"Little Pink House": Kelo vs. New London, Conn.

***Southern Virginia University Press Release***

In between teaching classes at Southern Virginia University, Professor Jeff Benedict is squeezing in national media interviews, major speaking events and a book tour to meet the demands of the interest in his new book, “Little Pink House: A True Story of Defiance and Courage,” about a controversial Supreme Court decision.

“'Little Pink House' is an absorbing read, almost novelistic,” wrote Melanie Kirkpatrick, deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page. “Mr. Benedict interviewed just about every player, and he reconstructs events and dialogue in readable detail. The result is more 'Dombey and Son' than legal brief.”

The book tells the story of Susette Kelo, a middle-aged nurse and her fight to save her little pink house from a prominent governor, an enormous pharmaceutical company and city officials bent on demolishing her neighborhood. Her struggle extended all the way to the Supreme Court in the controversial case Kelo vs. New London, Conn., redefining the boundaries of eminent domain.

“'Little Pink House' is a modern morality tale,” concluded Kirkpatrick. “It shows how the politically powerful can use eminent domain as an instrument against the weak.”

After the release of Little Pink House, Benedict participated in a discussion at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., and a forum at Columbia University. He also has been interviewed about his new book on The Glenn Beck Program and on the Sean Hannity Show.

Students at Southern Virginia are excited for the success of one of their professors. Many find having professors like Benedict a key factor in the unique academic experiences they have at the university. “Being able to take a class from someone as accomplished as Jeff Benedict is a unique opportunity,” said Logan Davis, a senior majoring in liberal arts. “Many schools will boast of the people they have on their faculty. But most students will not be able to take a class from them let alone have opportunities to engage in one-on-one dialogue and paper reviews.”

Benedict is an award-winning investigative journalist and best selling author of eight books, which have been the inspiration for features on 60 Minutes, ABC News 20/20, Dateline, HBO Real Sports and the Discovery Channel. He has been a contributing writer for Sports Illustrated, the Los Angeles Times and the Hartford Courant. He holds a J.D., an M.A. in Political Science and a B.A. in history and he practiced law in Connecticut. He is a distinguished professor of English at Southern Virginia University where he teaches courses in advanced writing and contemporary issues.

Supreme Court says park monument is government speech

The Supremes are back in town, and this session is already looking interesting. Yesterday's unanimous decision in Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum (slip opinion here) held that a government may accept certain permanent religious monuments in public parks without violating the Free Speech rights of other groups who were not permitted to place similar monuments in the park. The city of Pleasant Grove already had a donated Ten Commandments monument in its Pioneer Park but it had refused to place a similar monument from a small religious group named Summum. (More background here.) Justice Alito's majority opinion overruled two separate 10th Circuit decisions by holding that such monuments are "a form of government speech and is therefore not subject to scrutiny under the Free Speech Clause."As SCOTUSblog noted, there were several concurring opinions, so Justice Alito's decision may not be concrete law, but this seems to be the direction in which the Court is moving.

I think it is interesting to compare Pleasant Grove with the 1995 case Capitol Square Review Board v. Pinette, where the State of Ohio had set up an area on the Ohio Capitol grounds where any group could display their poltiical or religious beliefs. The KKK wanted to put up a huge white cross and the Ohio government balked. Representatives of the KKK filed suit to force the Ohio government to let them put up the cross and won. This decision was affirmed by the Sixth Circuit and the Supreme Court on Establishment Clause grounds. Justice Scalia's majority opinion held that the Capitol grounds were a traditional public forum, and that the speech was permissible as long as the restrictions placed on the speech were content-neutral. Since this was clearly a content-based exclusion it was not permitted. 

Clearly, the nature of these two arenas made the difference in the outcomes. Whereas the posters and displays on the Ohio Capitol square were speech by other groups in a traditional public forum, the public park monuments were fundamentally different enough for the justices to declare them government speech. It is also important to note that this case was not decided on Establishment Clause grounds, although that may be where the case is headed.

In the background of this discussion is the fact that most of the city of Pleasant Grove is Mormon. That isn't central to the First Amendment analysis, but the parties mentioned it in a NY Times article last year:

The Ten Commandments monument here stands in Pioneer Park, which pays tribute to the city’s frontier heritage, one that is mostly Mormon. The two sides differ about how best to honor that heritage.

[Pleasant Grove Mayor Michael] Daniels said the monument broadly reflected local history. Mr. Barnard, the Summum lawyer, said the Ten Commandments did not play a central role in the Mormon faith. “If they wanted to quote from the Book of Mormon,” he said, “that would, at least, relate to the pioneers.”

“Mormons came to Utah because of religious persecution,” Mr. Barnard added. “The pioneer heritage in Utah has to be escape from persecution.” 

I was amused by the idea that the Ten Commandments do not play a central role in the Mormon faith -- I think the LDS Church and most of its members would refute that assertion. The reason commonly given for Ten Commandment monuments on government property is that those principles are central to the Judeo-Christian tradition out of which the Anglo-American legal system was formed. You probably couldn't say the same about the Book of Mormon, even in Utah. I know there were court systems run by the Mormon Church in the early Deseret Territory days, but I don't know of any legal legacy remaining in the Utah State courts.

Mormon Jurors Need Not Apply

I just came across this interesting article from the Daily Herald highlighting a man from Ogden, Utah charged with aggravated murder who requested that no Mormon be on his jury. His attorney filed a motion to keep Mormons off the jury because his attorney Sharon Sipes believes that some members of the Mormon church might believe that the only way for him to be forgiven by God is to be executed. Sharon Sipes, a public defender for Riqo Perea, filed the motion in 2nd District Court. She says a belief among members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that the only way to receive true forgiveness from God after committing a serious offense is to shed one's own blood.

Sipes says that although the church has indicated blood atonement isn't part of official doctrine, members widely believe it. As a life long member of the Church I've never heard of anyone who believes in the "blood atonement" (and I've met a lot of members with some whacked out beliefs). Perea, 21, is charged with two counts of aggravated murder in a gang-related 2007 shooting. Perea could face the death penalty. Sipes, I'll give you an "A" for effort but I don't see a Judge buying this.

Proposed Honduran Temple to be Moved

The Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints has announced it will not build a temple on its planned site in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, bowing to the wishes of protesters who feared the temple would overshadow and block the view of a historic and iconic Marian shrine.

The LDS First Presidency originally announced the temple for Honduras' largest and capital city of Tegucigalpa on June 9, 2006, to meet the needs of 120,000 Mormons in the country. A year later, LDS members and officials helped break ground for the sacred structure to be built adjacent to an LDS Institute of Religion building. But construction had to be halted in September 2007, due to the opposition of several city officials.

"We did realize it was relatively close [to the basilica] Mormon leaders in Honduras met with the Catholic cardinal there, who was "gracious and "amicable," Trotter said, but asked that the church move its temple to a different location. and considered design options to minimize the possible impact," LDS spokesman Scott Trotter said Friday. "None were satisfactory."

After months of negotiation, Tegucigalpa's mayor refused to approve the plans and the church withdrew. "Out of respect for the laws and to avoid any perceived stand against the Catholic Church, LDS Church officials made the decision to relocate the temple," according to an independent LDS Web site www.ldschurchtemples.com/tegucigalpa.

Suyapa's story traces back to 1747, when Alejandro Colindres, a Honduran laborer, reportedly found the tiny statue, only 2.3 inches tall, while sleeping in a corn field northeast of Tegucigalpa. It was sticking in his side as he slept. Colindres took the statue home, so the story goes, and kept it on a family altar for the next 20 years. Devotees built the basilica in 1777 and, in 1925, Pope Pius XII declared Suyapa, the patron saint of Honduras.

George Q. Cannon's review of Reynolds v. U.S.

I occasionally like to point out interesting law-related posts that I stumble across in the Bloggernacle (what a terrible name, that). William & Mary law prof Nate Oman of Times & Seasons has a brief post up about a publication George Q. Cannon wrote with the lengthy title of A Review of the Decision of the Supreme Court in the Case of Geo. Reynolds v. the United States. Cannon's Review discusses the 1879 Supreme Court case that held that the practice of plural marriage was not protected by the Free Exercise Clause. I understand that this case is still carried in many constitutional law texts because it was the first Supreme Court decision to tackle the issue head-on, but I don't remember reading it in law school. I've been perusing Cannon's Review this afternoon and I think it's fairly accessible and interesting for a legal text of that time period.

Oman notes that Cannon may have had help drafting the Review, but that "the pamphlet shows a surprising familiarity with American constitutional history, theoretical jurisprudence, and criminal law." I don't think the Review is still in publication anywhere, but thanks to the bounties of the public domain and Google's Book Search project, you can read it online or download a PDF.

Job of the Week: NYC Bankruptcy Associate

Whether the market is bull or bear, there will always be bankruptcies. And where there's broken companies, there's bankruptcy attorneys. If you've got the requisite experience, Lateral Link has the job for you. As always, the Job of the Week is brought to you by Lateral Link. There are currently dozens of Lateral Link members interviewing for positions throughout the country.

Position: Bankruptcy Associate

Location: New York, NY

Description: The New York office of this top international law firm is looking for an associate with 2-4 years of experience and excellent academic credentials. Previous bankruptcy experience is required.

For more information about this position or to apply, please see Position 10062
on Lateral Link. In addition to this opening, Lateral Link has numerous other openings for experienced Bankruptcy Associates. Membership in Lateral Link is free and you can apply at www.laterallink.com.

Senator Buttars Removed From His Committee Chair

Should Chris Buttars have been forced out of his judicial committee chair for his negative gay comments? Or was this a violation of his first amendment right to free speech?

Utah State Senator Chris Buttars, R-West Jordan, told former local television reporter Reed Cowan, an openly gay documentary producer, that gay activists are "probably the greatest threat to America going down."

The comments drew calls for Buttars' resignation in Utah and elsewhere. The Washington, D.C.-based Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, said that by Friday more than 15,000 e-mails had been sent to Utah Senate President Michael Waddoups, R-Taylorsville, demanding that he condemn Buttars' remarks.

Waddoups did not condemn Buttars' statements and said he kicked Buttars off the committee primarily as a way to draw attention away from him. In a brief news conference Friday, Waddoups declined to say what comments — if any — Buttars made that he and other Republicans disagreed with.

"We think he's a senator that represents the point of view of many of his constituents, of many of ours," Waddoups said. "We agree with many of the things he said. We may disagree with some of them, we may disagree with some of the ways he said it."

Senator Buttars has said that he will not issue an apology and in a statement released on his blog, Buttars wrote that he will continue to defend traditional marriage. "I disagree with my removal as Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, since my work there is entirely unrelated to my opposition to the homosexual agenda," Buttars wrote. "Still, I'm a grown man and I can take my knocks. When it comes right down to it, I would rather be censured for doing what I think is right, than be honored by my colleagues for bowing to the pressure of a special interest group that has been allowed to act with impunity."

As chairman of the committee, Buttars frequently took pride in killing legislation that would have extended some legal rights to gay couples. He has long complained that gay people lack morals and are trying to indoctrinate others into a gay lifestyle. "What is the morals of a gay person? You can't answer that, because anything goes. So now you're moving toward a society that has no morals," Buttars told Cowan in the January interview, which was about the Proposition 8 campaign to ban gay marriage in California and the involvement of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

In comparing gay activists to Islamic radicals, Buttars said, "Muslims are good people and their religion is anti-war. But it's been taken over by the radical side. And the gays are totally taken over by the radical side."

While Buttar's comments are no doubt controversial, is he restricted in saying what he believes to be true just because he is a politician?

Church liability for acts of individual members

Last week a woman in Florida filed a lawsuit against the Church of Scientology, alleging that the church was liable for the death of her 20-year-old son. The lawsuit alleged that the young man committed suicide after two Scientologists convinced his father, also a Scientologist, to take away the son's anti-depressants. It now appears very unlikely that the case will go to trial; police reports released this week apparently refute most or all of those claims. But it caught my attention because similar liability claims have been made against the LDS Church, alleging that the Church was liable for the wrongful acts of its individual members.

Since most churches are operated by professional clergy, most lawsuits against denominations are based on the actions of ordained clergy. The Mormon Church differs in that it employs virtually no clergy on the congregational level, relying instead on a "lay clergy." So while some Mormon leaders (such as bishops or stake presidents) could clearly be seen as agents of the Church, most of the congregation are not church agents, despite the various tasks or responsibilities to which they may have been assigned.

Like the recent Scientology lawsuit, there have been several lawsuits against the LDS Church in the past 20 years that claimed the Church was liable for the actions of its members. The most serious of these cases alleged sexual abuse by members of Mormon congregations. Some of these lawsuits also included liability incurred by church agents (i.e., bishops), but they have also allege that the LDS Church was liable for the abuse committed by one of its members.

As a matter of policy, I think no religious group should be liable for the wrongful acts of its members unless those individuals could be said to be agents of the denomination. But some courts have held just that. In a highly-publicized 2005 lawsuit in Washington State, the Mormon Church was found liable for the actions of a man who sexually abused his two step-daughters. But on appeal before the Washington Court of Appeals, that portion of the jury verdict was reversed and the Church was held not to be financially responsible for the step-father's liability.

Court still seem to be struggling with the difference between clergy members and parishioners in the Mormon Church. Part of this may be due to the practice of a lay clergy. A bishop may clearly be an agent of the Church, but what about and Elders' Quorum president? A home teacher? A Sunday School teacher? I also think this confusion is due in part to an unfamiliarity with the structure of Mormon congregations. It would be hard to imagine a similar ruling against a Catholic Diocese or a Protestant congregation because more judges and juries are familiar with the structure of those organizations.

Where to Find Free Law School Outlines

Before I entered law school I'd never heard of an "outline" but since the moment I stepped into law school on the first day I heard everyone talking about outlines--study guide to the class. Different law school groups have "secret" outlines that they pass down from year to year. I've been given some very good outlines from some recent grads and other students which have definitely helped out. In my quest to find smarter (and faster) ways of studying I found the law school outline jackpot at outlinedepot.com They have almost 29,000 outlines from every law school in the country. The outlines are keyed to each law school, professor, class, and text making them very helpful. The outlines are completely free; the only thing that they ask from you is that you give them one outline for each outline that you download. I've added a few outlines to the website and in some ways its nice to know that all the hard work I put into some of those outlines with benefit someone else.

God in the courtroom

I recently was present for oral arguments where a pastor was representing himself pro se. The judge mentioned that a party associated with the case was absent due to family health reasons, and the pastor requested that the court observe a moment of silence for the family. Not knowing how to respond, the judge and the rest of the court awkwardly complied and bowed their heads until the pastor declared the moment over, while I looked on incredulously.

This episode with a pro se litigant was unusual, but Deity is regularly invoked in many courtrooms. Where I currently practice, it is common for a court to open with with an announcement such as "May God save the United States and this Honorable Court." Many judges and members of the bar bow their heads as this invocation is proclaimed. In many jurisdictions the swearing of an oath ends in "so help me God," a phrase that was recently challenged again with respect to the swearing-in of President Barack Obama. Religious references are also common in the legislative branch. Sessions of Congress and state legislatures are traditionally opened with a prayer.

The bizarre courtroom incident with the pastor made me consider my own position on religion in the courtoom and other government functions. Despite being a personally religious person, I have always felt somewhat uncomfortable with the institutionalization of religion. Perhaps this is due in part to having grown up in a region of the United States where Mormonism was a very small minority religion. I had a sense that whenever God was invoked in public, it was done in such a way and with language that was different from my own religious beliefs. I also identified at an early age that there was a certain amount of hostility or rejection associated with my denomination. I was a Mormon kid, and being Mormon was a little weird. I only encountered invocations or public religious observations occasionally, but whenever they occurred I was keenly aware that they represented a difference between everyone else and me.

But even though I'm not always comfortable with religious references in government, I don't think that they should be done away with entirely. I think it's important that the democratic process be a free marketplace of all ideas, religious or otherwise. Consequently, I generally think that the exclusion of all religious references in any branch of government is inappropriate, and contrary to the purpose and language of the First Amendment. My general rule of thumb is that personal statements of conviction should always be allowed.

Prayers before legislative sessions or "so help me God" oaths are usually called "de minimis" religious references by the Supreme Court, and the Court seems to take a fairly tolerant approach to these references, since they were common practices long before the United States was even formed. But this isn't an opinion that is universally shared. In January, MichaelNewdow (the same litigant who challenged the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance) sought to exclude a clergy invocation and benediction from the presidential inauguration and enjoin Chief Justice John Roberts from using the phrase "so help me God" in the presidential oath. Mr.Newdow had filed a similar lawsuit before at the second inauguration of President George W. Bush, and this most recent wasn't likely to prevail because he made all the same arguments.

I noticed that U.C. Berkley Law professor Eugene Volokh had an interesting thought about the prayers at the inauguration. He suggested that "a President's inviting a particular clergyman to say things at the President's inauguration might well be treated as an extension of the President's own right to express whatever views -- including denominationally specific views -- he wants to express as part of his own speech." This seems like it touches on my rule of thumb regarding personal expression of speech, although it may not be applicable to courtroom oaths or legislative prayers because the courts and the legislatures are not embodied in one person.

As you likely know, Mr. Newdow's lawsuit was again rejected and both the oath and the prayers went forward as planned. And thanks to a slip of the tongue by the Chief Justice and racial rhymes in the inaugural benediction, the references to Deity became the least controversial parts of the day.

LDS Church Vandalized in Oregon

The LDS Church on Cherry Park Rd. in Troutdale, Oregon was recently vandalized. Someone spray painted swastikas and racist comments on the church. The vandal(s) also struck a nearby Prespreterian Church and the Douglas Cemetery as well. A witness did see a white male writing on a cemetery building Monday evening. Troutsdale Police have not yet made any arrests but are pursuing all leads.

Job of the Week: FaceBook in Silicon Valley

Spending more time writing on your wall than writing a legal brief? Looking for a job where spending time on Facebook is your job? Now your social networking and legal skills can go hand-in-hand. Because of Lateral Link's outstanding reputation with legal recruiters, Lateral Link members have a significant advantage when seeking a new position. Membership in Lateral Link is free and you can apply at www.laterallink.com.

Position #1: Patent Counsel

Location: Silicon Valley (Palo Alto, CA)

Description: Seeking a mid to senior level Patent Counsel with 3-9 years of patent prosecution experience (in-house experience a plus). Responsibilities include: Manage in-house patent prosecution program; identify strategic areas for patenting and patentable inventions; evaluate potential acquisitions; educate employees on patent law issues; improve internal processes.

Position #2: Corporate Counsel, Transactions

Location: Silicon Valley (Palo Alto, CA)

Description: Seeking a Corporate Counsel to support transactions functions. The position will report to the Associate General Counsel, Commercial Transactions. Need a strong transactional background, with at least 3 years of legal experience at a top-tier law firm and experience working with advertising sales agreements strongly desired (In-house experience at a technology or internet company a plus). Responsibilities include: Contract drafting, negotiation and advisory responsibilities for business development, advertising sales and marketing groups; participate in structuring, negotiating and drafting general business and commercial transactions; administration and resolution of legal issues that arise in existing commercial relationships.

Current members can also contact their personal search consultant directly to discuss this position. Membership in Lateral Link is free and you can apply at www.laterallink.com

LDS Legal News Briefs

Elizabeth Smart kidnap case: Mitchell kidnapper booked into Salt Lake county jail. (Salt Lake County Tribune)

LDS lawyers obliged to give time, expertise. (Mormon Times - Deseret News)

Utah's Republican, Mormon Governor supports civil unions for gay couples (Atlanta Journal - Constitution- Georgia)

Same-sex Marriage ban defeated in Wyoming legislature

The Casper Star-Tribune is reporting this week that a proposed amendment to the Wyoming state constitution that would define marriage between one man and one woman was defeated in the state legislature this week. The defeat was due in part to the opposition by two LDS legislators, State Senator Katheryn Sessions and State Representative Joe Barbuto . I think the peculiar circumstances in Wyoming present an interesting fact pattern. First of all, Wyoming is no Utah. It ranks in the bottom half of the U.S. in terms of religiosity and Mormons are clearly a minority of the population. However, unlike other regions of the country, there are no dominant religious denominations. As my friend from Wyoming once said, "If you're driving down the road in Wyoming and you see a church, it's probably a Mormon church." So while Mormons aren't a large block of the population, they are essentially the only denomination with any significant presence in the state.

It seems that the stereotypical Western you-mind-your-business-and-I'll-mind-mine approach has some truth in Wyoming. So it would be easy to interpret the same-sex marriage vote as one falling down religious lines. And yet the bill's sponsor isn't a Mormon and at least some of the Mormon legislators voted against the measure. It seems to me that this isn't a simple matter of religious persuasion, but the normal complicated political process in action.

Ever since last year's Proposition 8 campaign most media reports have depicted the LDS Church as a monolithic group that universally supported the referendum. And while many members of the LDS Church did just that, the Wyoming vote shows that there is clearly room for differing opinions. I'll follow this post up soon with my thoughts on the use of state constitutional amendments and the future of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Man Arrested in a Plot to Storm LDS Temple and Kill People

Federal authorities have arrested a man they allege was planning to storm the LDS Church's Jordan River Temple and start shooting people.

Benjamin Speakman, 27, was charged with a single count of possession of an unregistered sawed-off shotgun. In a complaint filed in U.S. District Court late Tuesday and obtained by the Deseret News, Midvale police were called to Valley Mental Health's facility on Feb. 2 and told by an employee that Speakman had showed up and told them "he was in possession of a pistol and a shotgun and was planning to kill himself and others."

Gregory Hopkins, an agent with the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, wrote in a probable cause affidavit that officers spoke to Speakman, who gave them the keys to his pickup. Officers found a handgun and two loaded magazines in the center console and the sawed-off shotgun behind the driver's seat.

"Benjamin Speakman told the officer he thought about shooting his wife and mother-in-law," Hopkins wrote. "Benjamin Speakman told the officer he was planning to go into an LDS temple and start shooting people in the temple with his AK-47 and then shoot himself with the shotgun."

Midvale police called Speakman's mother-in-law, who said she had found a shotgun and an AK-47 in their home. Inside a gym bag, ATF agents say they found the AK-47, loaded magazines, knives and a carrier to hold the magazines.

"Benjamin Speakman stated he had planned on killing his wife and then killing his mother-in-law at their residence. He was then going to go to the Jordan Temple and fight his way into the temple to the celestial room where he planned to kill himself with the shotgun," Hopkins wrote. "Benjamin Speakman was asked if he was planning on shooting anyone at the temple and he said yes."

Speakman was originally held under a medical watch at a local hospital, where charging documents said he was undergoing an evaluation. During an appearance in U.S. District Court on Wednesday, he spoke softly with U.S. Magistrate Judge David Nuffer, who appointed him a defense attorney.

"Your honor, we anticipate a grand jury indictment next Wednesday," assistant U.S. attorney Carol Dain told the judge.

Speakman's attorney sought his medical records pending an upcoming arraignment on Feb. 20. Nuffer ordered Speakman held in U.S. Marshal's custody until then. He is being held in the Davis County Jail without bail.

Media Reports on Prop 8 Filing Uninformed

***LDS Church Press Release***

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was part of a coalition of other faiths and organizations which worked together to pass Proposition 8, which defines marriage as being between a man and a woman, with over 52 percent of the popular vote in California.

Claims that the Church filed only one report of its contributions before January 2009, or did not report all its contributions to the Protect Marriage Coalition, are erroneous. The Church filed all necessary reports over the course of the campaign in compliance with California state law.

Here are the facts:

• The Church filed seven contribution reports throughout the campaign. Earlier donations were filed for specific time periods prior to this last reporting period, as required by law.
• Reports were required to be filed in different ways: by mail, fax or electronically.
• All filings went to the California Secretary of State, the Department of Elections for the City and County of San Francisco, and the Registrar-Recorder for Los Angeles. The electronic filings were sent directly to the Secretary of State but copies were mailed to all three locations.
• The Church has no control over what filings are posted on the California Secretary of State’s Web site. Currently, not all the Church’s filings are posted.
• The Church’s donations were all in-kind and included travel expenses, compensated staff time and audiovisual production services.
• The value of the Church’s in-kind (nonmonetary) contribution is less than one half of one percent of the total funds (approximately $40 million) raised for the “Yes on 8” campaign.

The Church filed the following Proposition 8 nonmonetary contribution reports and amounts to the California Secretary of State’s office and other California officials in San Francisco and Los Angeles as required by California state law.

Date	Amount	Report Form	How Report Was Filed	Additional Information
30 July 2008	$19,831.40 (in-kind)	461	Filed by mail	(This report covers the time period from 1 January 2008 to 30 June 2008.)
25 October 2008	$2,078.97 (in-kind)	497	Filed by fax
30 October 2008	$333.00 (in-kind)	497	Filed by fax
1 November 2008	(See additional information)	497	Filed by fax	(Amendment to 30 October filing; did not represent any additional contribution)
1 November 2008	$2,531.20 (in-kind)	497	Filed by fax
15 January 2009	$30,354.85 (in-kind)	497	Filed by fax
Sub Total:	$55,129.42
30 January 2009	$134,774.16 (in-kind) Plus the $55,129.42 sub total	461	Filed electronically	(This report covers the time period from 1 July 2008 to 31 December 2008.)
Grand Total:	$189,903.58 (in-kind)

The Form 461 report is required to be filed within a month following each semi-annual period. The Form 497 report is required to report contributions made within the 16-day immediately preceding the election. The total amount included on the 461 report filed on 30 January 2009 shows all contributions from January – December 2008.

Law School and Laptops

As a current law student I often think to myself "I wish someone would have told me X, Y, or Z before I started law school". A few days ago as one of my study partners told me about how she had just dropped her laptop onto the tile floor in the hallway I thought to myself "I wish someone would have told me to buy a cheap laptop for law school". The chances of your laptop being lost, stolen, or broken are pretty good. Luckily for my study partner her computer survived the drop but I've seen other laptops that weren't so lucky. For example during the first week of law school I remember talking to one of my fellow class mates about the laptop that she had just purchased for school. It was a very nice (and expensive) computer that came with all the bells and whistles including a touch screen. Not more than a few days later her computer was dropped and the screen was shattered. The cost of replacing the screen was almost the same price as buying a new laptop so she just went out and bought a new cheap laptop instead.

Before I started law school I went out and bought a very nice laptop thinking that it would be a good investment because I'd be using it so much that I'd want to have a nice one. Only a few months after school started I was running up the steps of the law school (half asleep and late for class) when I stumbled on a stair and dropped my computer bag. My computer hit the corner of a cement stair before I could catch it. My computer still works but the frame of my computer is bent and so now when I type on on hard surfaces the computer wobbles back and forth.

You might be asking yourself if being uncoordinated is a pre-requisite to law school (and it may be) but between classes, study groups, lunch, studying/reading a law student can easily close up and move their computer 10 or more times a day. Moving the computer so many times a day increases the chances of something happening to your computer. My recommendation to LDS Pre-Law Students would be to either buy a really cheap laptop or to buy a three year warranty on a nice laptop so that if you do drop it or spill your Big Gulp on the keyboard you can get the computer replaced.

Job of the Week: NY International Insurance Company

Today's mission, should you choose to accept it, is to work in a Manhattan high-rise for a solid company. Make sure you bring all of your knowledge of the regulatory environment and compliance with you in order to achieve ultimate success. Because of Lateral Link's outstanding reputation with legal recruiters, Lateral Link members have a significant advantage when seeking a new position. Membership in Lateral Link is free and you can apply at www.laterallink.com.

Position: Assistant Vice President Corporate and Markets Compliance

Locations: New York

Description: This New York based international insurance company seeks an attorney (or someone with a legal background) with 8+ years of experience in compliance preferably with knowledge of the life insurance business. This person should understand the regulatory environment, corporate governance issues and related legislation pertaining to this industry. The candidate will possess strong knowledge and experience with U.S. and International anti-corruption statutes and regulations and OECD compact. In addition, this candidate should have knowledge and experience with U.S. and International anti-money laundering statutes and regulations and U.S.A. Patriot Act statutes and regulations. Candidates who have worked in an international environment are preferred. The ideal candidate has the ability to mentor and develop talent and demonstrates excellent business judgment and sharp analytical skills. Compensation commensurate with experience.

For more information about this position or to apply, please see Position 10336 on Lateral Link.

Reminder to Register with LDS Legal Link

In just under two months LDS Legal Link will go "live" and its database of LDS lawyers will become search able by the public. Large numbers of LDS attorneys from all over the country have been joining LDS Legal Link. If the current trend continues LDS Legal Link will grow to become the largest database of Mormon attorneys in the country. Currently there have been LDS attorneys from California, Arizona, New York, Florida, and Texas to name a few.

It is interesting for me to see the number of people that come to this blog each day who are specifically looking for LDS lawyers. I can see what key words someone typed into the search engine to find the Mormon Lawyers blog. LDS Legal Link will become the place for anyone looking for an LDS attorney. If you're an LDS Lawyer and you haven't signed up yet click HERE.

Mormon Church Defends its Annual Meeting with Utah State Legislators

Monday in Utah's, Salt Lake Tribune, Michael Otterson--the managing director of public affairs for the LDS Church wrote a response to Salt Lake Tribune columnist Rebecca Walsh's recent article about the LDS Church and its annual meeting with both Republican and Democrat Utah state legislators.

In part Otterson wrote, "Meetings in which legislators confer and consult with religious leaders do not constitute an "establishment of religion" as stated in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The LDS Church's will or doctrine is not binding on state law, nor should it be. It is simply one in a collection of voices and interests that may sometimes compete and sometimes be complementary. The church's views are offered for consideration, not as a mandate. It aims only to exercise its constitutional right to participate in public policy like other constituents, and in particular to raise moral concerns".

Otterson additionally wrote, "Contrary to the often narrow conception of political participation, all law is a reflection of the particular social, economic, cultural, even religious, mores of a people living under a single jurisdiction. These values, and the myriad complex factors they entail, all contribute to the legislative process. Likewise, each constituent part of society, whether it is an institution or an individual, has opportunity for expression. It seems unreasonable that churches should be singled out as unfit participants".

In Walsh's article she admitted that the Legislators also "meet with all denominations -- Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran" but then goes on to say in the next paragraph that "nowhere else in the country do lawmakers consult with one denomination in this way -- not Boston, not Birmingham". The second statement directly contradicts the previous one. How can Utah Legislators meet with all local denominations and then at the same time "consult with only one denomination"? State legislators meeting with local religious leaders is not something unique to Utah. Obviously Walsh is just another journalist trying to put the LDS in a poor light.

LDS Church Clarifies Prop. 8 Filing

***LDS Church Public Announcement***

Today The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints clarified erroneous news reports following the filing of its final report on donations to the ProtectMarriage.com coalition.

On Friday, 30 January, the Church filed the final report of its contributions (all of which were non-monetary) to the ProtectMarriage.com coalition. The report, submitted in advance of the 31 January deadline, details in-kind donations totaling $189,903.58.

The value of the Church’s in-kind (non-monetary) contribution is less than one half of one percent of the total funds (approximately $40 million) raised for the “Yes on 8” campaign. The Church did not make any cash contribution.

Because media coverage about this filing ran without a comment from the Church, the following statements of fact from the Church add context to this story and should help correct the record:

Fox13 (Utah): “The documents show the amount spent by the Mormon Church is greater than what was initially stated.”

Fact: The Church, like other organizations on both sides of the ballot issue, was required to publicly file these donations by the 31 January deadline. The Church has been filing required contribution reports throughout the campaign. Those earlier donations “initially stated” were filed for specific time periods prior to this last reporting period, as required by law. Other groups are also filing their final contribution reports to meet the same deadline.

San Francisco Chronicle : “Mormon church officials, facing an ongoing investigation by the state Fair Political Practices Commission, Friday reported nearly $190,000 in previously unlisted assistance to the successful campaign for Prop. 8, which banned same-sex marriage in California.”

Sacramento Bee : “The disclosure comes amid an investigation by the state's campaign watchdog agency into whether the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints violated state laws by not fully disclosing its involvement during the campaign.”

Fact: This filing is in no way prompted by an investigation by the California Fair Political Practices Commission. Many organizations are filing this week to meet the deadline required by law. We believe we have complied with California law.

KFMB 760 AM (San Diego) :

“Mormon Church Misstated How Much It Spent in Prop 8 Fight.”
“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints previously claimed only about $2,000 was spent in support of the measure.”

365Gay : “Mormon Church admits it spent 100 times more for Prop 8 than reported”

Fact: Again, the previous disclosure of an in-kind donation was to meet an earlier deadline. In fact, previous filings detailed over $50,000 out of the total non-monetary contribution of $189,903.58.This week’s filing reported donations that fell within a different time period and required reporting by the 31 January deadline. Other groups also made their final contributions reports this week.

Understanding the extent of donations from other organizations may help the media and the public better understand the context in which the Church’s donations were made.

New scrutiny on the billable hour

Last week the New York Times featured an article on how the down economy has forced many top law firms and their clients are reexamining the common law firm practice of billable hour. The billable hour is the focus of many young associates' waking hours, and everyone in the legal industry recognizes it is a flawed model. Not only does it make for extremely stressful working conditions when associates are expected to bill 2400 hours or more a year, it also presents a strong financial incentive to the firm that runs counter to the interests of the clients. The Times article highlights how the poor economy has forced some of the big firms to make concessions to their clients that demand cheaper fees.

None of these critiques are new. In his now-infamous ABA Journal article "The Billable Hour Must Die," Scott Turow recites many of the problems the billable hour poses to the profession. It creates tensions and suspicion between a lawyer and her client; it prevents lawyers from serving the public and underprivileged segments of society through pro bono work; it results in diminishing returns for ladder-climbing associates who have smaller and smaller chances of ever making partner.

The pressures of the billable hour are perhaps more acute for young LDS attorneys, who often hold ecclesiastical positions and have young children in addition to the significant burdens placed upon them by their employers. Everyone talks about a balanced lifestyle, but the current billable hour system virtually guarantees imbalance. I know quite a few LDS attorneys who have left private practice at large or mid-size firms and have entered the public sector. They all say the same thing -- they don't make as much money, but they are much happier. During law school I summered at a small immigration firm that mostly billed by project or by visa petition rather than by the hour. We still worked a few evenings or weekends when things were busy, but the stress level was significantly lower and the firm's financial incentives didn't conflict with those of the clients. Immigration practice might be particularly suited for that kind of billing, but I'm sure it's not the only practice that could be more effectively without the billable hour.

In "The Billable Hour Must Die," Turow cites the 1977 Supreme Court case of Bates v. Arizona (which invalidated previous prohibitions on lawyer advertising on First Amendment grounds) as the opening of the competitive floodgates in American law firms. And while I'm not completely naïve, I'd like to believe that the current economic turmoil might apply those same market forces in a positive way.

Photo credit: Darren Hester.

Job(s) of the Week: NY and DC

When the going gets tough, the tough get going in a counter-cyclical direction. Is your firm freezing salaries? If you make a move through Lateral Link you can make that up by earning a $10,000 guaranteed signing bonus. These positions are just two of the hundreds of job openings that Lateral Link has throughout the country. Current members can also contact their personal search consultant directly to discuss these positions. Membership in Lateral Link is free and you can apply at www.laterallink.com.

Position: Bankruptcy Associate

Location: New York

Description: The New York office of a top international firm is seeking a junior bankruptcy attorney with 1-3 years of bankruptcy experience. For more information about this position or to apply, please see Position 9651 on Lateral Link.

Position: Antitrust Associate

Location: Washington, D.C.

Description: This mid-sized international law firm is seeking an antitrust associate with 2-3 years of experience in antitrust, litigation, securities enforcement and white collar work to join the firm's 10 person Washington DC office. Strong academics and law firm and/or government experience is required. For more information about this position or to apply, please see Position 10151 on Lateral Link.