BISMARCK – Some North Dakota attorneys are outraged over the latest North Dakota Law Review, saying the scholarly publication was hijacked by national religious rights activists bent on stopping gay marriage.
One, Fargo family law attorney Mike Gjesdahl, accuses the Law Review in a widely distributed e-mail of “passing off editorializing and theological perspective as academic work … (and) bringing shame upon us.”
Another, Tom Tuntland of Mandan, pledged to “chip in money, time and support” for an action to counter the issue, such as publishing a special alternative issue.
“This is a law review that’s supposed to be a scholarly journal,” he said. “It’s nowhere near scholarly. By publishing those with an ax to grind, North Dakota’s publication becomes a tool that “gives imprimatur to their screed,” he said.
RELATED CONTENT
Janell Cole Archive
By Wednesday, lawyers’ protests had become so passionate and widespread that University of North Dakota Law School Dean Paul LeBel posted a disclaimer on the school’s Web site assuring the legal community that “the university and the School of Law are welcoming and inclusive educational communities.”
The Law Review is published quarterly by students at the University of North Dakota School of Law and is the official journal of the State Bar Association of North Dakota. Its latest issue, Volume 83, No. 4, is a symposium issue – that is, a collection of articles on one topic – family law. It was published about two weeks ago.
“I was appalled to see almost the entire issue authored by a very narrow, biased and distorted view of the law,” wrote Grand Forks attorney Mary Seaworth to the state bar’s executive director, William Neumann. “To publish such a biased issue appears to be a serious error of judgment.”
Read on.
Letter to the Editor.
Letter to the Editor.
(I have not read any blogs on the subject, since I'm assuming they will be rather skewed, but I do include these two LTEs that the Herald saw fit to print.)
The North Dakota Law Review is a student publication of the the UND Law School. Mistakes will be made, of course--mistakes are made in "real" journals too. If there is sufficient uproar, I'm sure the editor (or group of editors) will be "fired" for their incompetence. I don't agree with the sentiments expressed, but attacking them and asking for retribution for printing a series of articles based on one side of the story is laughable for a group of lawyers (who should be well-aware of first-amendment rights).
To me, this looks like a bad judgement on the editors' part: when they did not get enough submissions to showcase both sides of the issue (or that actually expanded the issue to include the rest of family law than "OMG gay marriage"), they should have put it off until they did have enough material. I'm sure no groundbreaking new studies would have been overlooked (this is law we're talking about, not science or politics), and the editors could have produced the issue they wanted to produce. Instead, it appears that they got a few submissions, said "screw it, let's get this over with" and now have to deal with the consequences.
On to the gay marriage subject; if we're talking about legal marriage, where does the sex of the people in question come into play? If all people are equal, what does it matter if you have women marrying men, men marrying men, or women marrying women? I understand that the law stands as it does, and that lawyers have to uphold the law. Doesn't it just seem a bit hypocritical though? Morally, of course, the question is up for everyone to decide on their own--so you can write about the way it is, and the way it should be, and the way you think it can be. The problem lies in trying to mix your legal and moral perspectives.
Topic: North Dakota Law Review defends "traditional" marriage (Read 4364 times)
