Stanford Law School - Yearbook (Palo Alto, CA)

Page 169 text:

The Law Forum has taken on itself the task of supplementing the curriculum provided by the School, and although its program this year has been modest, it has been quite successful. ' Working closely with the Office of Law Placement, the Forum continued its World of Lawn series, which brought to the School this year a number of law-trained individuals who have followed varying career paths. Programs included f'Law in an Agri-Business Communityf' f'Opportunities in Accounting for Lawyersj' and Lawyers in VISTAI' The main part of the Forum program, however, was a somewhat random series of hopefully relevant speakers. Democrat Alan Cranston ended his campaign for the United States Senate in a speech at Stanford co-sponsored by the Committee for a New Democratic Politics and the Forum. The candidate urged peace in Vietnam and justice at home as the key to election-year cries for ulaw and order. After his talk he met with a small faculty group, including law professors Packer, Sneed, and Girard, to discuss some of the needs of higher education. Candidate Cranston is now Senator Cranston. In answer to an undergraduate panic after several arrests on campus, for violations of marijuana laws, Professor John Kaplan addressed all interested students about Police on Campus: Your Rights and Theirs? For two hours Mr. Kaplan discussed the law of arrest and search and seizure, and he answered questions which finally led him to comment, HI canit believe the colossal naivete of the Stanford student body. Kaplan's class in Criminal Procedure seemed to agree. . Dr. Glenn S. Dumke, Chancellor of the Califomia State College System, spoke on the strike at San Francisco State C'The Turbulent Campusvj urging law students especially to support established channels for effecting change and maintaining that academic freedom is now in great danger from the State Legislature because the universities are abandoning their traditional ivory tower, uninvolved, search for Truth. Dr. Dumke found that Stanford law students, perhaps unwilling to support violence, are equally unwilling to accept, unchallenged, the status quo. Students especially questioned the due process of law which Dumke claimed had been accorded at S.F. State. To say the least, both Chancellor and students got the dialogue they came for. LA FORU LAW FORUM. SEATED: T. Adlhock and J. Mason. MISSING: M. McLennan, C. Bruton, annd R. Mallory. Mr. James Conway, Chief Postal Inspector in San Francisco and a handwriting expert, spoke on Documentary Evidence and the Expert. His entertaining and elightening talk included a forgery demonstrationn which left more than 150 in attendance in awe. Parliamentary Advisor to the Police Federation of Britain and Wales, Mr. Eldon Griffiths, M.P., educated students on British Police Practicesf, He emphasized the close and amiable relationship between the Bobbies and the citizens they police, and he noted how no British citizen would be offended at not being able to obtain a handgun for protectioni' - only the Queen has the right to cannon? He also noted that murders and armed robberies in Britain are far less frequent than is the United States. A new series for the Forum this year was the Legal Educationi' series, presented in conjunction with the Committee on Academic Affairs. Various law professors were given an opportunity to present their views on legal education and then were placed on the hot seat to answer student questions and justify their views in the face of any criticisms. The resulting dialogue will hopefully lead to constructive changes in the School and badly needed progress in the area of legal education. At press time, the Forum was looking forward to a full schedule in the last two months of the year, including Guest-in-Residence John W. Macy fformer Chairman of the U.S. Civil Service Commission and now President of Public Broadcast Laboratoryj and the Honorable J. Skelly Wright fof the U.S. Court of Appeals, Washington, D.C.j. In addition, the Forum had scheduled a visit from a group of White House Fellows including former Law Forum President David Lelewer, was planning for the return of the traditional Oxford Debate Con Black Autonomy in U.S. Citiesnj, and was working toward a meeting with N.Y. Mayor John Lindsay prior to his commencement address. The overall success of Law Forum programs this year surpassed the greatest expectations of even the most optimistic member, as student interest in the presentations grew continuously through- out the year.

Page 168 text:

MUST' CQURT The Stanford Moot Court program is designed to improve the students' skills of brief Writing and oral advocacy. The program is voluntary and open to all interested second that third year students. This past year has been one of rebuilding and innovation for the Moot Court Board. The Board's innovative energies were initially directed at developing the Appellate Practice Seminars. These seminars were an effort to perfect the brief writing skills in the most realistic and beneficial contest possible. Numerous practicing attorneys Worked with small groups of second year Moot Court Board Candidates preparing briefs for cases which the attorney was then appealing. The candidates had the benefit of a complete record and the skill and criticisms of the attorneys. The Appellate Practice Seminars provided a unique opportunity never before available at Stanford: a practical workshop in which students received personal supervision and criticism of his research and brief writing from a practicing attorney while Working on an actual case. The Board brought new appeal to the annual Marion Rice Kirkwood Moot Court Competition. The Kirkwood problem questioned whether white teachers could be fired solely on the basis of their race and black teachers hired in their stead. Participation in the Kirkwood increased twenty-nine percent from the previous yearg a first and a semi-final round pared the field down to four finalists. In order to make the Moot Court competition relevant to the interests of the community and to bring non-legal expertise to bear on the problem, this year's panel of judges for the final argument was selected not only on the basis of knowledge, intelligence and interest, but also expertise, ideology and personality. The final panel consisted of the Hon. Tom Clark, Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Ret.g the Hon. J. Skelly Wright, Judge of the Court of Appeals, D.C. Cir.g and Dr. Max Rafferty, Superintendent of Public Schools and Director of Public Instruction, State of California. Aufmuth ICO-chaimienj, G. Grant, T. Pulliam. The Moot Court assumed its more traditional role within the law school by working with teaching assistants formulating problems for first year moot court competitions and helping judge first year arguments. There is little doubt that this yearas Board took a major step in providing an alternative to the Review. It is up to succeeding Boards to follow the direction established by this years activities, it is up to the faculty to begin to realize that Moot Court is both viable and an altemativeg and it is up to the employers to begin to recognize the quality of the product resulting from the Moot Court experience. Oral argument in preliminary round of 1969 Marion Rice Kirkwood Moot Court Competition , . L.- ' MOOT COURT BOARD: J. Mason, E. Koplowiiz and L.

Page 170 text:

ACADEMIC AFFAIRS CO M TT E The Academic Affairs Committee, now in its second year, has concemed itself with three major goals. First, the Committee, in conjunction with the Law Forum, in an effort to create an atmosphere in which students, faculty, and administrators can meet and discuss the changing course of legal education at Stanford, has organized a series of panel discussions on a variety of academic topics. Second, on a somewhat informal basis, the Committee has sought to establish better lines of communication between the students and the administration by working directly with various members of the administration toward the solution of a variety of academic problems. Third, the Committee has overseen and coordinated the work of the various parallel committees established by the current Law Association administration. ACADEMIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: B. Fix Clst Year Rep.J, M. Vidgoff fPep. ex officioj, R. Rychlick 12nd Year Rep.j, T. Hawley CChmnJ.