Membership: the lifeblood of the NBAJanuary 18 - 22, 2012 25th Annual Corporate Counsel Conference...

Vol. 18, No. 1 August - December 2011

NABBS MAKES

HISTORY

GIVING BACK:Charitable Giving For Your Successful Clients

COMMITMENT TO THE FUTURE

The National Bar Institute Unwavering Commitment To The Legal Pipeline

NBA 69TH PRESIDENTDARYL PARKS:

"Membership: the lifeblood of the NBA"

NATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION

*Based on life insurance in force as of year-end 2009, A.M. Best Company, Inc. Guarantees apply to certain insurance and annuity products (not securities, variable or investment advisory products) and are subject to product terms, exclusions and limitations and the insurer’s claim-paying ability and financial strength. MetLife Auto & Home is a brand of Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Company and its affiliates: Metropolitan Casualty Insurance Company, Metropolitan Direct Property and Casualty Insurance Company, Metropolitan General Insurance Company, Metropolitan Group Property and Casualty Insurance Company, and Metropolitan Lloyds Insurance Company of Texas, all with administrative home offices in Warwick, RI. Coverage, rates, and discounts are available in most states to those who qualify. MetLife Auto & Home does not operate in Puerto Rico. The companies referenced in this material operate independently and are not responsible for each

others’ financial obligations. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (MLIC), New York, NY 10166. L0611185748[exp0613][All States][DC,PR] ©2011 MetLife, Inc. © 2011 PNTS 1109-3411

The memories we create today are as important as making sure those memories are protected for the next generation. MetLife understands that. As the nation’s largest life insurer* that has served millions of people for generations, we can help you and your family to create a plan that fits your financial needs. We take pride in helping you live out your dreams—now and for generations to come. You can also obtain protection for you and your family, as well as for your auto and home, with insurance that fits your budget from MetLife Auto & Home®.

Get started by visiting metlife.com or calling 1-888-MetLife.

From generation to generation, our legacy continues.

MetLife is a proud sponsor of the National Bar Association Conference.

11093411_NBA_AfAm_ad.indd 1 9/15/11 9:49 AM

www.NAtioNAlBAr.orG | 3

Editorial PolicyThe National Bar Association (NBA) Editorial Board welcomes the submission of articles relating to any topic of interest to the African American legal community. Criteria for publication include the quality of the article, its substantive value, its

general interest to NBA lawyers, and the originality of its subject matter. All manuscripts must be original work. Consistent with the Magazine’s format,

the language of submissions should be gender-neutral. The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject any manuscript submitted for publication.

All views, opinions, statements or expressions of opinion appearing herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the

Association, the Editors, or the Publisher.

NBA National Bar Association Magazine (ISSN 0741-0115) is published on a semi-annual basis by the National Bar Association, 1225 11th Street, NW,

Washington D.C. 20001 (202) 842-3900. The $36 subscription rate for members is included in membership dues. The subscription rate for

non-members is $60 per year. Periodicals Postage Paid at Washington, D.C. and at additional mailing offices.

POSTMASTER:

Send address changes to: National Bar Association Magazine

1225 11th Street, NW, Washington D.C. 20001.

Advertising inquiries: Please call (202) 842-3900 or (314) 552-6349.

Address all correspondence to:Pamela Meanes, Editor

The NBA Magazine1225 11th Street, NW

Washington, D.C. [email protected]

Mid-Winter MeetingJanuary 18-22, 2012

Sonesta Maho Beach Resort & Casino St. Maarten

Co-sponsored by: NBA Judicial Council, Small Firms/Solo Practitioners and Young Lawyers Divisions

and the Small Business, Civil Rights Law and Labor & Employment Sections

Register Today! Pre-Registration Rates starting at $199! For more information or to Register visit www.nationalbar.org

Promoting Justice & Equality

National Bar Association

NBA Editorial BoardPamela Meanes

Editor In Chief St. Louis, MO

Karl Connor Managing/Senior Editor

New Orleans, LA

Lavern Lewis Gaskins Associate Editor

Valdosta, GA

The Honorable Shelvin Louise Marie Hall

Associate Editor Chicago, IL

Section EditorsREGIONS

Kimberly Ford Huntsville, AL

SECTIONS Maurice McNab

Greenville, SC

Regan Taylor

DIvISIONS Caroline Watson

Chicago, IL

NBA Staff Liaison Ronda Williams

St. Louis, MO

Circulation and Advertising Coordination Tiane Younger

Circulation Coordination Washington, D.C.

Erika Owens Advertising Coordination

Washington, D.C.

©2012 The National Bar Association

Publisher National Bar Association

1225 11th Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20001

(202) 842-3900www.nationalbar.org

Interim Executive Director Demetris W. Cheatham

Vol. 18, No. 1 August - December 2011

NATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION

4 | NAtioNAl BAr AssociAtioN MAGAZiNE

Cover Story12 Interview with NBA President Daryl Parks

18 National Bar Institute: Developing Relationships and Building Bridges

22 The National Association of Bench and Bar Spouses: Makes History

President Parks shares his thoughts on the state of the National Bar Association (NBA), his vision for its future and identifies the ob-stacles and challenges the organization faces. He also reveals his goals for the 2011-2012 bar year, explores the factors which will contribute to the NBA’s growth and identify how the current leader-ship will play a vital role.

the National Bar institute (NBi) and NBA are partners in the quest to develop the next generation of African American lawyers. Ac-cordingly, these organizations have successfully obtained corpo-rate sponsorship from Fortune 500 companies to enable the NBi to promote legal education enrichment by awarding grants for projects which educate the public and enhance the public image of the legal profession.

NABBs has a long standing reputation for making history. in August 2011, NABBs made history when it installed its first male President, the rev. Dr. william M. Meanes, sr. who has vowed to build on NABBs’ collaboration with the NBA, law schools and lawmakers to help increase the NBA and NABBs memberships through recruit-ment efforts.


In This Issue CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES

8 The Roberts Court and Post-Racial Constitutionalism by Professor cedric Merlin Powell

14 Voting Rights Gone Wrong: Voter ID and Proof of Citizenships Laws by Professor Jennifer smith

EDUCATIONAL ISSUES

10 Civil Rights And the Choice Movement in Education by Professor osamudia r. James

16 Law At Its Best: Towards A Unifying Theory of Justice in Legal and Education Reform by Professor Maurice r. Dyson

26 Targeted Interventions to Expand The Pipeline by Professor carlton waterhouse HEALTHCARE & ESTATE ISSUES

20 Inequality Is Killing Us! What President Obama Must Do To Save Black Lives by Professor Vernellia r. randall

24 Giving Back: Charitable Giving Strategies for your Successful Clients by lillie N. Nkenchor and Barry rabinovich

Inside the NBAREGIONS 28 region i & region iX

DIVISIONS 28 Young lawyers

SECTIONS 28 Alternative Dispute resolution 28 Bankruptcy 29 civil rights law 29 commercial law 29 corporate law 29 Energy, Environmental & Public Utilities

29 HIGHLIGHT OF THE NBA CONVENTION


National Bar Association

2012 Calendar of Events

Mid-Winter Meeting Sonesta Maho

Beach Resort & CasinoSt. Maarten

January 18 - 22, 2012

25th Annual Corporate Counsel Conference

Doral Golf Resort & SpaMiami, Florida

February 23 - 25, 2012

Annual Day on the Hill

Washington, D.C. March 2012

National Black Law Students Association (NBLSA)

44th Annual Convention Renaissance Capitol view Hotel

Washington, D.C./Arlington, Virginia March 7 - 11, 2012

Mid-Year Conference & Gertrude E. Rush Award Dinner

Tampa, Florida April 18 - 22, 2012

International Affiliate Chapter Meeting

Morocco June 2012

87th Annual Convention & Exhibits

Las Vegas, Nevada July 14 - 19, 2012

Diversity...differences that

make a difference

www.thompsoncoburn.com

Thompson Coburn LLPProud Sponsor of

National Bar Association Magazine

The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements.


Preamble | President Daryl Parks

NBA Officers

Daryl D. Parks President

Tallahassee, FL

John E. Page President-Elect

Irvine, CA

Ellen E. Douglass Vice President

Chicago, IL

Kevin D. Judd Vice President

Washington, DC

Pamela J. Meanes Vice President

St. Louis, MO

Twanda Turner-Hawkins Vice President

Philadelphia, PA

Juan R. Thomas Secretary

Chicago, IL

Hon. John L. Braxton Treasurer

Philadelphia, PA

Sharon F. Bridges General Counsel

Jackson, MS

Dr. Joseph Youngblood II Parliamentarian

Trenton, NJ

Demetris W. Cheatham Interim Executive Director

Washington, D.C.

Happy Holidays! First, I wish to say “Thank you” to all of the National Bar Association (NBA) members who voted to “loan” me the office of NBA

President for the next year. As a long-time mem-ber of the NBA who has a keen awareness of the organization’s history and it’s tradition of outstanding leaders, I am truly honored by your vote of confidence.

Looking at where we are and where we are head-ed as an organization, as well as at the assets we have to support us in achieving our goals, I have to say I am strongly encouraged by the energy of our organization. NBA members have an infec-tious enthusiasm that allows us to achieve more together than we could as individuals. We feed off the energy of one another and we constantly support each other. So yes, I’m optimistic about our near- and long-term future.

What lies ahead in the next year? What do I see in our future? Let’s take a look …

My goals for this presidential term include: im-proving technological infrastructure, stabilizing finances and generating revenue, elevating the NBA's voice on judicial and legal issues, and increasing membership. Advancing the NBA's technological infrastructure is key to increas-ing knowledge and access to NBA events and membership benefits. I plan not only to stabilize and improve the NBA’s finance and budgetary systems, but will continue efforts to diversify revenue streams. My agenda includes providing increased access to Capitol Hill and increasing membership. Membership is the lifeblood of the NBA. Thus, we should encourage current mem-bers to renew dedication of their time and talent to the NBA, reclaim past members, recruit new members, and continue the pipeline efforts at law schools.

During the upcoming year, I will ensure that the NBA maintains its commitment to civil rights and serving the underprivileged both nationally and internationally. Accordingly, as leaders of the NBA, we recognize the significance of the 2012 United States Presidential election, and will work diligently to empower voters and ensure election protection. Furthermore, the NBA will continue providing economic relief to Haiti, and will expand domestic and international aid pro-grams. I will also seek to strengthen the NBA's relationship with foreign entities and associa-tions to elevate the NBA's global affiliations and status.

Moreover, I think we must do everything pos-sible to improve the professional skills of our membership and to offer them immediate value. This means developing top-quality events on the regional and local level, putting experienced law-yers in touch with our energetic young members. It means not just formal training but mentoring as well. It means meeting, conferring and build-ing relationships, lasting professional and per-sonal relationships. I’ve benefitted greatly from the relationships I’ve built through the NBA.

More importantly, it means networking with not only each other, but helping others make con-nections. We all benefit from building relation-ships.

We also have to look to our future. Where will we be as an organization in five, 10, or 20 years? What will we look like? What will our goals be?

There’s no way to look into a crystal ball and know the answers to those questions. There are too many unknowns in the equation. But one thing is clear: We must make the legal profession more accessible to African Americans. We can do this in the short term by mentoring young lawyers and by providing pro bono work to our community. But we must also bring more young people into the professional. This means build-ing, maintaining and growing effective pipeline initiatives such as the Crump Law Camp.

These pipeline initiatives must extend beyond the college level. Certainly, supporting BLSA re-mains important, but we have to reach out to high school students, making them aware that a career in law is not “for someone else.” It’s at-tainable … every member of the NBA is living proof of that.

The programs are in place and they’re working. And like the professional development opportu-nities we offer our current and potential mem-bers, they simply need to grow.

A year from now, more than anything, I want to look back on my term as NBA president and see that we’ve increased in numbers, in skills, in reach and in professional ability. I know we can do this because we’ve not only done it through-out our history, but because we have the energy.

We have you.

Thank you,Daryl Parks, NBA President


U shering in a new era of jurisprudential hostility to the viability of race-conscious remedies, the Roberts Court proclaimed that “The way to stop discrimination on

the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”1 At first glance, the appeal of this purportedly neutral proposition is powerful—the Equal Protection Clause prohibits the state from using race in its decisions.2 The Constitu-tion protects individuals, not racial groups.3 Yet these ostensibly neutral propositions have devas-tating consequences for African-Americans and people of color who still feel the present day ef-fects of past discrimination. Two recent decisions—Parents Involved in Com-munity Schools and Ricci v. DeStefano4—embody the Roberts Court’s post-racial constitutionalism and its formalistic approach to equality. Signifi-cantly, both decisions fundamentally alter doc-trine under the Equal Protection Clause5 and Title VII.6 For example, in Parents Involved, the Court reinterprets Brown v. Board of Education7 so that now it stands for the proposition that voluntary race-conscious remedial measures to preserve integrated schools are unconstitutional. Ignoring the constitutional mandate of Brown

The Roberts Court and Post-Racial Constitutionalismby Professor Cedric Merlin Powell

to dismantle dual school systems and actively pursue a broad array of remedial approaches (in-cluding the use of race) to prevent resegregation, the Court fashions an individual right to attend neighborhood schools. Without reference to context or history, the Court simplistically con-cludes that “[r]acial balance is not to be achieved for its own sake.”8 So, in the absence of clearly identifiable de jure discrimination by the state itself, there is no basis to use a race-conscious remedial approach to integrate schools. To the Court, de facto discrimination is natural and in-evitable; it is the product of individual choice, not invidious state action.9 Thus, it is impermis-sible to use race to artificially “balance” the ra-cial composition of segregated schools. It is not surprising, then, to note that the nation’s schools are largely resegregated.10

Only two years later, in 2009, the Court followed up its dismal decision in Parents Involved with Ricci v. DeStefano. Prior to the decision in Ricci, it was well-settled that while the Equal Protec-tion Clause did not reach private or disparate impact discrimination, Title VII reached both as well as discrimination by public employers. In enacting Title VII, Congress took a structural-

Cedric Merlin Powell is a Professor of law at louis D. Brandeis school of law where he teaches constitutional law, Professional responsibility, Evidence, criminal law, and race and the law. Professor Powell’s scholarship analyzes structural inequality, post-racialism, and the continuing influence of race in the law. His articles have appeared in the Harvard BlackLetter Law Journal, University of Miami Law Review, Seton Hall Constitutional Law Journal, and the Rutgers Race & the Law Review, among others. He received his B.A. with Honors in Politics from oberlin college and his J.D. from New York University school of law, where he served as Managing Editor of the N.Y.U. review of law and social change.


that individual rights are privileged above the le-gitimate claims of the historically oppressed. As exemplified in these cases, the preservation of white privilege is the touchstone of the Court’s race jurisprudence. Parents Involved reconceptual-izes Brown so that the eradication of caste and subordination are no longer the mandate of the Fourteenth Amendment. Rather, colorblind in-dividual choice to neighborhood schools is the guiding principle with no concern for the re-segregation of schools across the nation. Ricci transplants Fourteenth Amendment principles into the Court’s Title VII jurisprudence, and it makes it very difficult to overcome a claim of reverse discrimination by white plaintiffs who al-lege that any use of race is a statutory violation because the process is already neutral, fair, and open to all. To African-Americans and people of color, this is not reality.

We must continue to unpack

and critique neutrality; to

advance new theories of

substantive equality and

inclusion; and to examine

and seek answers to the

persistence of structural

inequality

in all avenues of

American society.

systemic view of discrimination in the work-place: discrimination occurred not only through the intentional actions of employers (disparate treatment), but through neutral practices and procedures which perpetuated the lingering ef-fects of the former system of race-based op-pression. Disparate impact discrimination is a statutorily cognizable claim under Title VII. Ricci dramatically transforms both Fourteenth Amendment and Title VII jurisprudence.

Ignoring well-settled precedent, the interpretive guidelines for disparate impact claims established by the Equal Employment Opportunity Com-mission, and clear evidence that the firefighter promotion examinations employed by the City of New Haven, Connecticut disproportionately impacted African-American firefighters, the Court held that the City violated Title VII by re-fusing to certify the racially skewed examination results. Indeed, the Court viewed the failure to certify the results as intentional discrimination against the white firefighters who passed the ex-amination and were eligible for promotion. This was disparate treatment discrimination in viola-tion of Title VII; the disparate impact on the Af-rican-American firefighters was irrelevant. The Court turns Title VII jurisprudence on its head —voluntary compliance efforts by employers to avoid disparate impact liability will be viewed as race-conscious disparate treatment (intentional) discrimination and disparate impact liability will be inconsequential in the absence of a “strong basis in evidence.” “…[U]nder Title VII, before an employer can engage in intentional discrimi-nation for the asserted purpose of avoiding or remedying an unintentional disparate impact, the employer must have a strong basis in evidence to believe it will be subject to disparate-impact liability if it fails to take the race-conscious, dis-criminatory action.”11

In Ricci, the Court constructed, out of whole cloth, a new evidentiary standard for Title VII cases: there must be a strong basis in evidence that a disparate impact claim will be initiated against a public employer seeking to avoid such liability by decertifying the results of a promo-tion test for firefighters.12 The Court concluded that the city engaged in disparate treatment (in-tentional discrimination) of the white and La-tino firefighters who expected to be promoted based on the results of the exam.13 The fact that the exam disproportionately impacted African-American firefighters14 was irrelevant to the Court because the Constitution (and by exten-sion Title VII) does not guarantee equal results.15 Instead, the Court viewed the city’s efforts to avoid disparate impact liability as pure racial politics.16

Both Parents Involved and Ricci represent a disturb-ing doctrinal shift in the Court’s race jurispru-dence. The new post-racialism mandates a for-malistic and literal interpretation of equality, so

While these decisions signal a shift in the Court’s approach to race—from colorblind constitu-tionalism to post-racial constitutionalism—they should not be viewed as disrupting the pursuit of transformative equality. We must continue to unpack and critique neutrality; to advance new theories of substantive equality and inclusion; and to examine and seek answers to the persis-tence of structural inequality in all avenues of American society. 1Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School

District No. 1, 551 U.S. 709, 748 (2007). 2City of Richmond v. Croson, 488 U.S. 469, 497-500

(1989); Adarand Constructors v. Peña, 515 U.S. 200, 204-10, 227 (1995). Under the Equal Protec-tion Clause, the use of race-conscious remedies is constitutionally prohibited unless there is specific evidence of discrimination by the state itself or there is a diversity interest that can be pursued in the context of higher education. See Grutter v. Bol-linger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003).

3Parents Involved, 551 U.S. at 743.

4129 S.Ct. 2658 (2009). 5Section 1. “No state shall … deny to any person

within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” U.S. const. amend. XIV, § 1 (1868).

642 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-e-17 (2006). 7347 U.S. 483 (1954). 8Parents Involved, 551 U.S. at 729-30. 9Id. at 750 (“…racial imbalance can also result from

any number of innocent private decisions, including voluntary choices.”) (Thomas, J., concurring).

10Girardeau A. Spann, Disintegration, 46 U. Louisville L. Rev. 565 (2008).

11129 S.Ct. at 2677. 12Id. at 2681. 13Id. at 2664-65, 2681. 14Id. at 2667. Out of 77 candidates for promotion

to lieutenant in the fire department, only 6 blacks passed the eligibility exam. These candidates were not, however, eligible for immediate promotion. There was an internal rule that determined the order of promotions. Ten candidates were eligible for immediate promotion—they were all white. Id. Forty-one candidates took the exam for promotion to captain, only 3 black candidates passed. Again, these three candidates were not eligible for imme-diate promotion. Id. Seven white candidates and 2 Hispanic candidates were eligible for immediate promotion. Id. So, in a very real sense, no African-American firefighter actually “passed” the exam in order to be eligible for promotion.

15The narrative framework of “equal opportunity” versus “equal results” fits squarely within the Court’s post-racial jurisprudence. Since the process is es-sentially open and fair, any use of race is suspect. So, racial disparity that negatively impacts African-Americans is “natural,” and any burden on white privilege and settled entitlements is constitutionally suspect or a violation of Title VII. As Professors Cheryl I. Harris and Kimberly West-Faulcon note: Arguably, even before Ricci, modern dis-

crimination law’s central narrative was that potential changes to the racial status quo in the workplace, in business, and in schools and universities, threatened and compromised the rights and legitimate expectations of whites as a group. Over the long colorblind march of the past two decades, the Court has embraced the view—albeit by a bare five-vote major-ity—that racially attentive actions or public policy are inherently suspect, no matter the motive. This doctrinal move has effectively constrained the operation of anti-discrimina-tion law and remedies—indeed turning the remedies into racial injuries and further legiti-mizing a narrative in which whites are (or are at risk of being) repeatedly victimized because of their race. … [T]he underlying racial frame is that present-day discrimination is largely a problem confronting whites.

Cheryl I. Harris & Kimberly West-Faulcon, Reading Ricci: Whitening Discrimination, Racing Test Fair-ness, 58 U.C.L.A. L. Rev. 73, 82 (2010).

16129 S.Ct. at 2684 (Alito, J., concurring) (rejecting the City of New Haven’s rationale that it voluntarily complied with Title VII by decertifying the exam because of its disproportionate impact on African-American firefighters and concluding that this ra-tionale was merely a “pretext” for the City’s real reason: “the desire to placate a politically important racial constituency.”).


When the NAACP joined the United Federation of Teachers in filing a lawsuit against New York City for disparate treatment of the

city’s public schools in favor of charter schools, it signaled that the choice movement had be-come a key issue in the current civil rights educa-tion agenda. The anger and backlash that ensued from the suit further illustrated just how contro-versial the choice movement can be.

As early as the 1990s, the choice movement in education, which contemplates both charter schools and voucher programs, was heralded by some as a viable option in the fight for equal educational opportunities for children of color. Premised on market economics theories, the choice movement conceptualized parents as consumers, and their enrollment choices as deci-sions made in a market. In accordance with that view, vouchers and charters give parents more choices, thus forcing schools to compete for en-rollment: the best schools rise to the top, as their enrollment increases, while the worst schools sink to the bottom and ultimately close. Today, President Obama’s Race to the Top program welcomes charter schools, in particular, as part of an effort to encourage experimentation and reward success—a curious move, given repeated studies which conclude that charter schools, on average, educate students about as well as tradi-tional public schools.

There are several reasons, however, that the ap-plication of market principles to education is problematic. Market principles assume a level

Civil Rights and the

ChoiCe MoveMent in

By Professor Osamudia R. James

Education

Osamudia R. James is an Associate Professor at the University of Miami school of law. she researches and writes about education, focusing on opportunity and access in the American public school system. she received a B.A cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania in 2001, a J.D. cum laude from the Georgetown University law center in 2004, and an ll.M. from the University of wisconsin law school, where she also served as a william H. Hastie Fellow from 2006 to 2008. she was also previously an associate with King & spalding in washington, Dc. she writes and teaches in the areas of Education law, race and the law, Administrative law, and torts.

of choice that poor communities and communi-ties of color do not necessarily have. Commu-nity bias against particular groups, for example, is often reflected in local policies such as zoning for multi-family housing that can limit access to particular schools—charter and voucher schools included. Moreover, even assuming genuinely broadened choice, educational decisions are more complex than mere preference for a par-ticular school. Distance from home and place of employment, access to public transportation, and enrollment of siblings are just a few of the many factors considered in schooling choices. As a result, the switching costs for parents are high, even when their children are stuck in under-performing schools. Despite these obstacles to “easy” decision-making, market principles tend to perpetuate rhetoric of personal responsibility: the market is free; the market is open; the market is level; parents make their own choices in the education market, and if something goes wrong, the parents are to blame. In the meantime, real structural obstacles to closing the achievement gap—continued school and residential segrega-tion by race and class, inadequate healthcare and housing, food insecurity—are ignored. This is not to say that maximizing options for parents is a bad thing. It is to say, however, that market economics principles, with their focus on competition and efficiency, a fictional level playing field, and laissez-faire regulation, do not have value as a guiding principle in the educa-tion reform movement. Indeed, we have already seen the fallout from insufficient regulation of charter schools, which stemmed from faulty be-liefs that the best schools would simply “rise to


We have witnessed before the destruction that “markets” have wreaked in the lives of margin-alized communities with less power, and edu-cation is no different. When responsibility for school reform is placed with individual choices on the “market,” instead of with our collective choices as a community, we lose our motivation to cultivate integrated schools; we lose our com-mitment to school financing equity; we lose pub-lic support—both budgetary and social—for our nation’s public schools. The embrace of market principles animating the voucher and charter movement has been, and still is, the “embrace of a conflict between the idea of a common good and a market mentality that turns every human relationship into a commercial transaction.”1 As we consider the civil rights of students and fami-lies of color in the education system, we must acknowledge how market themes of choice are problematically influencing and setting the agen-da. 1A. Molnar, “Charter Schools: The Smiling

Face of Disinvestment,” 54 Educ. Leader-ship 9, 15 (1996).

the top.” And, unlike the financial markets that punish investors with the loss of money when prices go down, when schools fail, the fallout is not just about cash. Rather, it is about students who have spent years in schools with inadequate resources or poor curriculum, who are then punished as administrators cut and run with the money, or when a school is left to fail and is ul-timately shut down.

President Obama’s Race

to the Top program

welcomes charter schools,

in particular, as part of

an effort to encourage

experimentation and

reward success—a

curious move, given

repeated studies which

conclude that charter

schools, on average,

educate students about

as well as traditional

public schools.


5 MINUTES WITh NBA PRESIDENT

Congratulations on being elected president of the NBA. How long have you been involved with the NBA and in what capacities?

I got an early start with the National Bar Asso-ciation. I originally got involved locally as a law school liaison with the Florida Chapter of the NBA when I was in the Florida State University College of Law. I was a member throughout law school and my career as a lawyer and decided to run for a vice president position in 2008. I won that election and served as Vice President of Finance.

How was your term as vice President of Finance?

I enjoyed it very much, for several reasons. I’d been involved with the NBA on a local level for well over ten years when I was elected vice president, and I truly enjoyed being involved on that level. It gave me an excellent opportunity to meet other lawyers in my area and to learn from their experiences. Being elected to a national po-sition was a great experience. In that position I met people from across the United States and learned a great deal about myself and the orga-nization. Being involved on a national level gave me the opportunity to work at the forefront of the NBA, and to contribute to the key decisions that were being made. But most important, I gained a real feel for the membership and for the capabilities of the entire organization.

Daryl Parks was installed as the 69th President

of the National Bar Association (NBA) at

the annual convention in Baltimore, Maryland. President Parks recently

spent a few minutes talking about the NBA, his vision of the future and his journey to the

presidency.

What experiences, in life and professionally, shaped you before joining the NBA and since becoming a member?

Well, I grew up in a segregated neighborhood and that gave me a deep understanding of the African American community and of the nega-tive effects of racism and social injustice. I could see the limits of opportunity and the barriers to success. I did my undergrad work at Florida A&M, a historically black college and when I went to law school at Florida State, I could see that it is extremely important for African Ameri-can lawyers to be a part of their community. That has not only given me my perspective on the role of the legal profession in the African American community, it has set the direction of my career.

You run your own firm, correct?

Benjamin Crump and I started Parks and Crump LLC on my dining room table and we’ve grown the firm to include seven lawyers and 15 sup-port people. We handle personal injury, medi-cal malpractice, wrongful death and civil rights cases. It’s a challenging area of law, but one that is crucial to our clients.

Share your thoughts on the state of the NBA.

First, I have to say that I am honored to have the opportunity to lead the NBA. When I was in law school and in my early days with the NBA I never would have dreamed I would one day be elected president. I believe the NBA is in a great position. Our membership is dedicated to the legal profession and to the organization. Our energy level is high and our members have great focus. There is a strong sense of community within the NBA, and that’s reflected in the will-ingness of our members to mentor one another, and to participate in networking to develop long-term relationships.

Daryl Parks


What challenges do you see in the near future for the NBA?

The big challenges ahead are very clear: Con-tinuing to improve on our deliverables to mem-bers and identifying new services to provide our members and prospective members. Above all, we must continue to deliver value – readily rec-ognizable value – to our members.

I also believe that by focusing on what we can do for members and by adding value, we will con-tinue to grow our membership. I see no reason for our growth to slow.

What other factors will contribute to the NBA’s continued growth?

I think we have to continue our existing initia-tives, networking, professional development and mentoring for example. In the long term, pipe-line initiatives will naturally create more African American lawyers and in turn, NBA members.

A key to our growth is communication. This magazine is a perfect example. The magazine says a lot when it’s sitting there in your hands. It makes a connection to a reader, and it opens doors. Communication in general, though, is extremely important. Our members are tremen-dously busy people. Between their demanding profession, family needs and their work in the community and with civic organizations, they have almost no free time. We absolutely have to initiate and sustain communication with our members. The initiatives, programs and services we provide are excellent, but we have to be cer-tain our members know about them.

We’ve also taken major strides in our pipeline initiatives and have built very productive rela-tionships on the law school level. We’re getting the word out that a career as a lawyer is an at-tainable goal and that the support is there for anyone who is willing to work hard and create opportunity.

What is your vision of the future of the NBA?

The NBA has an incredibly bright future. A key to that bright future is that our membership has a thorough understanding of the organization, its history, its goals, its direction and its leader-ship. And our leadership has a clear understand-ing of the organization. That means the leader-ship and the membership have a shared vision, and in turn, that means we are unified and can effect change and achieve our goals as an orga-nizations.

Specifically, what are those goals?

Our members must continue to represent the legal profession in the African American com-munity. In many ways, it’s about communication. We have to make and take advantage of oppor-tunities to promote the attainability of careers in law. We have to network, with each other, with the community, with young people and with the business community. We also have to work to increase our professional skills in every possible way. And we have to raise the profile of African American lawyers. Taking these steps will lead to the betterment of all.

It’s vital that we continue to build on the past successes in the pipeline and mentoring initia-tives. I’m a firm believer in the idea that we must keep our eyes on the long-term goals.

Could you talk about the NBA’s current lead-ership and how it fits with the organization’s past leadership?

I think the NBA’s membership has historically demonstrated an ability to select the type of leaders the organization has needed at any given time. Our current group of vice presidents; Pam Meanes (Finance), Ellen Douglas (Regions and Affiliates), Tawana Turner-Hawkins (Member-ship) and Kevin Judd (Sections and Divisions) are all highly-qualified, talented and dedicated. Each of them is in touch with the organization’s goals and our membership. Just as important, and as I mentioned a minute ago, they’re all out-standing communicators and that’s a key to our long-term success.

They, and the people serving as leaders on the regional and local levels, are the right people for our time. They understand our history, our di-rection and our goals. Many have been involved in pipeline initiatives, and almost every one of them has served in mentoring roles.

It’s an honor to serve with these people. The people, both the membership and the leadership group, make this a truly special organization. All things considered, the sky is the limit.


No right is more precious in a free coun-try than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws

under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined.” Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1, 17 (1964) With the 2012 presidential election upon us, many state legislatures have enacted or proposed some form of additional identification to reg-ister to vote or to vote. Voting rights groups are challenging these voter ID and proof of citizenship bill and laws because they are seen as having a disproportionate impact on people of color, students, women, those with disabili-ties, the poor, and senior citizens. The right to vote for African Americans and other groups in this country has come at a high cost. Each time there were breakthroughs in the right to vote, there were intentional barriers to deter and pre-vent voting and registering to vote. Today ap-pears no different. Black men fought for their right to vote and were finally granted the right to vote in 1870 pursuant to the 15th Amendment. During Reconstruction many black men held elective office and many more were registered to vote. During that era it was not unusual to find places where more black men were registered to vote than white men.

Nearing the end of Reconstruction, the 15th Amendment lost its force and effect. The threat of black men as politicians birthed a new day of

voting Rightsgone WRong:Voter ID & Proof of Citizenship LawsbyProfessor Jennifer Smith

Jennifer Smith is an associate professor of law at Florida A&M University college of law in orlando, Fl. Before becoming a law professor, Professor smith was a partner and department chair with the international law firm of Holland & Knight llP. she practiced in the firm’s washington, D.c. and Miami offices. Professor smith was also recognized in 2002 by the Young lawyers Division of the washington Bar Association as “the Young lawyer of the Year”. she holds a B.s. from Hampton University and a J.D. from the University of Miami school of law.

Klan terror, literacy tests, segregation, odd ger-rymandering, white-only primaries, poll taxes, and other such devices to prevent black men from voting. Black men were removed from of-fice, and their presence on voter registration rolls dwindled. The 15th Amendment remained in place, but there was no enforcement.

In 1920, the 19th Amendment was enacted al-lowing women the right to vote. Just as it was for black men, women endured prejudice and discrimination to prevent and deter women from voting and holding political office.

The mid-1950’s began the emergence of the Civil Rights movement, which had two major agenda items for black people: desegregation and voting rights. Sit-ins, boycotts, marches and freedom rides breathed life into the movement. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Thurgood Marshall and others were determined that black people would have the right to vote with no barriers.

In 1964, the 24th Amendment barred poll taxes in federal elections. The Civil Rights movement continued. The Selma to Montgomery March in the summer of 1964 brought about significant change at great cost. Beatings, killings, jailing, and gassing plagued the summer march, but the movement prevailed.

In 1965, the Voting Rights Act was passed. Among other things, this Act banned literacy tests and other voting impediments, and allowed the federal government to intervene where mi-nority voting rights remained disenfranchised.


The most aggressive

assault on voting rights

today is voter ID

and proof of citizenship

bill and laws.

In 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court banned poll taxes in state elections. In 1971 and in response to anti-war protests and social unrest to the draft, Congress passed the 26th Amendment to reduce the voting age of 21 to 18, which was the military draft age. Young Americans came out to vote in the reelection of President Nixon in 1972 with a 55 percent turn-out. Then, their participation steadily declined until a slight rebound for President Clinton in 1992. However, young voters’ second highest turnout was in the 2008 election of President Barack Obama with a 49 percent turnout.

While people of color, women, and the youth have made great strides in securing voting rights, intentional hindrances to voting has never ceased to plague these groups from obtaining the right to vote, voting, or registering to vote. Even to-day when access to voting for all people should be open and accessible, legislatures are turning back the clock. Indeed, with today’s technology advances, we should be looking toward modern-izing voting and voting registration.

The most aggressive assault on voting rights today is voter ID and proof of citizenship bill and laws. These laws are sweeping through our country at an alarming rate, so that they are in place for the 2012 election cycle. According to the Brennan Center for Justice:

In this legislative session, at least 37 states are considering or have considered voter ID and/or proof of citizenship legislation. Those states are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecti-cut, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minneso-ta, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebras-ka, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.1

The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Un-der Law reports that thirteen states have laws mandating or requesting that voters produce an identification card with their photograph to vote.2 Those states are: Florida, Georgia, Ha-waii, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Michi-gan, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin.

On its face, requiring a photo ID may appear to be benign, but a nationwide study done in 2006 by the Brennan Center for Justice “showed that millions of American citizens do not have government-issued photo identification, such as a driver’s license or passport. … the survey dem-onstrated that certain groups – primarily poor, elderly, [younger citizens,] and minority citizens – are less likely to possess these forms of docu-

mentation than the general population.”3 This study also revealed that “[t]wenty-five percent of African-American voting-age citizens have no current government-issued photo ID, compared to eight percent of white voting-age citizens,”4 which translates into 5.5 million African Ameri-cans with no photo ID. A 2008 study funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts, JEHT Founda-tion,5 and AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) found that African Americans and Hispanics were asked to produce a photo ID more than whites. With respect to proof of citizenship, this survey revealed that “millions of American citizens do not have readily available documentary proof of citizenship. Many more – primarily women – do not have proof of citi-zenship with their current name.”6

Advocates of laws mandating a photo ID and proof of citizenship to vote assert that these laws are needed to prevent voter fraud. How-ever, the only fraud that these laws would deter is voter impersonation fraud, and no available evi-dence has found that voter impersonation fraud is a problem. In fact, the Lawyers’ Committee found that states already have a plethora of pro-tections to ensure that impersonation fraud does not occur and “[i]n the 23 states that allow voters to provide various forms of non-photo ID, there have been no reported cases of voter imperson-ation.”7 Requiring the purchase of a photo ID or official documents to vote is akin to a poll tax, which was banned long ago in the United States. The more pressing issue with voter fraud occurs with absentee ballots, and those are mainly used by better educated, non-minority voters.

The increase in voting restrictions has not been only with voter ID and proof of citizenship laws. Voter registration drive reductions, voting centers (which then eliminate the need for small-er, more convenient voting precincts), and early voting reductions have been implemented or proposed in one or more states and will restrict access to voting and voting registration. For ex-ample, the state election records of the Florida Democratic Party found that in the 2008 general election, 1.1 million African American voters participated, and about 54 percent of these vot-ers cast their votes at early voting sites before Election Day8 and another 13.6 percent cast ab-sentee ballots. Thirty-two percent of Hispanics cast their votes at early voting sites before Elec-tion Day.9 However, only 27 percent of white voters cast their votes at early voting sites before

Election Day, but 25 percent used absentee bal-lots to vote. In Florida’s counties with high con-centrations of African Americans, many voters cast their ballots at an early voting site on the Sunday before Election Day.10 Recently, Flori-da’s Republican Legislature passed a new law, signed by Florida’s Republican Governor, which reduced early voting from 14 days to eight days and eliminated early voting on the Sunday be-fore Election Day. Pursuant to the 1965 Voting Rights Act, this new law must obtain clearance from the federal government for the counties with a history of voting problems. The problem with the law, however, is not just that it will sup-press the African American vote, but that it will suppress the votes of all Americans.

As the 2012 election nears, the legislative rush to implement various voting restrictions across the nation has increased. Unfortunately, the con-cern that the voting bills and laws will dispro-portionately affect minorities, students, the poor, the elderly, women, and voters with disabilities is a valid one. Also unfortunate is that the legisla-tion rests largely along party lines: Republicans favoring voting restrictions and Democrats fa-voring increased voting access.

It appears that voting rights of African Ameri-cans have come full circle with the passage of voting laws that have the net effect of suppress-ing their vote, intentionally or unintentionally, just as it was during the “Jim Crow” era. How-ever, our national fate is so intertwined with the voting rights of all Americans that inevitably, if they are not guarded for African Americans, our precious right to vote will be a thing of the past for all Americans. 1Brennan Center for Justice, Voter ID legislation

in the States (last updated June 9, 2011), http://brennan.3cdn.net/74138fe01a34d22af0_n7m6b-ny5d.pdf.

2Lawyers Committee for Civil rights Under Law, The Law Regarding Voting Photo Identification Laws, (June 2011), http://www.lawyerscommittee.org/admin/voting-rights/documents/files/state-of-voter-ID-laws-for-web.pdf.

3Brennan Center for Justice, Citizens Without Proof: A Survey of Americans’ Possession of Doc-umentary Proof of Citizenship and Photo Identi-fication (Nov. 2006), http://www.brennancenter.org/page/-/d/download_file_39242.pdf.

4 Id. 5 The JEHT Foundation’s name is an acronym that

stands for its core values: “justice, equality, human dignity, and tolerance.”

6Id. 7Lawyers Committee for Civil rights Under Law,

Speak Out Against Voter ID!, http://signup.law-yerscommittee.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=4473

8Lloyd Dunkelberger, New Election Law May Dis-parately Affect Black Voters (June 11, 2011, 10:57 PM), http://www.ocala.com/article/20110611/ARTICLES/110619957.

9Id. 10Id.


byProfessor Maurice r. Dyson

LAW AT ITS BEST: ToWARDS A UNIfyING ThEoRy of JUSTICE IN LEGAL AND EDUCATIoNAL REfoRM

Professor Maurice R. Dyson is a professor of law at the thomas Jefferson school of law in san Diego, califor-nia as well as the author and co-editor of our Promise: Achieving Educational Equality for America’s children. Following graduation from columbia law school as a Harlan Fiske stone scholar, Professor Dyson practiced law with the firm of simpson thacher & Bartlett. He has served as educational policy adviser to the texas state legislature Joint select committee on Public school Finance, various elected officials and has taught law on the faculties of columbia University, the city University of New York, and southern Methodist University Dedman school of law.

As an advocate for educational civil rights having myself been a victim of discriminatory educa-tion laws and policies of exclusion, I know first-hand the powerful impact law has had in shaping my destiny and the many protesting who have been disenfranchised by a legal system of gov-ernance not fully equipped and/or unwilling to accommodate calls for justice. It was in the first grade that my parents were given papers to sign to place me in a remedial institution that would dictate my educational placements until I was at least 18 solely because I was classified then as EMR (educable mentally retarded), a most unfortunate label reserved for those who per-form below the “normal” range on a standard IQ test. Like the many racial minorities dispro-portionately classified as EMR in the educational system,the IQ test result was vouched for by a classroom teacher that didn’t see my potential or was unwilling to do so. Fortunately for me, my parents knew better than any IQ test the true learning potential of their child and refused to authorize the alternative placement. But I had learned early on that educational policy had au-thorized the use of a test that surely was not normed for all test takers in violation of psycho-metric testing principles as well as equal protec-tion and due process safeguards. The test which was inappropriately used to render placement determinations without any input other than the perfunctory advice of a teacher who knew me for only a matter of days before recommending alternative educational placement in a “special” learning facility would be all that stood in the way to a life path of limited opportunity. I had become a victim of discriminatory test-based placement sanctioned with the force of law into

s I take pen to paper this evening, the controversial execution of Troy Davis

now begins as the machinery of the law plows unyielding over the demands and cries for jus-tice heard outside his cell block. Down in Wall Street, I see the beginning rumblings of a pro-test movement to remove the corrupting influ-ence of money out of law and government de-cision-making. These demands for justice have compelled me to think about the very best and the very worse that law brings forth both in our-selves and with regard to appeals to justice in our society. More specifically, I wish to unpack here a conceptual framework as part of my central thesis which attempts to demonstrate that much of law’s response to justice demands can best be understood by examining whether the law promotes exclusive disconnection or inclusive interrelatedness of the masses in any given legal context. Indeed, it is from this single, primary consideration that we may ultimately and finally have an adequate theory and practical contex-tual lens to understand how the law will regard justice demands. To see how this proposition is true, however, we need to first understand the conceptual nexus between legal exclusion and its ability to disconnect legal accountability from justice demands in severing the relationship be-tween cause and effect. The stakes remain high for the failure of lawmakers to more forcefully challenge legal schemes that undermine interre-latedness by promoting exclusionary practices. Moreover, such failure invites more crises of confidence in our legal system whenever there remains a refusal to acknowledge wrong when done or self correct when such wrong is finally brought to light.

How powerful

we come

to see the best

and worse that

the law, lawyers

and the legal

process play in

shaping a life

path of a person

and a nation.


a dead end curriculum and isolated academic track. How ironic I stand today, the holder of two ivy league degrees, a professor of law and the author of numerous articles and texts about rectifying the very nefarious practices of separat-ing, sorting and pitting “us v. them” that nearly would have profoundly altered my destiny for the worse. I wondered whether the blind adherence to a flawed exclusionary legal process in my case similarly existed for the young Troy Davis (where eye witnesses recanted their testimony and jury members later remained doubtful about critical evidence). I wondered whether there was blind adherence to a flawed exclusionary legal process that pitted the countless homeowners who lost their homes in foreclosure against their own banks through massive illegal robo-signatures. I wondered whether blind adherence to unethical investment bank practices and the rating agen-cies that legitimized their sale of toxic mortgage back securities to “us” without any consequence to “them” for their rigged and profitable fail-ure could ever be permitted in an inclusive legal system that did not divorce accountability from acts by promoting exclusionary legal process. How easily we could fall through the cracks in a regimented exclusionary system that processed us, rather than embraced us. How powerful we come to see the best and worse that the law, law-yers and the legal process play in shaping a life path of a person and a nation--one of inclusively empowered interrelatedness or one denoted by exclusively severed accountability.

Exclusion, isolation and segregation emanates directly from the denial of our interdependence because prejudice would have us see no con-nection between ourselves and others thereby perpetuating the acquiescence of the sleep-ing giant of the masses to challenge the status quo. Exclusionary schemes further obfuscate the relationship between cause and effect. As noted essayist Jean-Paul Sartre acknowledged, the temptation to view effect as separate from its cause allows us to justify things being simply as they are rather than as the outcome of a par-ticular cause. Thus, unless and until awakened to the causal relationship that lies at the heart of our interrelatedness, exclusionary legal schemes that divide and conquer the masses leave little accountability to one another for wrongdoing and little apparent reason to acknowledge or respect our common core of humanity. Law at its worse, in promoting exclusionary practices, thereby endorses and perpetuates this fiction of an inherently separate existence which itself be-comes the necessary precondition for injustice, prejudice, indifference, and greed at the expense of others to thrive. “Systematic and pervasive impediments to human interaction in life” in-cluding as early as kindergarten, through primary and secondary schools, colleges and universities which are encouraged through exclusionary laws are also corrosive of individual dignity and the core commonality of our shared humanity. Thus

it seems only fitting that concentrated isolation and exclusion have been at the heart of the evil to be combated in educational policies that deny or exclude individuals with differences.

One need not look far to see that exclusion is pervasively promoted in our educational system designed to inculcate societal values early on. Whether it was the racial segregation laws of Jim Crow, today’s racially segregated classroom prac-tices enforced by tracking and ability grouping, linguistically segregative policies that partition students into unequal resource tracks, racially exclusionary admissions practices of magnet schools, discriminatory community district zon-ing laws dividing neighborhood schools, crimi-nally punitive zero tolerance policies leading to separate school placements, unequal educational finance systems, sexually segregative schools that unwittingly perpetuate polarizing gender stereo-types at the expense of quality instruction, the harassment and bullying of students at schools that have turned a blind eye, or the systemic exclusions of students of color with disability from the mainstream classroom and curriculum, it would seem we have successfully consolidated and compartmentalized ourselves into separate worlds of existence based upon our own narrow self interest. In so doing, the law perpetuates a divided group dynamic that facilitates the masses from realizing their mutual interest in challeng-ing the status quo.

Often racial progress comes only on the heels of the realization by a majority power structure that views its own exclusive self interest as nar-rowly aligned in a moment in time with racial minorities to the extent a change in the status quo is justified, or in other words, when it sees its own narrow interdependence with racial mi-norities can be beneficial for racial cooperation in seeking racial reforms. This is what is often referred to among critical race theory law schol-ars as the Interest-Convergence Dilemma pos-ited by the noted, late law professor Derrick Bell. The dilemma arises because once the need for racial cooperation no longer exist, the coalition unravels and the ultimate outcome only proves to be marginally beneficial to minorities because their reform goals were principally relegated to back seat status of majoritarian-driven reform objectives that scarcely resemble true justice. But I wish to posit here that in recent years, what we may begin to witness is a fundamental inversion or a flipping of the interest-convergence dilem-ma in a new emerging reality where economic prosperity must be shared on a greater plane of parity with masses of non-white cultures and so-cieties including India, China, Brazil, Venezuela to name just a few.

The denial of interrelated interdependence in turn blinds and obscure us to yet another hid-den costs: It is the axiom that the harm we do to others, we ultimately really visit upon our-

selves. Indeed, as Frederick Douglass reminds us, no man can put a chain about the ankle of his fellow man without at least finding the other end fastened about his own neck. We are, in the words of Dr. King, tied together in the single garment of destiny, caught in an inescapable network of mutuality. However, we often over-look that a denial of our commonality and thus interdependence adversely affects all. The inju-ries of race and racialization not only affect the racially subjugated, but they also harm, at least in part, the humanity and material conditions of the subjugators themselves.

How can we as private citizens, teachers, attor-neys and entrepreneurs practically frame the case for action and greater racial cooperation in a way that promotes the goals of inclusion to render the law more responsive to justice de-mands? We must come begin to view ourselves interrelated as part of the big picture in every small aspect of our life that we are involved. If as Frederick Douglass declared, power con-cedes nothing without demand, then consumer demand can make all the difference in setting a new bar for the practicing bar concerned more about building competent, trusting relationships than with law firm hierarchy, status or prestige. We must raise the incentives for cooperation and the stakes for non-cooperation among stake-holders to effectuate positive change in the law’s response to justice demands. Within the sphere of our own influence, however slight it may seem, we play a larger role in the collective as consumers, policymakers and opinion shapers as Dr. King did with his famous Montgomery Improvement Association bus boycott. We must make a concerted effort to move beyond our comfort zone to multiracial constituents for per-sonal growth and progress never occurs in static conditions of complacency, but in struggle. When we seek a broad constituency—when the sleeping giant of the middle class is awakened, change is the most likely to occur. Finally, we must master the environment around us—shap-ing and designing it for our constructive ends of justice and fairness. Therefore, the question isn’t for example, “How do we handle discrimination or discriminatory policy in education, hiring or promotion? but how do we create an environ-ment among parents, teachers, administrators, students, jurists and entrepreneurs that gives us the leverage we need to influence the policy and those who shape and enforce it? In these ways that recognize, promote and exploit our inter-relatedness and by extension our interdepen-dence, law operates at its very best when we are at ours. For law will yield to justice demands only when we see ourselves as unified in struggle despite the law’s exclusionary nomenclature and compartmental treatment. Only then can the masses see the true promise of law achieve the lofty ideals of justice and fairness that we seek it to uphold.


Partnering With Corporate America

The National Bar Institute (NBI) has partnered with major US Fortune 500 corporations for many years. The corporations realize that their efforts to make the legal profession more diverse are multiplied exponentially through their sup-port of NBI.

Corporations also realize that in order to in-crease diversity in the legal pro-fession there must be a pipeline of young students who are ex-posed to law as a career option. It is also important that students have an opportunity to partici-pate in programs that teach oral advocacy and the rule of law. NBI sponsors such programs, among others, which are aimed at students who have been his-torically underrepresented in the legal profession.

NBI sponsored programs have received support from MetLife, FedEx, Ford, General Motors, Microsoft, State Farm, Thomp-son Reuters, Deloitte, the Na-tional Football League, Huron Consulting Group, and Walmart. Each of these corporations has made multi-year commitments to support NBI programs. Ad-ditionally, the NBA Commercial

Law Section has continued to be a major finan-cial supporter for over a decade. In addition to providing financial support, these donors have provided attorneys to serve as program speak-ers, moot court judges and mentors to students. This experience for in-house attorneys is very rewarding. The attorneys can see first-hand the impact that the corporation’s support has on the students and how their lives are changed. It is truly a win-win situation for the corporation and for the students.

I would urge in-house attorneys to encourage their corporations to support NBI. Members of the NBI Board of Directors are available to dis-cuss sponsorship opportunities and are willing to make personal visits. Support of the NBI and its programs is a way for corporations to have long lasting and significant impact on the future of our profession.

A Tale of Two Boards

It was quite forward-thinking many years ago to reserve a seat on the NBI Board of Direc-tors for the president-elect of the NBA. Randy Jones was the first to sit on the NBI Board in that capac-ity in 1996-97. Each succeed-ing president-elect has added stature and perspec-tive to the NBI Board: Beverly Mc-Queary Smith, Harold D. Pope, Evett L. Simmons, Michael S. Rosier, Malcolm S. Robinson, Clyde E. Bailey, Sr., Kim M. Keenan, Reginald M. Turner, Jr., Linnes Finney, Jr., Vanita Banks, Rodney G. Moore, Mavis T. Thompson, Demetrius D. Shelton, Daryl Parks and now John Page. As an active board member the president-elect has a unique

The National Bar Institute: Developing Relationships and Building Bridges for the Next Generation of NBA Lawyers

2010-2011 NBI Board of Directors: sEAtED: sonya A. Johnston , Hon. Joyce london Alexander Ford, Belinda D. stith,

Debra D. Matlock, Andrea Pair Bryant (secretary), regina K. Dillard, Kimberly Phillips stANDiNG: reginald M. turner, Jr., Hon. John l. Braxton (treasurer), Joseph H.

Hairston (Pres. NBA investment corp.), Dr. walter l. sutton, Jr. (chair, National Bar institute), Frank seales, Jr. (treasurer), linnes Finney (Vice chair), and

Daryl D. Parks (NBA Pres.-Elect). Not pictured: sonya D. Hoskins

byFreida L. Wheaton


opportunity to help define NBA initiatives that can be supported by NBI funding. Such initia-tives have included

· The production of a video: Portrait of the National Bar Association;

· Support of the “Race for Justice” Conference co-presented by the Society of Black Lawyers of London and Wales;

· Legal publications, including a special issue of the NBA Magazine commemorating the 50th anniversary of Brown v Board of Education; and

· Voter protection initiatives. The stature of the NBI Board is certainly en-hanced by the president-elect’s presence during and long after one’s NBA presidency. Linnes Finney, Reginald Turner and Harold Pope are exemplars of the symbiotic relationship of the NBI and the NBA by their continuing NBI Board service. Future President-elects must also make good use of this opportunity.

The relations between the two organizations are further enhanced through an NBA board reso-lution adopted over 10 years ago requiring NBI membership of all members of the NBA Board of Governors. The full potential of these two measures however must be elevated for the fiscal longevity and investment benefits of NBA lead-ers. NBI dues are more than affordable at $50 annually, but the commitment exhibited by paid and active membership is priceless.

A “Monumental Journey”

The Iowa National Bar Association has em-barked upon an historic journey that will place the National Bar Association at the forefront of the arts and culture district in Des Moines, Iowa, the birthplace of the NBA. “Monumental Journey” is the commitment to erect a monu-ment in honor of the NBA and its founders. The monument will be located in downtown Des Moines, Iowa on the highly visible Princi-pal Riverwalk on the east side of the Des Moines River between Court Avenue and Walnut Street. The sculpture, designed by internationally re-nown artist Kerry James Marshall following an extensive review competition, is expected to be completed in mid 2012, subject to several con-tingencies including engineering specifications and fundraising. The monument will include a speaker’s platform which will showcase African American leaders, organizations and history.

With a projected budget of $1.8 million, all ef-forts of the legal, business, corporate and arts communities will be needed. The INBA has a steering committee comprised of diverse mem-bers from the arts, corporate, judicial, and pri-vate sectors. Included among the committee are members from the IBNA Judge Odell McGhee,

Dr. Vicky Long Hill, former member Ramon-da Belcher Ford, NBI representative Freida L. Wheaton and Dr. Cleota Proctor Wilbekin of NABBS. The NBI role is to help raise funds for this project and to ensure that the National Bar Association legacy in Des Moines is strength-ened and visible.

For further information go to http://ianational-bar.com/contact.html

Developing the Next Generation of Lawyers

Since its founding in 1982 the NBI has stressed legal education enrichment by awarding grants for projects which educate the public and en-hance the public image of the legal profession. The NBI is particularly proud of its programs involving educational experiences for our youth.Emphasizing key skills that are characteristic of effective lawyers, the MLK Drum Major for Jus-tice Oral Advocacy Competition has benefitted from NBI support since 2000. At each Annual

Meeting of the National Bar Association high school graduates representing the twelve NBA Regions engage in declamation of their essays on that year’s topic before an audience that in-cludes their families and members of the bench and bar. First, second and third place finish-ers are awarded scholarships in amounts up to $2500.00. Each of the other competitors re-ceives $500.00. Competition at the Annual Meet-ing is facilitated by NBI’s underwriting travel and lodging expenses for each student and his or her chaperone. Students’ self confidence increases as well as their appreciation of the legal profes-sion through positive interaction with lawyers and judges.

The Crump Law Camp has recently become a signature program of the NBI. After successful completion of two weeks at Howard University learning about the law, a group of high school students then attend the NBA Annual Meeting. There, they participate in the Evett L. Simmons Moot Court Competition. The NBI affirmative-ly assists in raising funds for this project which every year receives many more applications than can be accommodated. This program is espe-cially valuable to a demographic whose primary interaction with the legal system needs greater positive reinforcement.

A legacy of the tenure of past NBI Chair Er-nestine Sapp is The NBI African American Law Student Fellowship program. It is the principal vehicle through which the NBI makes imme-diate impact on professional development of new lawyers. Each spring law students entering their last year of study before receiving their degrees submit applications. Criteria for con-sideration of a Fellowship include membership in the NBA, endorsement by a current regular member of the NBA and a desire to engage in a legal practice beneficial to the African American community. Fellowships have been awarded to students at diverse law schools, including sev-eral HBCU law schools. The NBI’s objectives of assisting with expenses incurred during legal studies and sensitizing students to the needs of the communities in which Black lawyers have historically made the greatest difference are met through the Fellowship program. Further, the pipeline initiative of the NBA is enhanced by making more students NBA members and en-couraging interaction between students and law-yers. Over the years our corporate partners have played major roles in supporting these programs.Andrea Pair Bryant Chair, NBI Grants Commit-tee.

Developing Youth through Sport

The Youth Golf Clinic is the most important part of the National Bar Institute Golf Tournament. We have historically invited 30 youth - young la-

NBi chair Dr. walter l. sutton, Jr. and treasurer Frank seales, Jr. receive 'check’ from walmart legal

executive Michael spencer (center)

NBi chair Dr. walter l. sutton, Jr. and treasurer Frank seales, Jr. receive 'check’ from

General Motors legal executive Myron l. lloyd (center)

2011 NBi Golf committee: Dr. walter l. sutton, Jr, Erica i. leMon (local chair), Freida l. wheaton,

Dana P. Moore (chair), Fred o. Dorse and Frank seales, Jr.

CONTINue ON PAGe 30


Inequality is killing us! Blacks are sicker than white Americans; they are dying at a signifi-cantly higher percentage.1 These are undeni-able facts. Black men live on average 6 years

less than white men.2 Black men have shorter life spans than men in Chile, Barbados, Baha-mas or Jamaica.3 Black women live on average years 4 less than white women.4 Black women have shorter life spans than women in Barbados, Panama, Bosnia and the Bahamas.5 Infant mor-tality rates are 2 times higher for blacks than for whites.6 Pat Buchanan has voiced a view that African Americans should be grateful for living in the United States.7 Yet, Black Americans have more low birth weight infants than women in Rwanda, Ghana and Uganda.8

Social determinants of health are the key fac-tors in the health status disparity between blacks and whites. Social determinants of health are the social, economic and political forces under which people live that affect their health.9 Social determinants include: wealth/income, educa-tion, physical environment, health care, hous-ing, employment, stress and racism/discrimina-tion.10 In fact, for blacks racism is a key factor.11 Even when economics is controlled, blacks have poorer health.12 That is, middle-class blacks have poorer health than middle-class whites. In fact, middle-class whites live 10 years longer than middle class blacks.13 The stress of living in a racialized discriminatory society accounts for these racial health disparities.14

Racial inequality in health persists in the Unit-ed States because racial discrimination persists despite laws against racial discrimination, in significant part because of the inadequacy of ant-discrimination law.15 In short, civil rights law

Vernellia Randall, Professor at the school of law at University of Dayton since 1990, writes extensively on and speaks internationally about race, women, and health care. she is the recipient of the ohio commission on Mi-nority Health chairman’s Award. involved in public health work for more than 15 years, Professor randall focused on eliminating disparities in health care for minorities and the poor. she also served as an adjunct faculty member at lewis and clark college. since coming to the school of law, Professor randall has also served as a grant reviewer for the National institute of Health. she has been recognized in who's who in the world since 1995 and who's who in the United states since 1998. Professor randall is the editor and webmaster for four academic websites on race, health care, gender, and academic support.

by Professor Vernellia R. Randall

Inequality is Killing Us!

only prohibits intentional discrimination and does not address reckless or negligent discrimi-nation.16 Reckless discrimination occurs when a person knows that there is a high risk of dis-crimination and the individual proceeds with the behavior. Negligent discrimination occurs when the individual knew or should have known that their behavior would result in discrimination and fails to take appropriate action to prevent or re-duce discrimination. Most discrimination of the 21st century is reckless or negligent discrimina-tion rather than intentional. Eliminating racial discrimination is necessary to closing the health gap in America.

For blacks, the health inequalities are the cumu-lative result of both past and present discrimina-tion throughout U.S. culture.17 Because of insti-tutional and cultural discrimination, blacks have less education and fewer educational opportuni-ties.18 Blacks are disproportionately homeless19 and have poorer housing options.20 Due to dis-crimination and poor educational opportunities, blacks disproportionately work in low pay, high health risk occupations (e.g., migrant farm work-ers, fast food workers, garment industry work-ers).21 Historic and present racism in land and planning policy also play a key role in minority health status. Even when income is controlled, blacks are much more likely to contain toxic ma-terials (and other unhealthy uses) sited in their communities than whites.22 For example, over-concentration of alcohol and tobacco outlets and the legal and illegal dumping of pollutants pose serious health risks to minorities.23 An-other significant factor affecting many blacks is the lack of grocery stores with fresh foods but the ready availability of fast foods with high salt and fat content.24 Exposure to these risks is not

What President Obama Must Do

To Save


a matter of individual control or even individual choice. Health status disparities are a direct re-sult of policies, practices and procedures (insti-tutional discrimination) that protect white privi-lege at the expense of black health.

Compounding the racial discrimination experi-enced generally is the institutional discrimination in health care that affects access to health care and the quality of health care received.25 Racial discrimination in health care delivery, financing, and research continue to exist, and racial barri-ers to quality health care manifest themselves in many ways including:

· economic discrimination; rationing health care on the ability to pay;

· insufficient hospitals and health care institu-tions and clinics in community;

· insufficient physicians and other providers in community;

· racial discrimination in treatment and servic-es; and

· culturally incompetent care.26

The primary focus of the health care reform law is the assurance of economic access through expansion of insurance.27 The recently passed health care insurance reform is not universal health insurance because it does not require ev-eryone to have health care insurance. Nor does it assure health care because importantly, econom-ic access to health care (that is the ability to pay) does not address issues of lack of physical ac-cess, such as the unavailability of providers and institution. Nor does it address poor quality of care, such as the lack of cultural competent care or discrimination in care or services.

President Obama has placed health care and economic recovery at the top of his agenda. The federal government has spent billions of dollars to help America regain economic footing and to reform the health care system. Yet, there is little evidence that the money is being spent in a manner that will close the health and economic inequality between whites and black. Health care reform and economic recovery for communities of color are something that cannot be achieved unless it is specifically addressed. Given the in-stitutional discrimination that currently exists in housing, financing, jobs, health and economic development, unless it (institutional discrimina-tion) is explicitly addressed it can be expected that communities of color will not reap the same benefit from his recovery plan. Thus, unless the federal government specifically addresses the economic and health care gap between commu-nities of color and white communities and the institutional discrimination, communities of col-or will not benefit from his economic recovery plan as much as white communities.

Inequality will most certainly continue. The Obama administration must be encouraged to assure that racial disparities do not exist in the implementation of his jobs plan, economic re-covery plan and the health care reform law by:

· enacting an Anti-Discrimination Act for the 21st century, which among other things rec-ognizes reckless and negligent discrimination;

· directing the economic transition team and then his entire executive branch to engage ac-tively in eliminating racial disparities in their area of responsibility by conducting racial im-pact assessments on all new policies, practices, procedures and programs;

· requiring the state, organizations and others who receive economic recovery monies and jobs monies to assure that those monies are proportionally available to blacks and people of color in contracting, in jobs and in clos-ing the racial economic gap, and in revitalizing their neighborhoods;

· providing economic relief for individuals and families who lost housing due to subprime lending practices for at least the previous 10 years, including liberalizing the bankruptcy laws, developing a lending program for indi-viduals who were foreclosed because of sub-prime lending practices with particular atten-tion on black communities; and,

· assuring availability of health care providers and institutions in black communities.

100,000 African American deaths a year occur that would not occur if African Americans had the same death rate of White Americans. The efforts of the Obama administration to improve access to health care and the economic environ-ment is not enough if those efforts don’t in-clude measures to assure the removal of racial inequalities. It is possible, to improve the health for everyone, while still allowing the racial gap to continue to exist. That outcome would be unac-ceptable.

1 National Center for Health Statistics, Health, United States, 2010: With Special Feature on Death and Dying (Hyattsville, Maryland: 2011) (Hereinafter, Health, United States); Vernellia Randall, Dying While Black, Dayton, OH: Seven Principles Press (2006) (Here-inafter, Dying While Black).

2 Health, United States, 2010, supra note 1; Dying While Black, supra note 1 .

3 World Health Organization, The World Health Report - Health systems financing: the path to uni-versal coverage (2010)(Hereinafter, World Health Report); Health, United States, 2010, supra note 1; Dying While Black, supra note1 .

4 Health, United States, 2010, supra note 1; Dying While Black, supra note 1.

5 World Health Report, supra note 3. Health, United States, 2010, supra note 1.

6 Health, United States, 2010, supra note 1. 7 Patrick Buchanan, A Brief for Whitey, http://bu-

chanan.org/blog/pjb-a-brief-for-whitey-969 (Last Visited: October 12, 2011)

8 World Health Report, supra note 3. Health, United States, 2010, supra note 1.

9 Michael Marmot, Introduction in Michael Marmot and Richard G. Wilkinson, eds. Social Determinants of Health. 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press (2006).

10 Id. 11 David Williams, Race, socioeconomic status, and

health: The added effects of racism and discrimina-tion, 896 Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 173-88 1999.

12 Dying While Black, supra note 1. 13 Id. 14 Joe R. Feagin, Documenting the Costs of Slav-

ery, Segregation, and Contemporary Racism: Why Reparations Are in Order for African Americans, 20 Harvard BlackLetter Law Journal 49 (Spring, 2004) (Hereinafter, The Costs of Contemporary Racism).

15 United States Commission on Civil Rights, The Health Care Challenge: Acknowledging inequity, Confronting Discrimination and Ensuring Equality, Volume I The Role of Governmental and Private Health Care Programs and Initiatives (Washington, D. C.: September 1999). (Hereinafter, Health Care Challenge)

16 Health Care Challenge, supra note 15. 17 The Costs of Contemporary Racism, supra note

14; 18 The Costs of Contemporary Racism, supra note

14; Joe R. Feagin , Success and Failure: How Sys-temic Racism Trumped the Brown V. Board of Ed-ucation Decision , 2004 University of Illinois Law Review 1099 (2004).

19 The Costs of Contemporary Racism, supra note 14; David Levinson, Encyclopedia of Homeless-ness xxi (2004)

20 The Costs of Contemporary Racism, supra note 14; Florence Wagman Roisman, Living Together: Ending Racial Discrimination and Segregation in Housing , 4 Indiana Law Review 507 (2008).

21 The Costs of Contemporary Racism, supra note ; Mario L. Barnes , A Post-Race Equal Protection?, 98 Georgetown Law Journal 967 (April, 2010).

22 The Costs of Contemporary Racism, supra note 14; Commission For Racial Justice, United Church Of Christ, Toxic Wastes And Wastes And Race In The United States: A National Report On Racial And Socio-Economic Characteristics Of Commu-nities With Hazardous Waste Sites (1987).

23 The Costs of Contemporary Racism, supra note 14; Vernellia R. Randall , Smoking, the African-American Community, and the Proposed National Tobacco Settlement , 29 University of Toledo Law Review 677 (Summer, 1998).

24 The Costs of Contemporary Racism, supra note 14; Nareissa Smith , Eatin' Good? Not in this Neighborhood a Legal Analysis of Disparities in Food Availability and Quality at Chain Supermar-kets in Poverty-stricken Areas, 14 Michigan Journal of Race and Law 197 (Spring 2009).

25 United States Commission on Civil Rights. The Health Care Challenge: Acknowledging inequity, Confront-ing Discrimination and Ensuring Equality, Volume I The Role of Governmental and Private Health Care Programs and Initiatives. Washington, D. C.: September 1999. (Hereinafter, The Health Care Challenge)

26 Id. 27 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,

PL 111-148, March 23, 2010, 124 Stat 119 (2010).


The National Association of Bench and Bar Spouses, Incorporated (NABBS) is a non-profit organization composed of the female and male spouses of active lawyers and judges of Afri-can descent throughout the United States of America and in other international regions of the world. Organized in 1951 in St. Louis, Mis-souri and incorporated in 1956 in the District of Columbia under the organizational name National Barristers’ Wives, the purpose was to function as a separate and yet integral part of the National Bar Association to provide a closer fel-lowship among the lawyers’ wives on all levels, to advance the careers of lawyers and the prestige of the legal profession without conflicting with their own ethical standards, and to foster civic, cultural, educational, political, social, economic and recreational efforts through community, state, and national activities to recognize lawyers and legal professions.

NABBS has a long standing repetition for mak-ing history. For instance, in 1968, the organi-zation, then known as the National Barristers’ Wives, made history when it developed charita-ble and educational efforts for law students who happened to be of African descent. Thereaf-ter, in 1969, NABBS created the Mrs. Dorothy (Richard) Atkinson Legal Scholarship which was the first national award to students enrolled in Law School. In that same year, the organization awarded several scholarships to law students at-tending historically Black Colleges and Universi-ties (HBCU’s).

In 1987, the organization experienced a name change to the National Association of Bench and Bar Spouses, Inc. Along with a new name came a newly revised and defined purpose. The purpose was to execute charitable and/or edu-cational endeavors; to promote a closer union among spouses and surviving spouses of law-yers and judges of the legal profession through educational, civil, cultural, and social activi-ties. Thereafter, NABBS has sponsored a host

The National Association of Bench and Bar Spouses

of activities and been involved in a number of community, state and national efforts in col-laboration with African Americans such as the late Mrs. Corretta Scott King and the late Dr. Dorothy Height. For instance, some its national programs include but are not limited to the: 1) Minnie P. Spaulding Youth Achievers Breakfast; 2) Dorothy Atkinson Legal Education Schol-arship Fund; 3) Martin Luther King Jr. Fam-ily of Schools Network; 4) NABBS Friends of Amistad Research Center, 5) March 6th NABBS Founder’s Day; 7) March 1st Law Day; and 6) Funding for the United Negro College fund,

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and AFRICARE – AIDS.

In August 2011, NABBS again made history when it installed its first male President, The Rev. Dr. William M. Meanes, Sr. Dr. Meanes serves as Senior Pastor of New Freedom Baptist Church in Belleville, Illinois, since 1995 and as President of The New Freedom Bible College since 1996. Deeply passionate about and com-mitted to his faith, Dr. Meanes has a long history of service to the community and people. He holds an earned Doctor of Ministry degree in Black Theology, Womanist Theology and The Black Church from United Theological Semi-nary in Dayton, Ohio, a Doctor of Business Ad-ministration degree in Religious Institutions of Higher Education from Claremont University in the Republic of Seychelles, Commonwealth of Nations, a Master of Business Administration degree from Claremont University in the Repub-lic of Seychelles, Commonwealth of Nations, and an advanced graduate degree in Non-Profit Management from Washington University in St. Louis. He also holds a Master of Divinity degree in Church History and Theology from the John C. Smith Theological Seminary/Morehouse School of Religion at The Interdenominational Theological Center in Atlanta, Georgia, after transferring from the Master of Divinity degree program in Theology and Black Church Stud-ies from Colgate Rochester Divinity School in Rochester, New York. In addition, Dr. Meanes holds a Bachelor of Arts in Psychology and Re-

Mrs. Dorothy (Richard)

Atkinson Legal Scholarship

was the first national award

to students enrolled in

Law Schools.


ligious Studies from College of New Rochelle in New Rochelle, New York, after transferring from Morehouse College.

Following in the rich traditions of theologians, community activists, and public servants, Dr. Meanes plans to: 1) foster activities designed to enhance the prestige of the legal profession through educational, civic, cultural and social ac-tivities; 2) promote a network among spouses and surviving spouses of attorneys and judges on local, national and international levels; and 3) build on NABBS’ collaboration with the National Bar Association (NBA), law schools and lawmakers to help increase the NBA and NABBS memberships through recruitment ef-forts. With respect to the NBA, Dr. Meanes maintains that a certain aura of interestedness surrounds the relationship between the NBA and NABBS. According to him, “President Daryl D. Parks idea of the NBA as a family speaks directly to and brings to fore the persons behind and in between the main beliefs, values and principles of the NBA founders and its con-tinued survival and success. For many attorneys who are relatively new to leadership positions within the NBA, they should demonstrate their level of NBA commitment to the idea of family by taking out a NABBS membership for their spouses to expand their NBA involvement and to broaden their scope of influence. Through my involvement with NABBS, I learned much about the NBA founders by listening to their liv-ing relatives and/or friends.”

Finally, consistent with its mission, Dr. Meanes has planned a full calendar of events this year which include but are not limited to the follow-ing:

· Encouraged the Georgia Parole Board to stay the execution of Troy Davis;

· Collaborate with the NBA and its WLD on a possible service project;

· Coordinate shadow opportunities to new and/or young spouses of law students and new attorneys locally and nationally;

· Initiate a national dialogue on how can spous-es and the community help improve attorneys and the NBA;

· Initiate a letter campaign to encourage law-makers to pass the Lilly Ledbetter Act;

· Initiate a letter campaign to encourage law-makers to pass the Equal Rights Amendment and Title IX;

· Initiate a letter campaign to encourage law-makers to pass the Fair Pay Act;

· Initiate a letter campaign to encourage law-makers to pass the Equal Pay Act;

· Initiate a letter campaign to encourage law-makers to pass the U N Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act;

· Recognize HBCUs with Award Certificates for their work with law students;

· Recognize local teachers with Award Certifi-cates for their work with the underserved in communities where NABBS chapters exist;

· Coordinate more child care options at the an-nual national convention;

· Coordinate a fashion show and awards cer-emony at the annual national convention;

Dr. Meanes Being sworn in

Past leaders of the National Association of Bench and Bar spouses.

swearing in of the of the National Association of Bench and Bar spouses Board.

· Coordinate seminars on Parliamentary Proce-dures, young black males, youth incarceration, etiquette and cancer.

Finally, at the NBA Annual Convention, as it has historically done, NABBS will sponsor seminars, host the NBA awards breakfast for children and youth, sponsor a President’s awards luncheon, sponsor a fashion show, offer shopping excur-sions and offer city tours. NBA conventioneers are welcome to participate.


GIVING BACK

Charitable giving strategies for your

successful clients.

Charitable giving continues to be a core American Value, even in the face of difficult economic times. According to a 2011 Giving USA report, in the year 2010 73% of the $290 Billion of

charitable gifts made in the United States were donated by individuals. This represents a 2.1% inflation adjusted increase over 2009. There are many reasons why individuals give money and property to charity. Some of the most common reasons are:

PhilanthropySome people want to share their wealth with the less fortunate by “Giving Back” to the commu-nities and institutions that helped them along the way.

Social ResponsibilitySome people believe that charities serve a valu-able social benefit, and making gifts to those charities is a way to fulfill the obligations they feel to help society in general. MemorialsOther donors make contributions to memorial-ize someone they respect or admire either during life or after their death.

Family TraditionMany parents consider charitable giving as an es-sential aspect of their family’s ideals and values so they make charitable giving an important fam-ily tradition for their children to emulate.

PublicitySome donors like the publicity associated with making large charitable gifts or they simply want to be remembered in some fashion as a legacy for their families.

Lillie N. Nkenchor, JD is an Associate Advanced Markets Advisor at Metlife. she provides estate and busi-ness planning consultation for Metlife’s financial representatives and their affluent clients. in addition to estate and business planning, lillie is responsible for assisting in implementing marketing campaigns, increasing sales, mitigating risk exposure, and handling compliance/best practice matters as they relate to estate and business planning. she is a member of the New York and New Jersey bar and serves as treasurer for the tax committee within the National Bar Association. she can be reached at [email protected].

Barry Rabinovich, MBA, JD, AEP, is a senior Advanced Markets Director at Metlife. He consults with Financial Advisors, clients, tax and legal Advisors on matters involving estate, business and retirement planning, charitable giving, executive benefits and the use and taxation of life insurance and annuities. He is a member of the New York state Bar Association trusts and Estates committee on life insurance and Executive Benefits, the Estate Plan-ning council of New York city, the National Association of Estate Planning councils, and the Business insurance and Estate Planning committee of the American Association of life Underwriters (AAlU). He can be reached at [email protected].

Financial BenefitsSome charitable strategies help donors con-vert fixed assets (that may produce little or no income) into liquid assets (that may generate income for life) - all on a tax advantaged basis. This may be a motivating factor for those who seek to benefit themselves, their spouses or oth-ers with extra income before their selected chari-ties actually receive the charitable gift.

Potential Tax SavingsThe income tax and estate tax benefits that come with making charitable gifts can be a prime moti-vator for high net worth individuals.

Like most people, after reviewing the above list you might discover that one or more of these reasons will influence your client to make a charitable gift. Prior to giving a gift, the client should consider advice within the framework of a particular question..

The question is, “Which Charitable Giving Strat-egy Is the Right One for them?”

ChARitAbLe GivinG OPtiOnS

The following is a short list of the major ways in which people normally donate money and prop-erty to charity. Some are easy to implement and others are more difficult… and each has differ-ent benefits, costs and tax consequences.

1. Gifts of cash or property with no restrictions as to their use

2. Gifts of cash or property tied to a particular use

3. Naming a charity as the owner and benefi-ciary of a life insurance policy

4. Charitable Gift Annuities


Recipient Gift of Cash Gift of Long term Appreciated Property

Public charity Up to 50% of AGi Up to 30% of AGi

Private Foundation Up to 30% of AGi Up to 20% of AGi

Pooled income Fund Up to 50% of AGi for remainder interest

Up to 30% of AGi for remainder interest

Donor Advised Fund Up to 50% of AGi Up to 30% of AGi

charitable remainder trust Up to 50% of AGi For remainder interest

Up to 30% of AGi for remainder interest

5. Donor Advised Funds

6. Pooled Income Funds

7. Charitable Remainder Trusts

8. Charitable Lead Trusts

9. Private Foundations

heLPinG YOuR CLientS DeCiDe WhiCh StRAteGY iS RiGht fOR them

Size of charitable giftSometimes, the size of the charitable gift drives the decision as to which strategy to select. A modest sum of money will naturally eliminate those strategies that require extensive legal and accounting assistance to either create or administer. A gift of under $25,000 in cash or property, for example, is generally too small for the donor to consider a Charitable Remainder Trust. Strategies 1-5 listed above probably would be the most appropriate to use for this gift.

Type of property givenSome types of property, and certain “inter-ests” in property, are not appropriate for gifting to charity. A museum, for example, might be pleased to accept a work of art as a charitable gift, but another charity (which has nothing to do with art) might only be interested in the gift if they can easily sell it. Income tax implications and deduction limitations may arise if the do-nated property is not related to the purpose of the charity.

Donor’s income needsIt is possible to make a charitable gift today and yet arrange to receive an income from the prop-erty for a period of years in the future – or for life. Pooled income funds, Charitable Remain-der Trusts and Charitable Gift Annuities are all charitable giving methods that have this feature. Generally speaking, the tax deduction available for these types of charitable gifts is lower than for outright gifts of cash

Donor’s desire for controlIf a donor wants to retain direct or indirect control over the way in which his or her chari-table gift is invested, or wants ongoing control or advisory rights over deciding which charities receive grants from the funds and when they should receive them, then a donor might consid-er a Donor Advised Fund or Private Foundation.

Donor’s desire for tax benefitsThe type of property given, the type of chari-table entity that the property is given to, the in-come (if any) that the donor wishes to retain, and the length of time for which he or she wishes to retain it, will all affect the deduction that a person will get by making a charitable gift. The percentage deduction can vary from 20% of AGI (Adjusted Gross Income) to 50% of AGI.

Here’s a basic reference chart:If the deduction available for a charitable gift exceeds these limits, there is an automatic 5 year carry forward rule which enables the donor to take the excess deduction in future years (not to exceed 6 years in total).

the SmALLeSt tAx DeDuCtiOn miGht ReAP the LARGeSt PeRSOnAL ReWARD

This might occur with a private foundation. A private foundation is a charitable organization that is established by an individual for the pur-pose of controlling, to the fullest extent pos-sible, the use of that person’s charitable dollars. Individuals who have strong convictions about what they can accomplish through charitable giving and have the financial means to back up those convictions often establish private founda-tions. This is the case despite the lower income tax deductions that are available for contribu-tions and the strict rules and guidelines that must be followed to (1) prevent the foundation and it’s contributors from engaging in self-dealing, (2) limit the ability of the foundation to own for profit businesses, (3) prevent the foundation from putting it’s assets at undue risk by engaging in financial speculation, and (4) make sure that the foundation uses its income and assets for the charitable purposes for which it was granted tax exempt status.

A private foundation can help provide an or-ganized structure for a person’s charitable ac-tivities. Charities seeking funds from individual contributors may be referred to the person’s foundation for review, approval and funding. In fact, some individuals who formalize a private foundation grant-making process and become actively involved in that process are able to con-tinue to operate their foundations well into their retirement.

For some individuals, the need to comply with the complex private foundation rules may dis-courage them from establishing a private foun-dation. However, if a person knows the rules, respects their purpose, and consults with appro-

priate legal, financial and tax advisors, there is no reason why that person cannot use a private foundation to “give back” to his or her commu-nity and do a lot of good.

ChARitAbLe GivinG At DeAth

Thus far, we have only discussed charitable giving opportunities during life. According to statistics complied by Giving USA, in the year 2010, about $22.83 Billion was given to charity by testamentary bequest. As a general rule, un-der IRC Section 2055(a), the amount of money or property passing to charity by reason of a per-son’s death is deductible from his or her adjusted gross estate for federal estate tax purposes.*

Some individuals may decide to make charitable contributions in their wills. A charitable bequest can be a specific amount of money or property, a certain percentage of the estate or a specific type or property. Others may leave property to charity by naming the charity as beneficiary of either a tax deferred annuity, life insurance pol-icy, IRA, or other qualified plan account. Tax qualified funds payable to charity at death avoid both income tax and estate tax.

Life insurance is another popular way of benefit-ing charity at death. If the charity owns the pol-icy during the life of the insured, then amounts gifted to the charity to pay the premiums neces-sary to keep the insurance in force may be tax deductible. If the insured owns the policy, the death proceeds paid to charity will be deducted from the adjusted gross estate of the insured for estate tax purposes. Using life insurance is a way of providing a favored charity with a consider-able benefit (at death) while having it cost only the annual premiums (during life). Giving to charity is a wonderful way of “Giv-ing Back”. Before your client makes such a gift, however, the client should talk with you and their financial advisor about which type of giv-ing is the right kind of giving for them.

CONTINue ON PAGe 30


A lthough American law schools added three thousand additional seats from 1993 to 2008, both the number and the percentage

of African American matriculants decreased. Moreover, from 2003 through 2008, 61 percent of African American applicants were rejected at every school they applied to; only 34 percent of white applicants had a 100 percent rejection rate. In 1993, there were 3,432 African-Ameri-cans in the entering class of law schools around the country, accounting for 7.9 percent of law school matriculants. However, in the fall of 2008, there were only 3,392 African-Americans making up 7.3 percent of law school matricu-lants.1 Rather than a blip on the radar screen this decrease represents a declining trend in African American law school admissions.

Professor Carla Pratt at the Penn State Univer-sity College of Law and her collaborator, Profes-sor Dorothy Evenson from the School of Edu-cation, have completed a study that examines the factors that lead to success in the process of entering law school and becoming an attor-ney. The study uses stories of African American attorneys describing obstacles they faced and the mechanisms they used to overcome them. While a wealth of insights come out of their re-search, the remainder of this article will focus on three lessons that can have a meaningful impact

Targeted Interventions to Expand the Pipeline

Professor Carlton Waterhouse is an Associate Professor of law at the indiana University school of law - in-dianapolis. He is nationally recognized for his work on environmental justice and is known internationally for his research and writing on reparations for historic injustices and state human rights violations. His views have been published in the wall street Journal online and the indianapolis star and he has appeared on both radio and television to provide his perspective on issues. He is an active member of the National Bar Association and serves as the Vice chairperson of the organization’s law Professors Division.

on ongoing efforts to expand the pipeline to and through law school. They are aspiration, infor-mation, and concentration. Through systematic interventions in these three areas persons work-ing on pipeline issues can have a meaningful im-pact.

The aspirations of African American children are damaged daily by the explicit and implicit messages of American society. Few of these messages tell African American children that they can succeed in life, much less become an attorney. The Pratt-Evenson study addresses this directly. Research subjects, in the study, who did not realize that they could become attorneys experienced personal awakenings when they saw and met African American lawyers. No heroic efforts or special soliloquys were required by those lawyers. Being an African American and being present was all it took to ignite hope in those children and enable them to see them-selves as future attorneys. Using this insight, African American bar associations and African American lawyers across the country can make a meaningful impact on large numbers of stu-dents. Through organized visits to elementary and middle schools, students across the country can have new possibilities opened for them with a brief introduction and basic presentation. By making systematic efforts to have their members visit elementary and middle schools, in the area, local bar associations can expand the aspirations of African American children who will in turn expand the pipeline.

The 61 percent rejection rate of African Ameri-can law school applicants from 2003 to 2008 highlights the next insight from the Pratt-Even-son study. Far too many African American law school applicants lack a sufficient appreciation for the steps necessary to get accepted into law school. Although the LSAT has grown in its importance to law school admissions commit-tees because of its significance in determining U.S. News and World Report Best law school rankings, African American students do not ap-proach the exam with an understanding of its relative importance. Many students also lack an appreciation for the difficulty of the exam and how much preparation may be required for them to obtain a competitive score. Some students in the study noted that they were ignorant of what CONTINue ON PAGe 30

byProfessor Carlton Waterhouse


4912 Creekside Drive • Clearwater, FL 33760 • (877) 766-5331 • www.centersweb.com

Special Needs Trust Services • Public Benefits Compliance Lien Resolution • MSA Services • Needs-Based Planning

Fiduciary Support Services • Structured Settlements

The Centers is proud to be a Platinum Sponsor of The National Bar Association.

Fully Protecting Your Clients


ReGIONS Region I(Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, & U.S. Virgin Islands)By Regional Director Donald LaRoche Region I of the National Bar Association, covering Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, Puerto Rico and the Vir-gin Islands, had a very productive and event-ful calendar year for 2010 -2011. Immediately following the 85th Convention in New Or-leans, the board organized a night of bowling and two informational dinners for the area attorneys and law students to network and become acquainted with the benefits and im-portance of joining the NBA. For 2011-2012, we will continue the dinner series and also we will begin a mentoring program with some of the area schools.

Region IX(Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon)By Regional Director F. Travis Buchanan Region IX of the NBA which covers the far Western region of the United States and in-cludes almost 20 affiliates in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Nevada, Washington and Guam, is currently reacti-vating two affiliate chapters: The Ashley M. Dickerson Chapter (Alaska) and the Oregon Chapter of the NBA. The Region is also as-sisting Idaho lawyers in their efforts to es-tablish a new affiliate chapter. At the 2010 Convention in Baltimore, MD, Region IX was recognized as “Outstanding Region of the

NBAInsideTheNBA The National Bar Association is comprised of the following subpart groups: a) twelve (12) Regions which are contiguous to and parallel with the Circuit Courts of Appeals; b) twenty-two (22) substantive Sections; and c) nine (9) Divisions. These subpart groups serve as the heart of the organization and provide members with: a) access to meaningful leadership opportunities; b) participation in social and business networks which are critical to client development; c) attendance at thought-provoking Continuing Legal Education programs; and d) opportunities to invest in the legal pipeline. Below are highlights of some of the past, present and/or future activities of some of these subpart groups.

Year,” and John Page of Region IX was elected as President Elect of the NBA. Throughout the Region, several individual members and affili-ates have been recognized for their excellence in the legal profession over the past bar year. The newest Region IX affiliate, the Richard T. Fields Bar Association (Riverside, CA), recently hosted a celebration of the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education with a trial reenactment and a reception at the California Court of Appeals, Fourth District in Riverside, CA.

DIVISIONSYoung Lawyersby Aja DiamondYLD Under the leadership of Chair John A. Moore of Atlanta, Georgia, the National Bar Association’s Young Lawyers Division (YLD) had a productive 2010-2011 bar year. YLD fos-tered professional development through CLE seminars on topics such as, social media and ethics as well as managing a client relationship. YLD supported Immediate Past NBA President Demetrius Shelton’s “Expanding the Pipeline Youth Program” by presenting a legal curricu-lum to students of color from the Bay Area of California. YLD also offered networking events in DC, Oakland, Baltimore, and Punta Cana, Dominican Republic - the location of the Divi-sion’s Annual Retreat. SeCTIONSAlternative Dispute ResolutionBy Gloria JohnsonThe Alternative Dispute Resolution Section congratulates ADR Section members who re-

cently completed the last credentialing phase of the newly established NBA Panel of Certified Neutrals. Training was conducted by Capitol University law professor Floyd Weatherspoon, and widely known commercial arbitrator and American Arbitration Association (AAA) board member, Harold Coleman. Access to panel members and ADR services will be available through a link on the NBA website, providing an excellent opportunity for the NBA family to actively support its own members, while fulfill-ing the Section’s goal of creating earning oppor-tunities for members.

Chair and Member of Judicial Council Appointed as Bankruptcy TrusteeBy Honorable Arlene Gordon-OliverThe National Bar Association Bankruptcy Sec-tion is proud to announce that one of its own, Greenburgh Town Judge Arlene Gordon-Oliver, has been appointed to the panel of Chapter 7 Trustees for the Southern District of New York.

“This is a deserving appointment for Judge Gor-don-Oliver”, says Greenburgh Town Supervisor Paul Feiner. “Arlene is a very smart and thought-ful judge. She has been outstanding here in the town of Greenburgh and I am happy to see that she will also be serving the Southern District of the State of New York as a Bankruptcy Trustee.”

Gordon-Oliver is the principal at her law firm, Arlene Gordon-Oliver, P.C., where she repre-sents debtors, creditors and trustees in all as-pects of chapter 7, 11, and 13 proceedings.


InsideTheNBA

Civil Rights Lawby Tanya Clay HouseHonored as the “Outstanding Section of the Year,” the Civil Rights Law Section had an ex-citing year, exemplified by the production of semi-annual newsletters to membership, assist-ing in the production of the Guide to the Fed-eral Bench, sponsoring two standing room only CLEs on Education and the Supreme Court at the Annual Convention, and culminating in the Section’s widely attended Reception and Fund-raiser sponsored by 14 major national and lo-cal civil rights organizations. We will continue throughout the 2011-12 bar year to sponsor our signature CLEs during the Annual Convention and also more during the Mid-Winter and Mid-Year Gertrude Rush Conferences. As part of our commitment to educating and helping to guide the NBA, we will work closely with Presi-dent Darryl Parks and the Legislative Division and Committee on NBA advocacy with the Ad-ministration and Congress, release Semi-Annual, possible quarterly newsletters, and again utilize our Reception to further engage the larger civil rights community with the NBA.

Commercial Lawby Dawn TezinoThe NBA Commercial Law Section will host its 25th Annual Corporate Counsel Conference at the Doral Golf Resort & Spa in Miami, Flori-da on February 23-25, 2012. Our Conference theme is “Celebrating the Past and Embracing Our Future: 25 Years of Excellence.” This year’s conference will be particularly memorable with three esteemed General Counsels serving as the Honorary Chairs: Jeffrey J. Gearhart (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.), Michele Coleman Mayes (Allstate Insurance Co.) and Roderick A. Palmore (Gen-eral Mills, Inc.), who will discuss their respective career paths and share their perspectives on the future of diversity in the legal profession. The Conference will feature unparalleled net-working opportunities for in-house and outside counsel, including again the Law Firm Inter-viewing/Networking Expo and the new Corpo-rate Counsel Dine-Arounds and Diversity Em-powerment Award. Additionally, we will have eight CLEs featuring highly, sought-after and experienced practitioners. The Conference has truly become the premier client development, networking and CLE event for attorneys. See you in Miami!!!!

Corporate Law Section Hosts NBA Corporate Leadership ForumBy Catherine H. CostictThe Corporate Law Section left its imprint on the National Bar Association’s 86th Annual Convention in Baltimore, MD, by hosting the 3rd Annual NBA Corporate Leadership Forum (CLE), led by Section Chair Catherine H. Cost-ict, and NBA President-Elect, John Page. CLE participants benefited from the forum by gain-

ing direct access to General and Senior Counsel from major companies such as James Jenkins, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Deer & Company. New to the Corporate Lead-ership Forum this year was the Pinnacle Awards Luncheon. This year’s Pinnacle Awards recipi-ents were Roderick Palmore, Executive Vice President and General Counsel of General Mills, and Veta Richardson, CEO and President of the Association of Corporate Counsel.

energy, environmental & Public utilities Section Activities By Annise K. MaguireThe Energy, Environmental & Public Utilities Section of the National Bar Association par-ticipated in the 86th Annual Convention in Bal-timore, MD, by hosting a trio of panels. The first panel, “Energy Storage & Other Emerging Issues in Energy Law,” provided an overview of legal and technical issues surrounding en-ergy storage. The second panel, “Hot Topics in Environmental Law,” featured presentations on smart grids and consent decrees negotiated with public utilities. The third and final panel, “Environmental Justice: Innovative Concepts & Current Developments,” offered suggestions from government and private sector attorneys on reducing the environmental impact of devel-opment on surrounding, minority communities.

HIGHLIGHT OF NBA CONVeNTIONNBA Securities Law Seminar Panel Says “We tried that already when asked About the Prospect of Repealing Dodd-Frank and al-lowing the Financial Markets to Determine the Regulations Needed”By Karl L. ChenAt the National Bar Association's (NBA) 86th Annual Convention & Exhibits in Baltimore, Maryland a panel of financial services legal and regulatory experts were unanimous in their re-sponse to the question posed as to whether The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act” or the “Act”) should be repealed and replaced by a market driven approach to regulation. The panel which included George W. Madison, General Counsel, US Department of the Treasury, Dr. Ronald L. Crawford, Former Chief Counsel for Diversity and Policy Initiatives at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), Robert March-man, Executive Vice President, Legal Section at Financial Industry National Regulatory Au-thority (“FINRA”), Beverly Jo Slaughter, Man-aging Counsel, Wells Fargo Advisors and Todd Cranford, Of Counsel, Washington, DC office of Patton Boggs, LLP, conceded that there are significant challenges in implementing the land-mark legislation, however, they expressed no doubts about its importance in restoring confi-dence in the regulation of the US financial markets.The seminar entitled "Securities Law and Regu-latory Compliance 2011: Dodd-Frank and Be- CONTINue ON PAGe 30

yond" was sponsored by the NBA Corporate Law Section and provided NBA lawyers with a primer on the financial services laws and regula-tions designed to avert the next financial crisis covering a range of Dodd-Frank related changes including the Act’s attempt to address systemic risk, its aim to bring greater understanding fi-nancial instruments through increased focus on financial literacy, the potential impact of Section 342 requiring the development of an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion and the impact of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ("CFPB").

Kevin J. Armstrong, Director & Managing Counsel for Pershing Advisor Solutions LLC, a FINRA member broker-dealer and one of the country’s leading custodians for registered in-vestment advisors and family offices served as the moderator for the panel. Mr. Armstrong, who serves as Chief Legal Officer for Pershing Advisor Solutions engaged the panel in a critical examination of the legislation using quotes and anecdotes that reflected the change in political climate since President Obama signed this law in July of 2010. Mr. Armstrong probed with the panel whether the Act, which is the largest piece of financial legislation passed since the Great Depression, would actually bring about much needed reform when earlier efforts had achieved mixed results.

In addressing this concern, the panel cited the creation of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC”) which consists of the nation’s top financial regulators and is charged with iden-tifying and responding to systemic risks posed by large and interconnected bank holding com-panies and non-bank financial companies to the broader U.S. financial system as an example of the greater authority found in Dodd-Frank. On this point, the panel agreed with the proponents of the legislation and indicated that the FSOC’s broad oversight authority is necessary in order to eliminate the reoccurrence of “too-big-to fail” in the U.S. financial and political arenas.

Mr. Armstrong reminded the panel that crit-ics questioned whether the FSOC would have any impact citing its lack of full membership, an absence that includes the head of the new CFPB which among other things is charged with “making regulations and guidance as clear and streamlined as possible so providers of con-sumer financial products and services can fol-low the rules on their own.” In response to this question, the panel led by Mr. Madison disagreed with the critics and cited the work the FSOC is already engaged in holding its meetings [its sev-enth meeting was held on July 18, 2011] with key regulators in attendance and taking seriously its authority to designate nonbank financial firms as systemically significant (SIFI) and thereby sub-


dies and young men to participate each year. The young people receive tips and instruction from golf professionals, have lunch with the adult golfers, receive personal Award Certificates, and interact with lawyers and judges from across the country under the auspices of the National Bar Association. Thus, the Youth Golf Clinic serves as a developmental vehicle for youth in the local communities. For 2011, the NBI hosted youth from The First Tee of Baltimore.

FROM PAGe 19

FROM PAGe 25

FROM PAGe 26

FROM PAGe 29Note* The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act of 2010 (“Act”) impacts the federal gift, estate and gen-eration skipping transfer tax (together referred to as “transfer tax”) through 2012. Among other changes, the Act temporarily establishes maximum exemption amounts of $5,000,000 per person for transfer tax purposes, establishes a maximum transfer tax rate of 35% and pro-vides for portability of the estate tax exemption between spouses. These changes, however, are only in effect through December 31, 2012. Un-less Congress enacts new legislation, on January 1, 2013 the transfer tax laws will revert back to the laws (e.g. exemption amounts of $1,000,000 and generally 55% maximum tax rates) that were in effect in 2001. At this time, it is not clear what steps, if any, Congress will take to revise the transfer tax laws for years beyond 2012. Fu-ture changes in transfer tax exemption amounts and transfer tax rates may impact the appropri-ateness of any transfer tax planning strategy or product sale. Clients need to understand that tax law is always subject to interpretation and legislative change. MetLife and its affiliates do not provide tax advice and therefore clients must speak with their qualified legal and tax counsel regarding their current estate plan and what planning options are available and appropriate.

Pursuant to IRS Circular 230, MetLife is pro-viding you with the following notification: The information contained in this document is not intended to (and cannot) be used by anyone to avoid IRS penalties. This document supports the promotion and marketing of insurance prod-ucts. Clients should seek advice based on their particular circumstances from an independent tax advisor.

MetLife, its agents, and representatives may not give legal or tax advice. Any discussion of taxes herein or related to this document is for general information purposes only and does not purport to be complete or cover every situation. Tax law is subject to interpretation and legislative change. Tax results and the appropriateness of any prod-uct for any specific taxpayer may vary depending on the facts and circumstances. You should con-sult with and rely on your own independent legal and tax advisers regarding your particular set of

facts and circumstances.Metropolitan Life Insurance Company1095 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, NY 10036 New England Life Insurance Company501 Boylston StBoston, MA 02116

L0911206002(exp0812)(all states)

was required to become a lawyer and that they did not know how limited their knowledge was. Because students’ lack basic information rang-ing from the need to attend college to become a lawyer to the importance of substantial prepara-tion for the LSAT exam, pipeline interventions need to disseminate basic information about preparing for law school to reach a broad range of students. The World Wide Web and social media provide an excellent opportunity to reach a large number of African American high school and college level students with critical facts and basic steps necessary to successfully apply to law school. An NBA webpage with basic informa-tion and steps to guide students through the preparation and application process could reach large numbers of students at a minimal cost. Likewise, bar associations and pipeline programs need to convey basic steps and information to students to guide them through the process, including contact information for persons who can help answer questions. These steps will go a long way to improve the odds for African Amer-ican students.

All law schools are not created equal. This is especially true regarding the experiences of their African American students. When schools lack “a critical mass” of African American students, racial isolation can take a heavy toll, both inside and outside of the classroom. The Pratt-Even-son study illustrates this. Study subjects recount-ed the psychological and emotional toll of rep-resenting all African Americans in discussions or in dealing with insulting comments. The University of Michigan Law School admissions program, upheld by the Supreme Court in 2003 in Grutter v. Bollinger, recognized this as well. Using affirmative action, the school intentionally sought to build a critical mass of racial minori-ties to improve their experiences and success in school. Schools that increase the concentration of African American students and the resources necessary to support them improve the quality of life for those students and their likelihood of success. Further, African American students need guidance in choosing law schools and un-derstanding how race can impact their experi-ence. It is vital that African American students be made aware of the additional challenges of attending law schools with little or no racial di-versity and how it might affect them. Further, as alumnae, African American attorneys need to

encourage their schools to take diversity issues seriously and to invest the resources necessary to support African American law students. A joint letter from African American bar associations with alumnae of local law schools to local law school deans encouraging such a commitment can help increase the concentration of students and the resources needed to support them. 1For more information visit http://blogs.law.co-

lumbia.edu/salt/.

jecting them to heightened supervision by the Federal Reserve as required by law.

Panelists also focused on the viability of the Act to fulfill a mandate on improving consumer financial literacy. The SEC must provide the results of its study on financial literacy by July 2012. While views of the panelists varied with respect to the obligations of financial institu-tions to provide better disclosure and transpar-ency to enable all investors in making prudent in-vestment decisions, it was commonly agreed that the African-American community suffers greatly as a result of not having proficiency in financial literacy, and therefore, frequently is behind the curve with respect to asset accumulation.

Mr. Armstrong directed the panel to address some controversial issues regarding undertaking fiduciary obligations, in this connection. The panelists views also varied as they related to the role of financial institutions, primarily those of traditional broker/dealers, possibly assuming fiduciary responsibility as covered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, rather than being subject to the suitability requirements that have been the standard for broker/dealers.

Despite the engaging dialogue among the pan-elists and the audience, there remained the un-answered question, "how will the Act impact African-Americans?" Uncontroversial to the panel and seminar participants is the well-noted Section 342 of the Act. Section 342 provides for each federal agency or branch of the Depart-ment of Treasury, affected by the Act, to estab-lish an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion. Each Office must develop among other things, standards for equal employment opportunity and the racial, ethnic and gender diversity of the agency's workforce and senior management, in addition to increasing participation of minority- and women- owned businesses. There is skep-ticism whether this provision will eradicate the growing under-representation of minorities and women in the financial services industry. The jury is still out, and it's likely that the effects of a fully implemented Act will not be felt for several years.


We are proud to partner with the National Bar Association

to promote excellence in the legal profession.

Working together to make a di�erence.

The “Spark” Design ( ), Walmart and Save Money. Live Better. are marks and/or registered marks of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. ©2011 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Bentonville, AR.

National Bar Association87th Annual

Convention & Exhibits

July 14 - 19, 2012

REGISTER

TODAY!

CAESARS PALACE LAS VEGAS, NEVADA

For more information, visit www.nationalbar.org

Date post:	12-Sep-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Membership: the lifeblood of the NBAJanuary 18 - 22, 2012 25th Annual Corporate Counsel Conference...

Documents