(HOST) Recently, a Pentagon official denounced lawyers and their firms for representing detainees at Guantanamo Bay. It’s a criticism that troubles commentator Cheryl Hanna.
(HANNA) I’m getting increasingly concerned about government officials and the media attacking lawyers who represent unpopular clients.
Charles Stimson is the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainee Affairs. He said that he was shocked that many of the nation’s top lawyers were representing those held at Guantanamo Bay. He then named many of those firms and urged corporate clients to tell their lawyers: Stop representing detainees or kiss my business goodbye.
I find it hard to believe that this man is a lawyer himself. And I think he ought to be ashamed of such remarks.
Then, Wall Street Journal editor board member Robert Pollock added fuel to the fire. He listed more law firms representing detainees and agreed that these attorneys should suffer some consequences for challenging the government. The Pentagon has denounced Stimson’s statements; but I fear that in the future competent lawyers will shy away from taking unpopular cases because they’ll fear backlash from their clients and the general public if they do.
And just in case you think this issue doesn’t have much to do with all of us here in Vermont, three of the lawyers under attack are Vermonters. Robert Rachlin, a partner at the state’s largest law firm, along with David Sleigh and Robert Gensburg of St.Johnsbury, represent Guantanamo detainees.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales responded to Stimson’s remarks by saying, “Good lawyers representing the detainees is the best way to ensure that justice is done.”
What Stimson and Pollack failed to mention was that the government has lost nearly every case involving the detention of those classified as enemy combatants because both liberal and conservative judges have found that the government is disregarding Constitutional principles in the pursuit of terrorists.
These cases are complicated and extremely expensive to defend. Without the willingness of major law firms to take these cases and foot the bills, it’s Americans who will ultimately lose their freedoms.
But my sense is that a lot of folks sort of agree with this anti-lawyer sentiment. Maybe that’s because we lawyers haven’t always done the best job of explaining why it’s in all of our collective best interest.
Senator Leahy, now chair of Senate Judiciary, has asked the President to respond to Stimson’s remarks. But I’d like to see every lawyer and judge in the state of Vermont speak up in defense of competent representation for everyone.
It’s the responsibility of the bar not just to take unpopular cases, but also to defend our colleagues who do so, both in the public forum and in private conversation. Apparently, we need this kind of dialogue now more than ever
Cheryl Hanna is a professor at Vermont Law School in South Royalton.