|
I'm a law student due to graduate next Spring. I am all too aware of the reputation that lawyers have in this society. I think some of that reputation is deserved. There is egregious conduct among lawyers in the American legal profession. I find it so ironic that to be qualified to sit for the Bar exam you have to be nearly squeaky clean but once you are sworn in you can engage in some very questionable behavior and suffer no sanction.
But lawyer or not, it isn't the label that counts. There are good lawyers (John Edwards) and bad lawyers (Enron lawyers that either looked the other way or were complicit in the corruption). It isn't about the profession, it's about the integrity and motivation of the person.
To be sure, Edwards made his fortune at the expense of those corporations he held accountable for their unconscionable behavior. That is what good lawyers are paid to do. But it was honest work. It was work done mostly to help the underdog and it was earned. Anyone who doesn't appreciate the fact that most trial lawyers work well over 60 hours a week need to step back and give that a thought. That's one reason I don't see trial work in my future.
But it wasn't about Edwards, it was about his clients. And I think that is how he will approach his future political service as Vice President.
And those who think tort reform is the answer should think again. Tort reform simply limits those who have been wronged in their recovery. Is that fair? If a corporation knowingly manufactured a product that had a high probability of causing injury, should we allow Congress to cap the amount of recovery for the victim? Is that what justice is all about? I think not. I agree there have been some unsupportable judgments over the years but I think in general juries are responsible and render awards based on the relative merits of the case.
Go Kerry/Edwards 2004!
|