Laura Bergus

Today the controversial US News law school rankings dropped (well, ok, they’ve been leaked online for a few days…). I’m not going to comment on the ridiculousness of the rankings and how they distort what would otherwise be a competitive system. I’m just going to point out that there’s a picture of me in the current issue of US News. :) There’s also a rather awkwardly-worded quote at the end, about the importance of following and commenting on blogs (something I’ve been preaching for a while). In any case, I’ll take the publicity. After all, this is print, and it’s print that reaches thousands of men over the age of 50. Ooooh.

Several people have asked me how I happened to end up in a national magazine, so here’s the story:

In February I got an email and follow-up call from Jessica Rettig, US News reporter, who had found me online through Legal Geekery (go Josh!). She and I talked twice, at length, about how law students can use social media to connect with experts in their interest areas, present themselves as intelligent humans, and maybe even discover a meaningful career. Obviously that story won’t sell as many magazines as the “OMG law school is ’spensive and there are no jobs!!!!1″ story that I ended up being quoted in, but such is the media business.

In March US News flew a photographer out from Maryland. To my house. In Iowa. The photographer was Jeffrey MacMillan, a first-class news veteran (note the pictures of presidents, senators, etc. on his website…) who’s now focusing on helping colleges and universities visually promote themselves. (So, any law schools out there who might want alumni coverage in the DC area, drop him a line.) He spent the day with my daughter and me, taking pictures for about five hours. Being a good photojournalist, he’d done some research on me and had even watched some of the video I directed about homelessness in Iowa, and was impressed with the quality of my video work. That little tidbit made my day. He also had great stories of campaign coverage and politics in Washington. When we went to Iowa City’s famous Hamburg Inn for lunch, he pointed to Bill Clinton’s official presidential portrait on the wall and said, “I had lunch with the guy that took that just the other day.” Very cool.

This is a social media success story. (Thanks to my Twitter friend Omar Ha-Redeye for pointing that out, clichéd as it may be.) If nothing else, it’s evidence of the point that most journalists start with Google, and if you’ve made any kind of SEOed name for yourself in a particular field, they can, and will, find you online.

I’m currently taking Conflict of Laws, from one of my favorite professors. When we talk about the interests at stake in something as abstractly benign as choice of law, the benefit of finality and repose for civil defendants comes up often. Back in Civ Pro, I recall first hearing the term and picturing a would-be tortfeasor kicking back poolside. “Ahh, so nice to finally have some repose,” he thinks. “Never have to worry about that minor car crash again…” At the time, I had trouble seeing why the concept was very important. What’s the big deal if he has to answer for some kid’s whiplash five years down the line?

I know a lot more now about the balance of equity involved in barring or allowing claims. I get that shorter statutes of limitation are good for finality, but also for judicial efficiency: keeping stale claims out of the courts. Today I learned why statutes of limitations, and the finality that they provide defendants, are absolutely critical in the criminal context, thanks to criminal defense attorney and blogger Brian Tannebaum. On the risks of removing the Florida statute of limitations for some sex offenses:

We live in a country where person after person after person is being exonerated by DNA evidence. People who were sentenced to death, and to life. Is this the time to abolish statutes of limitations on cases where a mere accusation can result in a criminal prosecution that can take away a person’s liberty for the rest of their life?…Why we are OK letting our elected leaders convince us that finality and liberty only matter in the types of cases in which they decide?

Brian’s point is that the very real and tragic victims’ stories often prevent discussion of why we have statutes of limitations in the first place: that freedom from fear of prosecution is integral to our liberty, and liberty is a fundamental American right. Thanks, Brian, for bringing this point home.