Future American lawyers to be proud of ...

Alberto Gonzales spoke before law students at Georgetown on January 24, 2006, in a speach entitled "Intercepting Al Qaeda: A Lawful and Necessary Tool for Protecting America " justifying the unauthorized surveillance of US citizens. While it was announced late on January 20th, the student body was given only about 24 hours notice to digest the concept that he was going to give a policy speech at their school. Even with such short notice, the students did take action even though there two rows of Justice Department staff and three rows of media in a small room. During the course of his speech about thirty of the students in class got up from their seats and turned their backs to him. Others walked out before the speech was over. To make matters worse for Gonzales, additional students came into the room, wearing black cowls and carrying a simple banner, written on a sheet that quoted Ben Franklin, "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither."

The protest was peaceful and the Gonzales was not interrupted. When the students’ placement of their banner obscured the view of the press cameras broadcasting the event, Law Center security personnel asked them to lower the banner—and the students did so. Because the student protest was within the bounds of courtesy, except for the request to move the sign, they were not stimined in any way.

One student who attended the speach stated:

Our protest was not about partisan politics; leading politicians and constitutional scholars of all political stripes have recognized the administration's arguments for domestic spying as flimsy at best. Our silent protest was about choosing the Constitution and our country's ideals over wrongheaded political rhetoric and surrender to a culture of fear. As graduate law students, we know for certain that adherence to the law must not be a passing consideration. Our government cannot dismantle the law for the sake of unfettered discretion in advancing national security policies or cling in vain to weak legal justifications. As the next generation of America's lawyers, our job is to stand up for the rule of law, not the rule of men. Jean Pasquarella of http://www.standupforthelaw.blogspot.com/

Hear! Hear! That was and is a fundamental principle of our republic and embraced by all political persuations. No ONE is above the law. Otherwise we slide into a system of priviledged aristocracy to whom the laws do not apply.

Fortunately for Alberto Gonzales, it was a brief speech after which he immediately left and did not participate in the panel discussion that followed. The panel was composed of national security law and constitutional law experts representing widely different views on the legal and policy issues, namely Georgetown Law Professor David Cole, Visiting Professor Martin Lederman, University of Virginia School of Law Professor Robert Turner and David Rivkin of Baker & Hostetler. Nonetheless, it was the consensus of the panel, there as no basis in law for Gonzalez's radical proposals.

And, as panelist said,

"When you're a law student, they tell you that if you can't argue the law, argue the facts. They also tell you if you can't argue the facts, argue the law. If you can't argue either, apparently, the solution is to go on a public relations offensive and make it a political issue... to say over and over again "it's lawful", and to think that the American people will somehow come to believe this if we say it often enough.

In light of this, I'm proud of the very civil civil disobedience that was shown here today."

- David Cole, Georgetown University Law Professor