About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

1980 Newsl. 1 (1980)

handle is hein.aals/aalsnews1980 and id is 1 raw text is: 



President's Message

                         This summer, John A. Bauman, Professor of Law at the University of California
                     Los Angeles, will begin working with Millard Ruud to take over as Executive Director
                     of the Association of American Law Schools when Millard leaves to rejoin the faculty
                     at the University of Texas.

                         The Selection Committee, consisting of Dean Richard G. Huber, Chairman, Professoi
                     David H. Vernon and Professor Eugene F. Scoles has served us well. So too has the
                     Executive Committee in this selection. John was our unanimous choice.

                         John has a distinguished record as a legal educator, including a number of years
                     as Associate Dean at U.C.L.A. His most recent service to the Association of American
                     Law Schools has been his outstanding leadership as Chairman of the Committee on

                          John does not replace Millard. Millard has served in his own way with the
                     greatest distinction, and John will serve in his way. But all of us who participated
                     in the selection are fully confident that we could not have obtained a better successor
                     than John Bauman. We deeply appreciate his willingness to serve and frankly the
                     Association deserves congratulations for having obtained his services.

                          Continuing this first presidential message, I want to report on the beginnings
                     of what I think will be an important endeavor of the Association. At our meeting in
                     Phoenix and also as I have talked to deans and law teachers elsewhere, the single
                     greatest concern I hear expressed is the need for coming to grips with problems arising
                     out of federal regulatory programs that affect faculty, students, applicants, and the
                     schools themselves.

                          Concern is not directed at the subject matter of the regulatory programs themselves.
                     There is, for example, total support for insuring fairness in treatment of faculty,
                     students, and applicants growing out of differences in race, national origin, religion
                     and gender. Yet, the most common complaint I hear voiced concerns the excessive
                     burden placed upon the law schools by unreasonable enforcement proceedings by federal
                     agencies of insubstantial corulaints. It does not threaten fine programs such as these
                     to try to eliminate wasted motion and wasted expense so that the programs can concentrate
                     upon enforcement of valid complaints.

                          I brought this matter to the attention of the Executive Committee at its late
                     January meeting. The Executive Committtee agrees that-we should begin a general
                     affirmative program to try to work out with the government agencies some sort of
                     cooperative guidelines and procedures. Accordingly, as the first step, by a separate
                     memorandum I am asking the deans of the member schools to send me brief summaries of
                     extreme situations in which government agencies caused the schools to expend inordinate
                     amounts of time and energy in responding to complaints without substance. The purpose
                     of collecting these instances is to aggregate our experiences. When these extreme
                     examples are collected, we will analyse them to determine what may be the administrative
                     environment and institutional factors that account for them and then develop
                     suggestions for administrative changes that may reduce the instances of unnecessary
                     and burdensome administrative conduct. We plan then to approach the government agencies
                     to see if some effective standards for justifiable investigations can be worked out.

                          Later, we hope to broaden the program to make it a cooperative general endeavor
                     to improve the quality of procedures the government uses in regulating aspects of
                     legal educaticn. Regulation is not going to go away. Where it exists, we must seek
                     affirmatively to make it work with efficiency and with as little unjustified burden as
                     possible. We plan to enlist the aid of the Committee on Government Relations and
                     other committees in this program.

                                                                              JERRE S. WILLIAMS



Printing and Distribution Courtesy of Foundation Pr~ess, Inc.


What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 3,000 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.

Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most