• Providing desperately needed legal services to organizations with limited resources;
• Fostering law students’ pride in serving their community;
• Giving law students valuable practical experience and professional feedback;
• Letting students meet and interact with legal practitioners in the community;
• Instilling goodwill on behalf of the law school, its graduates, and our community.
• Developing professional responsibility in the practice of law.

What exactly is public interest law? Public interest law is a broad definition for legal practice areas that assist individuals equal access to justice. Public interest careers tend to focus in the areas of government, non-profit organizations, legal aid, and public defenders offices. Typical issues include poverty and welfare, domestic and family, immigration, civil rights, workers’ compensation, and bankruptcy.

Public Interest Week is an event at UF Law designed to introduce and facilitate law students’ interest and possible career in Public Interest Law. Currently scheduled events include:

Monday, September 8, 10 am – 2 pm: Volunteer Fair
Representatives from local Public Interest agencies will be in the courtyard in front of the library to answer questions and to sign up volunteers for their various programs. Agencies include: Three Rivers Legal Services, Volunteer Income Tax Assistance, Children’s Legal Services, Community Legal Services of Mid-Florida, Inc., Teen Court, & Southern Legal Services

Friday, September 12, 11:30 am – 12:30 pm: Public Interested? Do’s & Don’ts
Whitney Untiedt, from the Public Defender’s Office & former AmeriCorps Fellow, will reprise her program on the ins and outs of becoming a strong candidate for Public Interest & Pro Bono opportunities. This includes what potential employers are looking for on a resume, as well as what they don’t want to see, and the insiders scoop on how good applicants go wrong. Place TBA, watch your email for updates.

The Association for Public Interest Law (APIL) will also be holding many events this week, so watch for email regarding newly added programs.

Finally, although UF Law does not require service to graduate, we do recognize students achieving a certain number of pro bono or community service hours through out their law school career with a certificate.

For more information contact Kristen Bryant in Career Services at bryantk@law.ufl.edu.

In a new book, Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, David H. Levin Chair in Family Law and founding director of the Center on Children and Families at the University of Florida, argues that America has neglected the importance of children’s rights.

“The United States is alone in refusing to ratify the CRC (Children’s Rights Convention), the most rapidly and universally accepted of all human rights charters,” writes Woodhouse in Hidden in Plain Sight: The Tragedy of Children’s Rights from Ben Franklin to Lionel Tate, which was published on April 23.

In the book, Woodhouse brings up the story of Lionel Tate, who was sentenced to life in prison without parole for the death of a young playmate when he was just 12 years old. She also argues that abused and neglected children in state custody have fewer rights than accused criminals.

“My objective in Hidden in Plain Sight was to reach a wide audience of Americans who care about children,” Woodhouse said. “I wanted to use stories of real children, and real children’s advocates (including many of our own faculty and students) to combat the notion that children have no use for rights and can’t be trusted to shape their own destinies.”

Woodhouse points out that children’s rights should be more important to the United States because there are so many fundamental connections between children’s rights and American values. She argues that opponents of children’s rights on both the Left and the Right see it as a threat to parental authority.

Woodhouse’s mission for the book is the get America to understand that children’s rights are as important as other human rights.

“When I presented Hidden in Plain Sight to 600 advocates for children at the National Association of Counsel for Children it was clear that this audience felt it was speaking directly to their own experiences and to those of their young client,” Woodhouse said.

When Mondays rolled back around, he was sitting in his law classes once again, ready to repeat the cycle.

Shapiro’s journalism background and law career has come full circle, now that he has been prosecuting cases related to the First Amendment for the Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia in Washington, D.C. for the last year and a half.

“Since I used to be a journalist, I have an interest in the First Amendment,” Shapiro said. “I think I may be one of the only prosecutors in the country who prosecutes cases that somehow seriously involve First Amendment law.”

He deals with many protestors participating in unlawful conduct at the White House, U.S. Capitol, and other federal properties, particularly specializing in cases with mass protestors. Shapiro has prosecuted as many as 31 codefendants in one trial.

Shapiro has also worked on high-profile cases, just recently prosecuting and subsequently convicting a woman who accosted Condoleezza Rice on Capitol Hill with hands painted red to look like blood.

However, dealing with high-profile issues is nothing new to this journalism veteran, as he spent his seven years after his Florida State University undergraduate education as an investigative reporter. He covered stories that included the JonBenet Ramsey murder case, Columbine shootings, Chandra Levy investigation and Sept. 11 attacks. These experiences exposed him to the intersection of the law and media and the problems that can occur.

“My real interest in going to law school was because I had an interest in First Amendment law,” Shapiro said. “I feel that the media abuses the First Amendment a lot, and I was hoping to go to law school so I could eventually represent people who were victims of that abuse.”

This knowledge initially came from his beginning in journalism as a reporter for tabloids. In this capacity, he witnessed the abusive way the First Amendment was regarded in news coverage about JonBenet Ramsey. Shapiro ended up reporting these publications to the FBI, which led to a criminal prosecution and his testimony before a grand jury.

Shapiro’s journalism career quickly ascended, as he went from employment at the tabloid, The Globe, to publication in Time Magazine. Just before law school, he was working for Gannett in New York City.

“I actually spent a few months in Manhattan and all of the New York City area working on 9/11 and trying to track down information about Al-Qaeda, and then I came back to Florida and started law school,” he said. “You can kind of imagine the culture shock.”

Law school didn’t deter Shapiro from journalistic endeavors. In addition to his academic work and involvement in the Military Law Students Association, he wrote some stories and columns and made appearances on television shows, including the “The O’Reilly Factor.”

The summer after his first year, Shapiro was contacted by “48 Hours Investigates” to conduct a preliminary investigation on the Kobe Bryant case. This involved extensive time in Colorado that summer, extending into his second and third years of law school.

This commitment also required a class schedule conducive to long weekends traveling to cover the case.

“It was like I was living two lives at the same time,” Shapiro said. “It was a fun experience because I got to fly out of town every other week. It was a bit exotic for a full-time student, but it was also pretty exhausting.”

Shapiro described the Kobe Bryant case as beneficial in two ways. He was able to witness concepts he was learning in classes in the real world and also had the ability to grasp complex legal issues brought up in hearings that very few reporters would be able to clearly understand without a legal education.

“The Kobe Bryant case was sort of a whole part of my law school education,” Shapiro said.

The still full-time law student decided he had enough information on the Kobe Bryant case to write a book. “Kobe Bryant: The Game of His Life” was published in February of 2004 and broke an Amazon.com Top 100 sales during the first week it was released.

Upon graduating, Shapiro encountered another event that ultimately translated into his second book – bar preparation.

Shapiro didn’t pass his first bar exam in June 2005, which he had the unfortunate timing of taking right after the bar examiners’ decision to rewrite the test just six weeks before. This was due to a bar preparation course’s successful duplication of actual exam questions.

His second shot at the exam missed the mark by just one point.

At that point he had a bar tutor, Steve Friedland, who used to teach at Nova Southeastern University Law Center. Friedland had devised a methodology based on a system of protocols. For every section of the bar, he created a system a student should use to approach each subject.

“He had this great system he had developed, and I was very impressed,” Shapiro said.

The idea to write another book sparked, and Shapiro used his own writing experience combined with Friedland’s material to write a book co-authored by the two, entitled “The Essential Rules for Bar Exam Success.” The book serves as a bridge between the last year of law school and the start of bar preparation courses, since it can be an abrupt shift.

An important aspect of the book, which focuses on the Multistate Bar Examination, is understanding the language of the exam and teaching students how to “think the way the bar examiners think,” said Shapiro.

Shapiro passed the bar the third time, an accomplishment he credits to applying the protocols in the book.

Shapiro says the most valuable aspect of the book is preparing a third year law student for the psychological and emotional shift that accompanies bar exam preparation.

“This book really helps you understand every aspect of studying for the bar. It’s not just about the bar exam itself,” Shapiro said. “It’s about what is going to happen to your life when you enter this Twilight Zone called bar exam class.”

The book was published a few weeks ago by Thomson West with complimentary copies sent to every law school in the country. All law school bookstores, as well as select Barnes & Nobles and Borders bookstores, will be selling the book. Thomson West also selected the book as one of only two selected each year for its professional series.

A strong writing background has influenced more than his current legal specialty, as Shapiro is now working on his third book. The story is about a forbidden love that takes place in a future utopian society, complete with civil rights issues he learned about in Constitutional Law.

“There were a lot of things learned at UF that I wrote about in my stories,” Shapiro said. “If I hadn’t had that education at UF, I never would have been able to write those stories with the punch that they had.”

Cary Aronovitz, Kevin Combest, Robert Davis and Tara Nelson argued a hypothetical case in front of Roberts and three judges from the 11th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals on Friday.

“Before I went out, we were all kind of sweaty palms and we thought it was going to be nerve-racking,” Combest said. “But as soon as you get out there, he’s about as tall as you, he’s a regular guy.” Added Nelson. “The gravity of the situation added to the nerves.”

Aronovitz won the best brief and best oral argument awards, while Davis took home the best overall participant. Aronovitz and Combest won the competition for the petitioner, and Davis and Nelson argued for the respondent.

“I haven’t even really thought about it at this point,” Davis said. “It was a very nice honor, but I was extremely proud of everybody. Cary with the best brief and the best oral, and Tara and Kevin out there. “It’s a great honor, but at this point, I’m just glad I didn’t fall over.”

The competitors prepared for hours everyday since they found out they made the Final Four. Part of their preparations included professors posing hostile questions during their arguments to try to throw off the students.

“What really made it much easier than you would’ve thought it would be was that the questions the professors asked us in practice were hard-hitting, adversarial, trying to get us to screw up, and that prepared us to talk to these judges and justices who didn’t want to do that,” Combest said. “They just wanted to talk back and forth. We had seen the works, and anything less than that was just pleasant.”

That grueling preparation was essential since Roberts wasted no time questioning the competitors. Just one minute into Aronovitz’s argument, Roberts cut him off with a question.

“The very first question presented to me was [Chief Justice] Roberts, and I was anticipating that question, but it was probably the one question I really didn’t want to answer,” Aronovitz said. “I got it out of my mouth, I saw him nodding and that was a big confidence booster.”

The case was about the constitutionality of the fictional State of Webb allowing a specialty license plate with the words “Choose Life” without allowing a license plate with an opposing viewpoint.

UF Law Professor Lyrissa Lidsky stressed the importance of the case even though it was hypothetical because Florida was the first state to have a “Choose Life” license plate. Florida is also considering a license plate with the words “I Believe” and a cross, Lidsky said. South Carolina recently approved such a license plate, and a lawsuit has already been filed in the matter.

“This is a very important issue, it’s a hot issue, and some smart people in our intermediate appellate courts have split on the constitutionality of the issue,” Lidsky said.

The judges and the chief justice seemed somewhat loose with their questions and didn’t hit the students too hard.

Roberts took a playful jab at the three circuit court judges, Judge Peter T. Fay, Judge Susan H. Black and Judge Rosemary Barkett, when Aronovitz brought up lower circuit cases that are not binding on the Supreme Court. “We’re not bound, of course, by what the circuit courts have to say,” Roberts said. “We don’t pay much attention to them.”

During Nelson’s argument, Fay addressed Roberts’ joke and responded.

“Some of us want to pay attention to what those other judges write,” Fay said.

Although the bench ruled for the petitioner, Roberts said all of the students performed well.

“We unanimously decided that there was not a bad one among them,” Roberts said. “That’s not always the case, so we appreciate very much, as we do in our day jobs, that a lot of work went into the presentations. Judges and justices are very grateful when that happens.”

After the competition, Roberts surprised two law school classes with visits.

The endowed program will bring jurists to UF Law at least once each year for a period of several days to interact with students, providing them with unusual access to their expertise and insight in appellate advocacy.

“I think it is a good concept and it would be absolutely wonderful if it would allow the law school to invite all kinds of judges from around the country,” said Fay. “This program will really give students a chance to talk to judges and to realize a lot of different things, number one that they’re just human beings, trying to do a good job. And number two, that they’re dealing with everyday questions that are very similar, if not identical to the questions that are being discussed in class.”

Fay also believes the program will help students bridge the gap between what they learn in law school and legal practice, providing insight to the importance of legal drafting skills, how to file papers, how to file motions leading to a hearing and other “nitty-gritty” details regarding the day-to-day practice of law.

The jurist-in-residence program was the idea of Fay’s good colleague and friend, Judge Paul Huck. Huck regards Fay as a judicial mentor, and he wanted to honor Fay in a fashion that represented Fay’s tremendous influence on his own professional development. It is very appropriate that Fay will serve as UF Law’s first jurist-in-residence later this year.

“This honor is the highlight of my 38 years as a federal judge,” Fay said. “I’m very honored, very embarrassed and very humble.”

UF Law exemplified the inclusion of diversity measures on campus in the following categories: Hispanic enrollment, Hispanic faculty, Hispanic student services, Hispanic retention rate and Hispanic reputation.

Professors Berta Hernandez-Truyol, Juan Perea and Pedro Malavet and Assistant Professor D. Daniel Sokol make the University of Florida Levin College of Law a national leader in the number of tenured Hispanic faculty members.

“There are many reasons why the Levin College of Law has earned this distinction. For roughly the first fifty years of our almost-centennial history, this was a segregated all-white institution,” said Professor Pedro Malavet. “Virgil Hawkins led the litigation to desegregate our school, George H. Starke, Jr. became our first African-American student on September 15, 1958, W. George Allen our first African-American law graduate in 1962, and the Hon. Stephan Mickle the first African-American undergraduate Gator alumnus in 1965.”

In 2007, more than 10 percent of the student body was Hispanic. The school specifically recruits, supports and mentors Hispanic law students, and the retention rate for Hispanic students in 2006-07 was 100 percent. Student organizations oriented toward this special group include the Spanish American Law Students Association (SALSA), the Hispanic and Latino/a Law Student Association (HLLSA), the Caribbean Law Students Association (Carib-Law), and the International Law Society (ILS).

“We are a much more diverse institution now than we were even when I first joined the faculty in 1995. Back then, I was serving as SALSA faculty advisor when the members, led by President Joaquin Ferrao, asked why the number of Latina/o students had remained at around 5 percent for over a decade in a state in which Hispanics are now the largest group of persons of color,” Malavet said.

The college’s faculty are highly accomplished scholars, educators, and practitioners. Many are authors of treatises, casebooks, or major books used by law schools and practitioners throughout the nation, as well as hundreds of articles in law reviews and specialty journals. UF’s law school also is home to one of the country’s largest concentrations of faculty publishing in Critical Legal Studies, an interdisciplinary approach to the law.

With the creation of the Center for the Study of Race and Race Relations in the late 1990s, the UF College of Law emerged on the forefront of Critical Legal Studies and Critical Race Theory, with books by six faculty — Katheryn Russell-Brown, Berta Hernandez-Truyol, Juan Perea, Michelle Jacobs, Nancy Dowd and Pedro Malavet — included in New York University Press’ celebrated Critical America Series, more than any other school. The college also draws on the University of Florida’s curricular strength in other ways, such as by teaming with UF specialists on research and cross-disciplinary training, or by featuring guest presentations by UF experts. Students can take courses in other colleges or earn joint degrees, which the college offers in nearly unsurpassed numbers.

“Many law schools do not have a single Hispanic law professor, and few have more than one. We have earned our place in the top 10 by developing a strongly diverse community with a strong critical mass of Hispanics at every level of our school,” Malavet said.