Home »
Meetings & Events »
86th Annual Meeting

86th Annual Meeting

Annual Meeting Blog

Our new Annual Meeting blog, written by members, provides descriptions of the sessions and events, photos, and commentary on the Meeting. More information about our bloggers

Showing posts 21 - 30 of 49 prev | next

The Matter of the Death Penalty

Posted By: Mark Stichel | May, 19, 2009 | 07:18 PM
The scheduled one-hour discussion of the Council 's motion to withdraw Section 210.6 of the Model Penal Code regarding the death penalty turned into a session that lasted over two hours. The session included an amendment to the motion and an amendment to the amendment. My first action as a newly-elected ALI member in October 2007 was to post a comment on the electronic forum that the ALI hosted regarding the Clark-Podgor motion from the 2007 Annual Meeting "That the Institute is opposed to capital punishment." I wrote in 2007 that I was opposed to the motion and that the ALI should undertake a study to determine whether the Model Penal Code provision relating to capital punishment could be improved. Since 2007, the ALI obtained a major study of the issue by Professors Carol Steiker and Jordan Steiker and the issue was considered by the Council. Three possible alternatives were at issue at today 's meeting: (1) Withdraw Section 210.6 without comment - the Council 's position; (2) Withdraw Section 210.6 with a comment from the Steiker Report and the ultimate phrase: "the Institute calls for the rejection of capital punishment as a penal option" - the Leahy amendment; and (3) A compromise of the two proposals - Withdraw Section 210.6 with a comment, but without the ultimate phrase - the Garner amendment to the Leahy amendment. I spoke for the first time at an Annual Meeting in favor of the Leahy Amendment. My view has shifted since 2007. Given that the Council was not inclined to have further study, I felt that Section 210.6 not only should be withdrawn, but that the Institute should make an affirmative statement regarding capital punishment. Although the members ' comments ranged over a variety of points, the tension in the room was between what I perceived to be an overwhelming opposition to capital punishment against a feeling that the Institute 's explicit rejection of capital punishment as a penal option could harm the influence of the Institute or some of its members. The compromise position - the Garner amendment to the Leahy amendment - won by a vote of 188 to 118. Although I have not had enough time to reflect on the day 's events and decide how I feel about the result, I do feel good about the process. I have been involved with death penalty issues for 25 years - I have represented two inmates under a sentence of death in state postconviction and federal habeas proceedings and followed death penalty debates in many forums. I was impressed by the seriousness with which the members addressed the issue and lack of rancor in the members ' comments. A civil discussion of the death penalty is very hard to find, but we had such a discussion today.

Which Outcome Would Further the Prestige of ALI?

Posted By: Orin Kerr | May, 19, 2009 | 04:33 PM
It's interesting that those who oppose the amendment do so on the ground that the amendment would hurt the prestige of the ALI. The ALI would come off as political and not be taken seriously, they say. Proponents of the amendment take the opposite view. The amendment would advance the prestige of the ALI, they say, as the ALI would be seen as taking the right stand. I suppose these two perspectives aren't inconsistent. Prestige is a group reaction -- a collective assessment made by a community -- and the two sides care about the reactions of different communities. That raises an interesting question: What's the audience for the ALI? What groups matter?

Barnett Draws a Standing Ovation for Her Call to Address the

Posted By: Kristen D. Adams | May, 19, 2009 | 02:33 PM
New Life Member Helaine Barnett, who has been the President of Legal Services Corporation since 2004 and was a member of the ALI 's Class of 1984, addressed the luncheon honoring new life members and 50-year members. As President Roberta Ramo noted in introducing Ms. Barnett, she is the first legal services attorney ever to be invited to address the ALI. Barnett spoke on the topic of equal access to justice. She discussed the history of legal services in America and the creation of the Legal Services Corporation, noting particular challenges such as the fact that Legal Services attorneys have historically been prohibited from practicing in certain subject areas and the various attempts to dismantle LSC entirely. Ms. Barnett emphasized President Ramo 's efforts on behalf of LSC as ABA President and also noted several promising recent developments from the Obama administration, including increased funding. In talking about the important work LSC attorneys have done, Ms. Barnett emphasized the importance of the countless unlauded cases in which Legal Aid attorneys have protected the interests of their low-income clients, in addition to high-profile cases such as Goldberg v. Kelly, which established the due-process requirement for the termination of government benefits. Barnett also emphasized that the need for LSC services greatly exceeds the current supply, with somewhere between fifty percent and eighty percent of potential clients (depending on the data source) being unable to secure representation. As she noted, the current climate of widespread mortgage defaults and foreclosures, in addition to natural disasters and the increase in domestic violence that typically accompanies a period of recession, has only exacerbated the problem. Ms. Barnett drew a standing ovation for her address, which concluded with a call for action on the part of all constituencies in the legal profession -- for members of the private bar to provide more pro bono representation, for Legal Aid offices to reach out to graduating law students whose offers of employment have been deferred by private firms, for members of the judiciary to continue their important participation in Access to Justice commissions at the state level, and for law schools to continue to support clinics, internships, fellowships, and other sources of pro bono work by students and faculty alike.

PHOTOS: New Life and New 50-Year Members Lunch

Posted By: ALI Blogger | May, 19, 2009 | 02:20 PM

PHOTOS: Sessions A & B

Posted By: ALI Blogger | May, 19, 2009 | 12:10 PM

A New Record for the ALI? Principles of the Law of Software Contracts Approved in Less Than 30 Minutes

Posted By: Kristen D. Adams | May, 19, 2009 | 11:18 AM
The Principles of Software Contracts were presented today for the membership 's approval of the Proposed Final Draft dated March 16, 2009. The session opened at 10:30 with Reporters Bob Hillman and Maureen O’Rourke introducing the draft, as well as several recent changes of particular note. At around 10:50, the Boskey motion for approval was made, seconded, and passed with apparent unanimity. As a member of the Members Consultative Group who has followed this project with interest and admiration, I would like to add my own personal kudos to Bob and Maureen for their excellent work.

Conclusion of Employment Law Session

Posted By: Kristen D. Adams | May, 19, 2009 | 10:30 AM
The Boskey motion for tentative adoption of the Restatement (Third) of Employment Law subject to the discussions at this meeting and the usual editorial prerogative has passed and the body is now moving on to a discussion of the Principles of Software Contracts.

Restatement (Third) of Employment Law

Posted By: Kristen D. Adams | May, 19, 2009 | 10:15 AM
Professor Kenneth Dau-Schmidt and others spoke on behalf of a motion to refer this draft of the Restatement (Third) of Employment Law for further study, based on criticisms and suggestions coming out of a conference held by the Labor Law Group at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, in February of this year. The group 's primary overarching critiques went to the perceived lack of diversity of viewpoint among the Reporters, as well as the question of whether a separate Restatement (Third) of Employment Law is needed. Lively debate on the motion followed, after which the motion failed.

More notes from the Restatement (Third) of Employment Law Session

Posted By: Kristen D. Adams | May, 19, 2009 | 09:48 AM
The vigorous debate continued today on the Restatement (Third) of Employment Law with a discussion of whether the tort of wrongful discipline in violation of public policy should be considered a well-established common-law cause of action, given its recognition in some 43 states, or not, given the fact that significant jurisdictions such as New York are among the seven jurisdictions that do not recognize this tort.