This Month
February 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29
Year Archive
Login
User name:
Password:
Remember me 
View Article  Making Policy via law suits "A Lousy Idea" - Tierney on Charlie Rose in Feb, 1999

Last month, I made a few videos describing the basic operations of offices of state attorneys general and posted them on the Columbia Law School Website under the AG Library.  (http://www.stateag.org).   In investigating how to post them on other video sites, I came across an interview that I did about the tobacco cases on The Charlie Rose Show on February 16, 1999.

Shortly into the interview - that I scarcely remember - a much younger Jim Tierney says "I think that law suits are a lousy way to make public policy...."   Although my positions have changed on many things in the last decade, my views on that score remain the same.  "Policy ought to be made by elected officials," I said, and litigation should only be filed as a last resort. 

I believe that the tobacco cases were correct because they were a last resort.   Congress had not acted - and indeed has still not acted to regulate tobacco - and that the AG's at the time were courageous in their efforts to bring the truth in their fight to reduce youth smoking.  Smoking rates continue to fall and millions of lives have been saved. 

In the years since, I believe that the AG's continue to be correct to litigate national issues - again as a last resort - when the federal government fails in its duty to protect our citizens from whomever would commit fraud.

Our candidates for President talk about change.  If part of that change is to restore vital federal agencies - such as the FDA, the FTC, the CPSC and the DOJ - to their traditional roles as protectors of the American people, then the AG's will no longer be forced to carry out national litigation.  The AG's will be better able to focus on the problems they are facing at home - crime, immigration, charity regulation, prison reform, education and all of the rest.

I am optimistic that Sen. McCain - who carried the water for the AG's on tobacco - and either of the two Democratic candidates can bring about that change.  When they do, the AG's can reset their priorities back home.   If Washington does not change, then the state AG's will continue to do what they have to do and litigate national issues.

View Article  Very Bad Legal Advice - Legal Times Article on State AG's

A defense lawyer named Brian Anderson has written an article in this week's Legal Times entitled, "When State Officials Attack."    http://www.law.com/jsp/ihc/PubArticleIHC.jsp?id=1203866386444&pos=ataglance

Mr Anderson is certainly entitled to his views on state attorneys general and his perspective on the history of the office.  After all, the First Amendment protects all of us to rant which is how Bill O'Reilly makes his living.  (Come to think of it, Mr.O"Reilly should consider inviting Mr Anderson on his show as a guest.) 

The reason I am mentioning this silly article at all is that Mr Anderson purports to give advice to private parties as to how to defend against an investigation or lawsuit by an attorney general or group of attorneys general.   In my humble opinion, Anderson's advice borders on both legal and strategic malpractice.

I hope that no corporation takes his approach seriously (because it will be unnecessarily hurt) and that no attorney general or assistant attorney general hold the article against some of the very gifted lawyers in the O'Melveny firm.  Every family has a weird cousin.

You can read the article yourself in the Legal Times or in today's http://www.law.com