April 1999     

Last Dance Congratulations, Erich Pedestrian Safety NALSA SABER Graduation Pledge Seven-Year Reflection Small Claims and Cinnamon Rolls Church of the Earth Y2K Nuclear Threat Tribal Members Speak INS Are Thought Police In re Robin E. LOVE, Debtor Selected Crime Beat Reports Living Large: Downtown Haiku Variations The Light William Stafford perspective Spring Wave Poetry Notes

In early February, the first whispers began by email concerning an entirely new phenomenon for the law school campus: a Graduation Pledge. Billed as a "socially conscious" statement for students about to graduate, the pledge reads: "I ____________ pledge to investigate and take into account the social, ecological, and cultural consequences of any job opportunity I consider."

Admittedly, on its face, the pledge may seem anywhere from wishy-washy to harmless, and at best mildly consciousness raising. However, the attempt to establish the pledge at the law school unwittingly lay bare an antiquated referendum process, a simmering division between on-campus environmentalists and business law students, and an unexpected clash ignited by the ACLU Student group concerning free expression rights.

Due to an altogether opaque referendum process, SBA was implicated and accused of sponsoring a surprise attack on the campus in the form of the Pledge Referendum. An email debate broke out on the sba-list where the rancor seemed most heated over the prospect of "stars next to students names in the official graduation program." Surprisingly, while such is the method of implementation at Manchester College -- the nationwide coordinator of the Graduation Pledge -- the "star" scheme would appear to be an indication of an advanced state of acceptance of the pledge. That is, by definition something that cannot be merely imposed on unwilling participants.

However, by this point the debate had broken down into highly emotional and outraged rhetoric. In defense of those who lobbied strenuously against the pledge, the utter lack of information on the true intent of pledge sponsors (including this writer) meant a dense cloud obscured open and honest dialogue between the two sides. Presumably due in part due to the suffocating discussion climate and suspected unsavory mechanics of the referendum itself, the pledge referendum was defeated 59% Against to 38% In-Favor with roughly half of the student body voting (approx. 300 voting).

Prior even to the announcement of the vote results, the Graduation Pledge Alliance (G.P.A.) was formed as an independent student group. The primary objective of the GPA, according to organizers, is to make the graduation pledge available to law students. Recognized as an official group by SBA, the GPA has announced at that SBA meeting that it has no intention of moving for official recognition at this year's graduation ceremony. GPA members are apparently in discussion to arrive at a consensus as to how, if at all, they wish to express having signed the pledge. After a month of informational tabling, the GPA claims close to 10% of students have taken the pledge -- from among all years.

As the first law school to have the graduation pledge, and due to the massive controversy, an Associated Press reporter began writing a story to be published some time in May. For further information about some of the arguments for and against various aspects of the pledge visit the GPA's web site at http://www.lclark.edu/~gpa and the ACLU's Pledgerant page at http://www.lclark.edu/~aclu/pledgerants.htm.