Professor David Forte published a Letter to the Editor in First Things:  A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life.  In the letter, published in response to the article “Religion, Reason, and Same-Sex Marriage,” by Matthew J. Franck (First Things, May 2011), Forte praised Dr. Franck’s defense of the moral legitimacy of those argue against same-sex marriage.  He disagrees, however, with Franck’s conclusion that the tactics of same-sex marriage advocates will be self-defeating.  He writes that contrary to Franck’s position that opponents of same-sex marriage will win in the end because the majority of Americans agree with them, the sentiments of the majority may be changing.  As evidence for this assertion Forte notes that the popularity of marriage in the general population has decreased dramatically, divorce rates are up, and people who divorce often do not seek to remarry as they used to.  Instead, they tend to co-habit with a new partner.  As such, they see marriage as a lifestyle choice.  Because they are co-habiting themselves, he argues, people do not seem to see same-sex marriage as a threat to the lifestyle they are trying to build.  In fact, he writes that same-sex marriage advocates may attempt to take the moral high ground, arguing that in a world where many are choosing less committed relationships, same-sex marriage advocates are arguing for the most committed relationship.  Therefore, they can argue that it is they who hold marriage in the highest esteem.  Forte concludes, “The attack on marriage, therefore, is deontological, political, and social. On the one hand, some, knowing that the strongest argument for marriage arises out of natural law, wish to “de-nature” marriage, as one visiting scholar stated at my university. The political attack on marriage comes through the courts, as we have seen. But the social attack comes from the new habits and sensibilities of the American people, who when asked, speak of holding marriage in high esteem, but when put to the test of practice, are more and more preferring forms of less committed relationships.”

You may read the full text of the letter at
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=4&hid=17&sid=827f540d-015b-41aa-be2f-6904cf3ac306%40sessionmgr11&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=hlh&AN=64087720.

Professor Phyllis Crocker, who served C|M|LAW as Interim Dean for the past 18 months, has become quickly reengaged in her discipline.  Crocker was recently quoted in an AP news article praising Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor’s announcement that she will be forming a committee to  review the state’s death penalty law.  O’Connor made clear in her announcement that the committee will not debate the law itself, which was enacted 30 years ago.  Instead, it will be charged with making sure the current system is administered fairly, efficiently and in the most “judicious manner possible.”   O’Connor pledged to convene a 20-member committee with broad experience on this subject to produce a fair, impartial, and balanced analysis. The committee will consist of judges, prosecuting attorneys, criminal defense lawyers, lawmakers and academic experts.  It will also be charged with reviewing a 2007 ABA-sponsored comprehensive study of Ohio’s death penalty statute.  Professor Crocker was well suited to comment on this announcement.  She served as Chair of the 10-person committee that produced the ABA study of Ohio’s death penalty law in 2007.  Crocker was pleased with O’Connor’s announcement, saying “[a] thorough examination of our state’s death penalty system was one of the goals of the 2007 ABA Death Penalty Report.”

To read the full story, click here: http://www.chron.com/news/article/Ohio-s-top-judge-calls-for-death-penalty-review-2161796.php

Professor Ken Kowalski

Clinical Professor Ken Kowalski was interviewed yesterday, Tuesday, September 6, by Dick Russ of WKYC Channel 3 News.  Russ asked Kowalski whether the firefighters’ assertion in their ad, that SB5, if not repealed through Issue 2, would make it illegal for them to negotiate the proper number of firefighters to ensure public safety, was accurate.  In particular, the ad states”Issue 2 makes it illegal for [firefighters] to negotiate for enough firefighters to do the job. . . ” and “[f]ewer firefighters means slower response time and that can make the difference between life and death.”  Kowalski responded by saying “[SB5] does say the number of employees required to be on duty would be an inappropriate subject for collective bargaining,” and that he believes “it means neither side is permitted to bargain about that.”  When asked about the firefighters’ assertion that SB5 will lead to there being fewer firefighters to protect us, Kowalski says that is the firefighters’ professional opinion and not a matter of fact.

You can watch Dick Russ’ interview of Professor Kowalski, which he conducted on E.18th Street in front of C|M|LAW, at http://www.wkyc.com/news/article/205510/45/Truth-Test-Firefighters-anti-Issue-2-TV-ad

Dean Craig M. Boise, along with the new Dean at CWRU law school, Lawrence Mitchell, will appear on the Sound of Ideas radio show on Monday, August 29, at 9 a.m.  They will discuss changes in the legal profession, how law interfaces with our everyday lives, how we prepare law students for legal profession, the teaching of ethics, and other topics of interest to our community as well as the broader community.  You can tune in to 90.3 FM, or listen to the show via live streaming by clicking on the Listen Live link at http://www.ideastream.org/programs/live

Clinical Professor Ken Kowalski published a letter to the editor in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on Tuesday, August 23rd, supporting Warren Buffett’s assertion that the rich should pay more taxes.  To read the letter, click here: http://blog.cleveland.com/letters/2011/08/warren_buffet_is_right_the_ric.html