Page 24


Dan Morales Michael Tigar Texas Attorney General Attorney suop cogq nd w op ms suxaj, THE BACK PAGE GREAT MINDS OF TFIE LEGAL TRADITION \(John Jay, John Marshall, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Felix Frankfurter, Learned Hand, WHAT IS JUSTICE? What is Equity? What are the capabilities and limitations of law in modern society? Is there a role for American jurisprudence in the redistribution of society’s wealth? Do courts make or interpret the law? You, too, have pondered these eternal questions. And you may even have resolved to read the writings of jurists and legal scholars of the past, or to study the opinions of today’s great arbiters of the law such as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Perhaps, you have even considered attending law school. Yet you know you never will. Such an undertaking would require years of disciplined reading and study. But now, as an unintended consequence of the Hopwood v. Texas decision dismantling affirmative action in the state’s colleges, the University of Texas School of Law will come to you on tape. In an unnoticed footnote to his sweeping interpretation of the Hopwood decision, Texas Lino Graglia U.T. Law Professor Attorney General Dan Morales wrote that minority students routinely denied admission to U.T.’s School of Law could easily study the law in the privacy of their homes if the law school would simply tape the lectures of its faculty, and make those tapes available to any student who can fill out a form and write a check. The Law School responded, and the result is Great Minds of the Legal Tradition a definitive survey of the principles and practice of Western Civilization’s second oldest profession, as applied in Texas. Just listening to these lectures will provide you with the outline of a great legal education, paid for by all the taxpayers of Texas, but hitherto available only to a select group of upper-class, white law students. As General Morales wrote, “At the touch of a colorblind button, Law School on Tape eliminates the bias created by institutional racism, underfunded and inferior public schools, and the inherited financial and educational privilege that provides success in our meritocratic society.” TILE CURRICULUM INCLUDES: PART I: Counselor v. Client In a magisterial lecture, U.T. Law School Adjunct \(and Texas Attorney retained can selectively apply the law and ignore the wishes of their clients. Morales will discuss his refusal to appeal the Hopwood decision even after his client, the University of Texas Board of Regents, demanded it because he considers “quotas based on race personally repugnant.” As a bonus, General Morales will explain how his dismantling of his own Consumer Protection Office will ultimately create “a generation of better and stronger consumers in Texas.” For as he has often said: “If Social Darwinism is good enough for the schoolchildren of Texas, it’s good enough for the state’s consumers.” Here he explains the legal and sociological theories underlying that argument. PART II: Criminals Great and Small Michael Tigar, arguably the best criminal defense lawyer in the Republic, explains his theory of litigation, developed by defending’ such clients as concentration camp monster Ivan the Terrible, Oklahoma City bombing defendant Terry Nichols, and Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. Tigar will also discuss the legal profession’s response to fundamental paradigm shifts, in particular how the defense bar is responding to Kenneth Starr’s establishment of an inquisitorial system out of one of the world’s most established accusatorial systems of criminal law. PART III: Lino, the Law, and the Rule of the Racial Majority Constitutional Law Professor Lino Graglia’s unique racial theories might have cost him a seat on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, but the bench he occupies in Austin is protected by tenure. Here at U.T., where no Senate committee can censure him, Graglia’s unabashed commentary has attracted national attention. Graglia did so much “thinking” for Hopwood counsel Stephen Wayne Smith, that shortly after Smith filed on behalf of anti-affirmative plaintiff Cheryl Hopwood, Federal Judge Sam Sparks complained that Smith was in over his head and Sparks later reduced Smith’s billings accordingly. Listen, rewind, and re-listen, as the avuncular legal scholar behind the man dismantling affirmative action explains why African-American and Mexican-American cultures are inferior because they fail to teach “shame as a response to failure.” Lawyeranthropologist Graglia will also discuss why Sicilians are often backward subject to Initiative and Referendum. Just Call “1 800 939.6620: Note: CLE Credit Available for Graduates of South Texas School of A&M Law s uop eonq nd w ap rus sexal 7r4riflegir . -ff