Candidate Statement: Laird Nelson

Position: Vice President

As a participant this year in the ACS moot court competition and member of the 1L Planning Committee, I’ve had a chance to appreciate ACS and the role it plays here at CLS. Not only do I know more about the NSA and the Espionage Act then I ever imagined I would as a 1L, but I’ve also seen an amazing selection of speakers on a range of issues from religious freedom to the gossip on the 9th Circuit. As Vice President next year, I think I can help keep this trend going.

In particular, I’d like to focus on getting the membership active and encouraging people, in addition to simply attending our events, to become members and bring their own contributions to the table. The proud winner of the chocolate prize for recruiting 3 new members while tabling, I realize this isn’t an easy task, but there are definitely some options we can pursue – in addition to drafting our friends/roommates/strangers walking past. More quizzo nights, happy hours, and social events in general would go a long way to letting people know what ACS is actually about and how they can get involved. In addition, the 1L moot court program is a great way to bring ACS to the forefront, and I’d like to focus on encouraging all the 1Ls to join and take part in our events. Also to this end, ensuring that we schedule events that are related to the 1L curriculum, like Professor Cole’s recent lecture, would be a positive development. And everyone, not just 1Ls, would be attracted by an even greater expansion of our efforts at co-sponsoring events and bringing in a wide variety of speakers from academia, government, and the legal world to demonstrate the breadth of ACS’ commitment to the intersection of law and progressive policy.

Although I haven’t done a lot of work on the logistical side of ACS, in the past I’ve held leadership roles in a number of organizations, including running an inner-city tutoring program in Baltimore as an undergraduate. In this role I managed outreach events to encourage students to volunteer, planned activities during freshmen orientation to attract incoming students, and generally assisted with the project’s organizational aspects. In sum, I think my skills are a great match for the Vice President position, and I’d love to help make sure that next year ACS is an even more dynamic organization than it has been in the past.

Candidate Statement: Jake Honigman

Position: President

ACS, as I see it, serves two main purposes: 1) to provide our school at large with high quality programming on Constitution-related subject matter (speaker events, debates with the Federalist Society and whomever else wants some, blog); and 2) to run events that foster and strengthen a community of students who share a certain basic vision of the Constitution and the country (Quizzo, drinking heavily and trashing board members' apartments). This past year, I have run and helped with speaker events (one of which had Koronet's Pizza), DJed a party, and recovered the ACS banner when NYU stole it. Through it all, I have become attached to the organization. Next year I hope to serve it, and you, faithfully. Thank you for your vote.

Candidate Statement: Quinn Arntsen

Position: Events Chair

My name is Quinn Arntsen and I am running for the events chair and external relations chair. As a 1L I have been heavily involved with ACS: I am the assistant coach for the ACS moot court; a member of the 1L committee; and I brought Cass Sunstein to give a lecture earlier this spring.

Events Chair Statement:
My passion for bringing speakers to campus goes back to my days as an undergrad. During that time I was on a board whose sole purpose was to bring speakers and lectures to campus. Through that organization I was able to work with such speakers as Jon Stewart, Nadine Strossen, John Cleese, Pat Buchanan, and Sarah Weddington. This gave me a strong base of knowledge about the ins and outs of hosting and producing lectures. Thanks to ACS, I continued to be involved with bringing speakers during my first year at the law. Earlier this semester I brought Cass Sunstein to give a lecture on whether judges are political. I was completely in charge of the event and did everything from contacting Professor Sunstein to promoting the event and ordering food. The event was a great success and a number of people attended. This allowed me to gain first-hand experience regarding what is required for hosting events in the law school—there are a handful of hoops to jump through, and I was able to familiarize myself with them. Lectures are a primary component of what makes ACS such a great organization; this year alone the Columbia chapter of ACS will have hosted more than 50 events. I feel that my knowledge and experience can help this important tradition thrive.

External Relations Chair Statement:
As the assistant coach for the ACS Moot Court I had to reach out to members of New York City’s legal community in order to find attorney-judges for the internal competition. I found this to be a fun and interesting experience because it gave me the opportunity to chat with practicing lawyers from many backgrounds, including members of the New York City Chapter of ACS. During these conversations I learned that many attorneys would like more opportunities to interact with law school students. As the external relations chair I would try to use this experience and knowledge to set up more events where lawyers and law students could interact. For example, panel discussions where members of the NYC Chapter of ACS could discuss opportunities to stay involved with ACS after graduation; receptions where current students could chat with recent graduates about career opportunities; or outings with firms to discuss their pro bono opportunities. Furthermore, because I would already have a handful of contacts in the NYC Chapter of ACS, I think I could help strengthen the mentorship program. There is a large well of knowledge and experience that we can gain and learn from, if only we can find a way to tap it.

Candidate Statement: Katie Sullivan

Position: External Relations Chair

Vice President Statement:
My experience this past year as co-assistant media chair with ACS has shown my both that I want to be more involved in this organization and that I’d like to be involved in a different way. I think I’d bring two important traits to the vice president role with ACS: My organizational skills and my desire to work on the social side of this group. Maintaining databases, organizing sign-up sheets, keeping track of dues – these things appeal to the hyper-organized part of me. And I have experience performing these functions for groups, starting all the way back in high school, when I was secretary for National Honor Society. (Okay, I’m a dork…isn’t that what this is all about?) I think the academic event planning side of this group is amazing, but that’s not where my talents would be best utilized; I’d like to be more involved with the membership side. I also think I could bring a lot to the social aspects of ACS – I’m friendly (I hope you feel the same way) and I’ve really enjoyed getting to know everyone involved with this group. I think this past semester was great, socially, and I’d like to continue having events like the parties at Jon and Tim’s apartments while also adding more for the moot court participants and for 1Ls early next semester. I think a happy hour for the mooters right after they find out they’ve been selected for the program would be a great way to start things off, and also for them to get to know their editors. I did the ACS moot court program this year, so I think I’d be well positioned to work on retention strategies. Finally, I hope to make it to the national convention this year, and keep our excellent relationship with national leadership. Being a part of ACS has been one of the most rewarding parts of my law school experience so far, and I hope to be able to keeping working with all of you as vice president!

External Relations Chair Statement:
I think I have the personality and the organizational skills to be an excellent liaison to other chapters of ACS and our practitioner’s community. I’m also interested in keeping track of our chapter’s alumni, both as part of the mentorship program and for networking and other events. My experience this past year as co-assistant media chair with ACS has shown my both that I want to be more involved in this organization and that I’d like to be involved in a different way. I also feel that the external relations chair could take some of the weight off of the vice president in terms of social planning, and if I’m elected for this chair I would love to be involved with that. Social planning in general seems to fit in with the external relations chair’s responsibilities, and I think many of the groups the chair liaises with – alumni, other chapters – would be good additions to/reasons to have social events. I’d love to expand the chair to include some of these correlated responsibilities.

Candidate Statement: Yafang Deng

Position: Finance Chair

Media Chair Statement:
At Columbia, ACS is recognized as hosting the most events throughout the year, and also for maintaining one of the only active student group blogs. After attending many ACS events, I decided to get more involved in the group by joining the media/events committee and later the 1L planning committee. I was interested in contributing to the ACS blog but could never seem to commit to actually writing a post. It wasn’t until second semester when the chance to attend a HLS conference motivated me to write two posts in reaction to the conference and the related CLS panel that I attended. As Media Chair, I want to connect the online aspects of ACS more closely with the rest of ACS. My goal would be to have an online event calendar with event info on the website linked to blog posts reacting to the events. Event posts would provide readymade content for the blog, helping to maintain the consistency of posts and encouraging more ACS members, especially 1Ls, to contribute.

Finance Chair Statement:
The Columbia Chapter of ACS stands out for the level and variety of activities it organizes at the law school throughout the year. I became interested in ACS as a 1L after attending many events, and I would like to help maintain the quantity and quality of events next year. Without funding from the student senate and from ACS national, none of this would be possible. As someone who is organized and detail-oriented, I would work to ensure that all funding requests and reimbursements are submitted in a timely manner, keeping the group running smoothly.

Candidate Statement: Rob Weinstock

Position: Media Chair

I would like to serve as the 2007-2008 ACS Media Chair. This year, I worked as one of the two assistants to Andy Bradley (the current Media Chair) and have greatly enjoyed helping to sustain and develop the electronic forum for the ACS community at Columbia and beyond. Serving as a non-board officer and on the 1L committee this year has given me an excellent sense of our organizational purpose and workings, and of the proper role for the blog within ACS. Before coming to law school, I co-founded a public policy discussion website, and, compounded by my work on the ACS blog this year, I have a deep and demonstrated commitment and understanding of using the internet as a communicative tool for progressive ideas and policies. The ACS blog is important as the intellectual back-beat (to borrow a phrase), constantly reminding us all to be engaged, reflective, and critical about our legal education and the legal profession which we will inherit. In the coming year, I hope to continue the steady and high-quality stream of content on the ACS blog and further integrate it into the social, academic, and operational work done by ACS.

Candidate Statement: Katie Brandes

Position: 3L Rep

Working on the board of ACS this year as Finance Chair showed me what a dedicated chapter we have at Columbia. After helping in small ways and big ways with the over 50 events that ACS hosted or co-sponsored this year I have come to see how big of an impact this organization has on promoting progressive views and debate in the law school community. I would like to continue to have the opportunity to work with this organization as a 3L rep. Our 1L board members, assistants, and planning committee have done a terrific job this year and I know that their enthusiasm will carry over to next year. By joining the Board as a 3L rep I would help provide continuity to the running of the board and help the board accomplish its goals for ACS. Plus, I provide the added bonus of having someone who knows about the budgets and accounting and that can never hurt.

Candidate Statement: Zahra Egal

Position: 3L Rep

I have had a longstanding interest in progressive politics and am very enthusiastic about the agenda, objectives and approach of the American Constitution Society. I was introduced to ACS while still in college and became involved with the organization as a Moot Court Assistant during 1L. Last summer, I attended the ACS Convention where I made connections with several other chapter leaders, met many of the speakers we had over the last year, and planned social events as a Washington, DC Summer Leader for ACS.

Over the last year as Vice President, I have continued to have positive experiences. I assisted in planning several substantive events and was responsible for bringing Tom Goldstein and David Cole to Columbia. However, my primary responsibility as Vice President was membership development. As part of this role, I planned most of the ACS social events, created the mentorship program, informed people about ACS National and organized the 1L Committee.

I believe that I would be an asset to ACS as a 3L representative. I have knowledge of the organization at the National level as well as the Columbia level. I have several ideas for events next year, including expanding the diversity of our speaker list to more policymakers and activists. As advisor to the 1L Committee, I developed personal relationships with many of the future leaders of ACS and believe that position prepared me to be a resource, as it taught me to guide without leading or controlling. I hope to have your support and would be happy to give you mine as your 3L representative.

David Cole, "Less Safe, Less Free: The Failure of Preemption in the War on Terror"

Karl Rove: not as prescient as 3 witches

     Today, David Cole, Professor at Georgetown University Law Center and volunteer staff attorney with Center for Constitutional Rights, discussed the "paradigm of prevention" at the heart of the Bush administration's War on Terror. He points to 3 central problems with this new paradigm. First, it places a tension on our core democratic values. Second, the preventative paradigm is difficult to certify as successful, and some evidence suggests that it is counter-productive. Finally, the goal of preventing terrorism should be pursued through means less offensive to the rule of law.
     Cole explained a number of central tenets composing the rule of law and emphasized the core concept of fundamental human rights. Moving to discuss the importance of equality in the rule of law, Cole explained that the targeting of foreign nationals in the War on Terror evidenced a "path of least resistance" approach that was fundamentally inequitable. As a political maneuver, this allowed permitted a rhetoric of safety without appearing as a direct threat to the citizenry's constitutional rights. Pointing to several individual examples and national security policies, Cole made a clear and convincing case that ideas of inequity consistently undermine the rule of law in U.S. national security policy.
     Cole outlined the role of secrecy in the preventative paradigm and demonstrated that the trumping power of claims of secrecy can eviscerate all constitutional and human rights. The complete absence of transparency is critical to the War on Terror within the preventative paradigm. It is not indispensable to the broader project of national security.
     Professor Cole began his conclusion with his oft-suffered slight as being "so September 10th." This attitude - that human rights must be sacrificed in a post-9/11 world - is simply not supported by empirical results under the preventative paradigm. We are obviously less free, we are also less safe.

     The Columbia Law School Chapter of the ACS would like to heartily thank Professor Cole for his thought-provoking and important remarks.

“A Separate Society”

Judicial deference, separation of powers, and Harrison Ford

On the bus ride to Boston for the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell conference hosted by HLS Lambda, I was forcibly treated to Harrison Ford’s invigorating defense of the Constitution in Clear and Present Danger. The movie was remarkably apt for the occasion, and two spot-on moments of melodrama managed to sneak in between the bullets and the bombs. When Harrison Ford (aka Dr. Jack Ryan, acting CIA deputy director of intelligence) first discovers a miniature undeclared war in Colombia authorized by the President, his boss tells him, “You took an oath…I don't mean the President. You gave your word to his boss: you gave your word to the people of the United States.” At the end of the movie, Ford leaves the President in the Oval Office with a look of utter scorn and testifies for the Senate Intelligence committee, apparently the arbiters of justice in the Tom Clancy world.

So what happens when the political branches are more or less united? Is it the place of the courts to question the judgment of the elected representatives of the people over the constitutionality of their policies? The answer is always and emphatically yes. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is no exception, and as the conference panelists made clear, the Supreme Court needs to apply strict scrutiny to this discriminatory policy.

Professor Tim Bakken outlined the usual legal justifications for judicial deference to the judgment of Congress and the President:

• a textual argument for granting the political branches power and authority, especially when they are in concurrence,


• an argument of standard deference to Congressional fact-finding,


• and an argument for deference to military findings and decisions as the expert in the field.

However, none of the legal justifications are the true reasons for Don’t Ask Don’t Tell because they reference the argument that DADT is necessary to preserve unit cohesion and military morale, an argument so flimsy even the Defense Department has backed away from it in recent years. Former service members told emotional stories explaining that rather than improving cohesion and morale, DADT caused harm by making them feel unwelcome and dishonorable. Professor Laurence Tribe encapsulated the crucial problem with DADT: it is based solely on the military’s discomfort with homosexuality. Discomfort is not a legal or constitutional justification.

Despite the current tendency towards judicial deference with regards to Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, the Supreme Court still has the power to act. As several of the panelists emphasized, deference does not equal abdication. The Court has deferred to military judgments on the importance of military interests and values, but DADT clearly does not fall within the logical scope of deference to the military. Even with judicial deference to Congress and the President, the constitutional standard of strict scrutiny does not change. That means the Court must find a compelling government interest which can only be served by DADT. The stated compelling interest and the “tailoring” or fit of DADT are both highly questionable.

Stuart Delery, currently representing a group of discharged service members in Cook v. Gates, is championing the argument that judicial deference operates within the Constitution, not as a replacement. Likewise, the military must operate within the limits of the Constitution. As Professor Tribe thundered into his microphone, the military is not a “Constitutional blackhole.”

ACS T-Shirt Finalists

Here are the final designs for the ACS T-shirt competition:

4 Horsemen


It's Alive


Turn Left


Zombie Founders