The pervasive impact of possible war on the national psyche
became obvious Tuesday when a panel discussion at the Pre-Law
Society turned its focus to Iraq.
Alex Kozinski, a judge for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, and
Jeff Valle, an attorney and adjunct professor of communication
studies at UCLA, took drastically different stances on the legality
of a preemptive strike on Iraq.
Much of the argument centered on debating the difference between
a country that is a potential threat to the United States and its
allies, and one that is threatening to attack.
“I worry about the potential shredding of international
law ““ we are in danger of going back to “˜might is
right’ and nothing else,” Valle said.
“We have to ask: Are there good reasons to go to war? And
does the U.N. charter, which we are bound by, permit it?”
Kozinski, who had previously compared law to war, saw the
stockpiling of weapons as an act of war.
He said the United States should should attack Iraq first, and
pursue any other threats to the nation after.
Christopher Bradford, president of the Beverly Hills Bar
Association and third member of the panel, said justifications for
war could include credible evidence that Iraq is supporting
terrorists.
The debate grew heated as Valle and Kozinski argued from
opposite ends of the political spectrum, but the discussion
ultimately returned to its original topics: the existence (or
nonexistence) of justice, legal ethics and the qualities necessary
to be a good lawyer.
The discussion climaxed when Valle prompted Kozinski to say that
right and wrong occasionally exist outside the letter of the
law.
As the event progressed, panelists and students struggled with
the abstraction of justice.
“Justice is one of those huge terms like love or
equality,” Valle said.
“It’s made up of values that work together ““
the principles and guidelines that underlie a sense of fairness,
like democratic values, openness and equal access to the judicial
system,” he said.
Elvis Strumbergs, a fourth-year communications and economics
student, said he organized the event to find out how legal experts
think justice is being furthered in today’s legal system.
“I wanted to know if law and justice ever really do meet
in the courtroom,” he said.
All three panelists discussed the essential components of a
lawyer, and Kozinski gave a nine-part quiz to test students’
desires to enter the legal world.
Kozinski rejected the desire to bring justice to the people as a
prerequisite for law, and cautioned students they would lose their
idealism in law school.
“It will change you” he warned.