,
where you are the beneficiary of
a truly wonderful sliding scale.
Allow me to give you a personal example of how a sliding
scale works. Let’s imagine that
someone reads my column and
decides it’s funny, which is not
at all impossible and happens all
the time so please shut up. Is it
because I am actually funny? No,
it’s because I always try and work
the schedule so I write on the
same day as either Doug or Kara.
That way, instead of having to be
actually funny, I just have to be
funnier than Doug and Kara, a
relatively simple task.
Courtesy of quizilla.com
This column takes a strange turn, doesn’t it?
The sliding scale of law school
plays to the average guy’s advantage in the exact same way
with regards to looks, personality, and general dateability. For
instance, let’s say that you are
5’11”. You have always been considered of average height, right?
Wrong. Here you are officially a
Tall Person. This is because, for
reasons unclear to me, the male
side of our law school is populated primarily by hobbits. This
means your 5’11” is tall, and my
6’3” means people mistake me
for Hagrid from Harry Potter.
And those consecutive fantasy novel references bring me to
my next point: The students at
UVA Law are, for the most part,
a bunch of dorks. Sure we might
be cooler than the kids at law
schools like Harvard, but let’s
be honest, people, you can’t fall
off the floor. As a result, so long
as you can speak in complete
sentences without drooling on
yourself, girls here will be impressed.
For example, the first real
conversation I ever had with my
girlfriend was at Feb Club and
covered topics such as Battlestar
Galactica, why my hands were
so sweaty, which dinosaur is
best, and how she couldn’t find
any of her friends because I had
cornered her at the far end of a
bowling alley.
So have faith. Remember: average looks make you a model,
kind of clever becomes hilarious,
and the ability to play softball
reasonably well means girls in
NGSL will find you inexplicably
desirable (see: Doug). Now, if a
female law student were to ask
me for dating advice, I’m afraid
I would have a slightly different
message, which is that it’s time
to settle. Repeat after me, “Well,
he’s kind of tall…”
Q: Which dinosaur is best?
A: Stegosaurus. Duh.
Q: As a regular reader of your
column, I’ve noticed that you are
kind of a goon. Yet you still managed to get a job, whereas I have
not, possibly because I didn’t
even get my grades until about
a week ago. Career Services says
not to panic, but I was wondering if you had some more specific advice?
A: Not to panic, huh? Please
allow me to play devil’s advocado, as Tracy Jordan would say,
and instead make the suggestion
that you freak the geek out. YOU
DON’T HAVE A JOB! WHAT ARE
YOU GOING TO DO?!!
And please don’t think that
somehow PILA is going to provide
some magical support so that
you can spend your whole summer suing orphans (I’m not entirely sure what PILA grants are
used for, but I feel like orphans
must be involved somehow). Historically PILA hasn’t had enough
money to pay for your lunch, and
that’s during years when everyone and their mom doesn’t apply
for a grant (this isn’t hyperbole,
my mom actually applied for a
PILA grant this year).
Also, don’t listen to Career
Services. You know why? They
already have jobs. They don’t
know what it’s like. If you don’t
believe me, take a stroll around
their cushy offices upstairs. They
are spacious and smell of leather and rich mahogany, whereas
your best prospect this summer
probably involves working out
of a dumpster, like some sort of
legal Oscar the Grouch (if you’re
lucky).
I wish I had some more constructive advice, but I don’t, because there isn’t any and abandon all hope and YOU NEED A
JOB RIGHT NOW. I hope this
helped.
Q: Is it true that every class
here has its own shot that it
must take when at the bar, and
if so, how is this shot selected?
Also, as a follow-up, how upset
is Dean Mahoney that you chose
this question and not something
about, say, library hours?
A: It is true that the class shot
is a storied UVA Law tradition
that goes back over many years
or possibly I just made it up right
now. The 1Ls, as far as I know, do
not have a class shot as of yet.
3L class shot: Angry Bear. Adopted (stolen) from the class
before them, the Angry Bear is
equal parts whiskey, honey liquor, 151, and despair. The idea
is that when all of the liquors
mix, they start to fight your stomach not unlike how an enraged
bear would if trapped inside of
a person. After taking the shot,
you are supposed to do your best
impression of a bear, preferably
an angry one.
2L class shot: Steaming Hots.
Invented by my roommate, the
Steaming Hot is Firefly Sweet
Tea Vodka mixed with Tabasco
sauce. The explanation for this
shot is kind of complicated, and
by complicated I mean to say
truly bizarre.
So the back-story here is that
when my roommate drinks, he
occasionally (almost always)
likes to pretend he is Mrs. Potts
from Beauty and the Beast. Yes,
that’s right. As in the anthropomorphic teapot voiced by the
delightful Angela Lansbury (old
lady from “Murder, She Wrote”).
Usually this involves a performance of “A Tale as Old as Time,”
and the occasional recitation of
lines from the movie, such as
“back into the cupboard with
you, Chip.”
As a natural expansion of this
trend, to the extent that the word
natural can be applied to anything explained in the last paragraph, a tea-themed shot was
born. After downing the concoction (it burns, but in a bad way),
you are supposed to pretend you
are a teapot by making a handle
and spout with your arms while
yelling, “Steeeeeeeaming hot!”
Bonus points if you can do all
this before vomiting.
Q: What in the hell are you
talking about? That was probably some of the worst advice
ever. Is there any way you can
make this better?
A: Kara’s column is on page 7.
Email: [email protected]
Friday, 20 March 2009
faculty quotes
A. Johnson: I wake up in the morning, and I’m potentially violent.
J. Harrison: Are straight-to-DVD
movies the new equivalent of B-movies? Leaving aside porn, of course,
which dwarfs the mainstream movie
business . . .
C. Nelson: Can anyone think of a
sound basis for the Court requiring
a statute to sue state officials, but no
statute to sue federal officials?
Student: [gives theory distinguishing the two]
C. Nelson: That was an interesting
thought that had not occurred to me.
Class: [stares at student in awe]
G. Geis: Would it be a fiduciary
breach?
Student: I’d want to know how
close they were.
G. Geis: They go out to dinner once
every three months; they call each
other up; they’re Facebook friends!
J. Harrison: By and large a bar review course is a process of intellectual
death.
Student: Let me comb through the
42 pages of reading.
M. Doran: Oh my God! You poor
soul, take the rest of the semester off.
I’m putting a “W” next to your name
for whiner.
J. Monahan: He was on Twitter? Is
that a word?
A. Johnson: It’s like a hell-hole,
with the plaster and the feces. That’s
what I think of Vermont.
M. Doran: In lieu of beating small
children, we have a recording system
[for easements].
C. Sprigman: You [UVA law students] are like employees who aren’t
on methadone. Well, most of you.
C. Barzun: His wife saw that he
had been visiting Internet sites about
poisoning. I don’t know why he didn’t
‘Clear Private Data!’
C. Sprigman: Is this a legitimate
interest [for Virginia]? We don’t want
Tiger Woods?
J. Harrison: [on losing property in
law versus being held in contempt of
court in equity] It’s one thing to have
your house seized, it’s another to have
your ass seized.