liaison status report tally - american bar · pdf fileliaison status report tally ... in june...

LIAISON STATUS REPORT TALLY

Entity 2015-2016 Liaison Fall 2015 Spring 2016 Annual 2016 ABA Breast Cancer Legal Advocacy Joy Feinberg ABA Center on Children & Law Ann Haralambie ABA Center for Human Rights Llewelyn Pritchard ABA CPR/SOC Professional Ed Newman ABA Commission on Disability Rights Diana Metcalf ABA Commission on Immigration Llewelyn Pritchard ABA Commission on Law & Aging Paula Kirby ABA Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession Brandes Ash

ABA Commission on Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity (SOGI) Ben Aguilar

ABA Commission on Women in the Profession

ABA Commission on Youth at Risk Ann Haralambie ABA Coordinating Committee on Veterans' Benefits

Henry DeWoskin Lyndsey Olson

ABA Journal Kathy Hogan ABA Law Practice Management Division Jennifer Brandt ABA Rule of Law Initiative Sam Schoonmaker ABA Section of Dispute Resolution Frances Ross Nolan ABA Section of International Law Melissa Kucinski/Annie Jacobs ABA Senior Lawyers Division Llewelyn Pritchard ABA Special Committee on Bioethics and the Law Bruce Wilder

ABA Special Committee on Disaster Response and Preparedness Noel Tucker

ABA Standing Committee on Professionalism Ed Newman

ABA Standing Committee on Publishing Oversight (SCOPO) Gail Baker

ABA Standing Committee on the Delivery of Legal Services Allen Bailey

ABA Standing Committee on Gun Violence Christina Angell ABA Standing Committee on Legal Assistance to Military Personnel (LAMP) Mark Sullivan/Patricia Apy

ABA Young Lawyers Division Liaison Brian Karpf American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML) Mitchell Karpf

American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Tracy Coenen

American Psychological Association Brittany Ranson Association of Family & Conciliation Courts (AFCC) Chaim Steinberger

Canadian Bar Association Family Law Section Grant Gold

National Association of Counsel for Children (NACC) Ann Haralambie

National Coalition on Oversight of Assisted Reproductive Technology (NCOART) Richard Vaughn

Uniform Law Commission Family Law Joint Editorial Board

Melissa Kucinski Sam Schoonmaker

American Bar Association SECTION OF FAMILY LAW 2016 SPRING MEETING

LIAISON STATUS REPORT

DEADLINE DATE: Friday, April 8, 2016

RETURN Via e-mail to Cindy Swan: [email protected] Please type your answers. Thank you.

Liaison To: __ ABA Coordinating Committee on Veterans Benefits & Services Submitted By: _ Henry M. DeWoskin_____________________________

1. Attach a copy of your most recent Meeting Minutes. The ABA Coordinating Committee on Veterans Benefits & Services met at the ABA Midyear Meeting. Although the minutes have not been published yet, the Committee held lead a sitevisit/tour, roundtable and meeting at Veterans Village of San Diego. Veterans Village of San Diego is an innovative provider meeting the housing, legal and treatment needs of homeless veterans. The Committee met with staff as well as clients to learn about their highly effective model—with an emphasis on removing legal barriers to benefits, employment, housing, treatment and services through onsite legal services including the Homeless Court Program. They learned about new trends and practical solutions to the issues affecting veterans, and met with local lawyers and providers affiliated with the Veterans Treatment Court, Legal Aid and pro bono programs serving veterans in San Diego. 2. Please tell Council three (3) projects/activities your group is currently working on (or

planning to work on in the upcoming year). One of the projects that the Committee is seeking volunteers is for Helping Homeless Veterans Comply with Child Support Obligations. The ABA partners with the VA and HHS in order to identify contacts and fixing problems. The next step is identifying a network of attorneys who handle child support issues (with an emphasis on pro bono or legal services for noncustodial parents and/or veterans). A teleconference call was held between the Chair of the Committee and the Child Support Committee of the Section. We are working on creating information on child support laws from every state that can assist the nonattorneys who assist veterans on these types of cases. The Committee is seeking someone from the Section of Family Law to speak at the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans conference in Washington, DC on June 2, 2016. The session title is “Family Law and Child Support: Legal Services, Advocacy, and How to Prepare Your Clients for Court When They Don’t Have an Attorney?” The description is the following: Representation for family law matters is one of the largest unmet needs in the legal system. This session will explain why finding representation can be such a struggle and what options exist for supported self-representation. While laws differ state to state, the presenters will provide a broad overview of the terms and

theories that are common to family law actions across the country, provide tips on how to identify state-based resources, and explain how you can assist your clients as they navigate the system and prepare for court. 3. How can the Section of Family Law and its leadership assist you and your group in

accomplishing your goals? See paragraph 2 above. In addition, The Section needs to report on any initiatives/projects that we are doing to assist veterans. In addition, the Section should advertise and recruit family law attorneys who can assist in the Helping Homeless Veterans Comply with Child Support Obligations. 4. Are you aware of current or "up and coming" topics in family law of which the Section

should take notice? If so, please state the issue, and offer your suggestions. No. 5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting? Submit

written agenda items to Cynthia Swan at [email protected], Director by April 8, 2016. (Items not requiring Council action may be moved to the Non-Discussion Agenda, pending review by the Section Chair)

No.

mailto:[email protected]





Liaison To: __ABA Journal

Submitted By: _Kathy Hogan

1. Attach a copy of your most recent Meeting Minutes. N?A 2. Please tell Council three (3) projects/activities your group is currently working on (or

planning to work on in the upcoming year). N/A 3. How can the Section of Family Law and its leadership assist you and your group in

accomplishing your goals? N/A 4. Are you aware of current or "up and coming" topics in family law of which the Section

should take notice? If so, please state the issue, and offer your suggestions. At the ABA level, family law is taking a back seat to a variety of other issues, including the politics of the Supreme Court, and various practice management issues, only some of which are likely to be of interest to our members. 5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting? Submit


No






Liaison To: ABA Rule of Law Initiative ____________________________

Submitted By: Sam Schoonmaker __________________________________

1. Attach a copy of your most recent Meeting Minutes. None attached. The best way to get updates on ROLI is on the website: https://www.americanbar.org/advocacy/rule_of_law.html 2. Please tell Council three (3) projects/activities your group is currently working on (or

planning to work on in the upcoming year). This is the first year the Family Law Section has had a liaison to the Rule of Law Initiative. ROLI promotes the rule of law internationally with the goal of delivering justice, fostering economic opportunity, and ensuring respect for human dignity. It has many active projects on multiple continents. 3. How can the Section of Family Law and its leadership assist you and your group in

accomplishing your goals? Provide guidance for what we want to accomplish by working with ROLI. 4. Are you aware of current or "up and coming" topics in family law of which the Section

should take notice? If so, please state the issue, and offer your suggestions. Topics include women’s rights, criminal law reform, anti-trafficking, and legal education. 5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting? Submit


No.

https://www.americanbar.org/advocacy/rule_of_law.html


American Bar AssociationSECTION OF FAMILY LAW 2016 SPRING MEETING


DEADLINE DATE: Friday. April 8, 2016

RETURN Via e-mail to Cindy Swan: Cynthia.SwanCDamericanbar.ors~

Please type your answers. Thank you.

Liaison To:

Submitted By:

1. Attach a copy of your most recent Meeting Minutes.

2. Please tell Council three (3) projects/activities your group is currently working on (orplanning to work on in the upcoming year).

3. How can the Section of Family Law and its leadership assist you and your group inaccomplishing your goals?

4. Are you aware of current or "up and coming" topics in family law of which the Section

should take notice? If so, please state the issue, and offer your suggestions.

5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting? Submit

written agenda items to Cynthia Swan at Cynthia Swan(c~americanbar.orq, Director

by April 8, 2016. (Items not requiring Council action maybe moved to the Non-

Discussion Agenda, pending review by the Section Chair.)

fd

Text Box

Center for Human Rights

fd

Text Box

Llewelyn G. Pritchard

fd

Text Box

Not ready yet

fd

Text Box

see attached report

fd

Text Box

Participate in Human Rights seminar

fd

Text Box

No

fd

Text Box

No

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATIONCENTER FOR HUMAN PoGHTS

WASHINGTON, DC

Report to Rule of Law Initiative

Llewelyn PritchardMarch 2016

ABA Urges Preservation of Trials for Perpetrators of Mau Atrocities in Svria

On January 5, President Brown issued a statement (initiated by the Center) urging that any

negotiated transition of power in Syria preserve the prospect of trials for all those responsible

for atrocities committed against Syrian civilians since the peaceable protests of 2011 and during

the current civil war there. "If true peace is to be secured in Syria;' she said, "the atrocity

crimes committed there must be resolved according to a just rule of law."

Neier Addresses CHR Human Rights Luncheon at ABA Midyear Meeting

The Center held its annual Human Rights Luncheon, on February 8, 2016, at the ABA Midyear

Meeting, in San Diego. Aryeh Neier, President Emeritus of the Open Society Foundations,

delivered keynote remarks on human rights advocacy in the context of combating terrorism

globally.

BHR Project to Convene Bar Associations in Geneva: New Sourcebook Released

In June the Center's Business and Human Rights Project will convene its second annual meeting

of global, national, and regional bars, in Geneva, Switzerland, to increase the global legal

profession's awareness of, and engagement in, the growing business and human rights

movement. Last year's conference produced a "Declaration of Commitment" among the

participating bars, since joined by others, to advance the field pursuant to the United Nations

Declaretion of Commitment on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), which the ABA endorsed

in February 2012. This years conference will focus on implementing the "Remedies" pillar of

the UNGPs and strengthening the engagement of the judiciary in promoting the UNGPs.

Meanwhile, ABA Publishing has released a Business, Human Rights, and Sustainobility

Sourcebook, edited by Lelia Mooney. A companion to the Centers recent sourcebooks on

international human rights law and international humanitarian law, the Sourcebook compiles

international hard and soft law sources that address the human rights and sustainability

1

questions brought by a wide variety of clients from the corporate, government, and non-profit

sectors.

ICC Project Co-hosts Art Event Featurins Portraits of Mass Atrociri Defendants

On March 1, at New York City's Robert Blumenthal Gallery, the Center's International Criminal

Court (1CC) Project co-hosted a private viewing of Bredley McCallum's exhibition, "Impunity,"

featuring severel paintings from his series, "Weights and Measures," which McCallum created

over the past two years, exploring masculine configurations of power in war, international

relations, and militarism. The portraits are of defendants as they have stood trial before the

International Criminal Court or other international tribunals for war crimes, crimes against

humanity, and genocide. David J. Scheffer, U.S. Ambassador at-Large for War Crimes Issues

(1997-2001) and U.N. Secretary-Generel's Special Expert on United Nations Assistance to the

Khmer Rouge Trials, delivered keynote remarks and was joined by Patricia Williams, James L.

Dohr Professor of Law at Columbia Law School and columnist for The Nation Magazine; Richard

Bennett, Amnesty International's UN Representative; and the artist, Bradley McCallum.

Justice Defenders Program

The Justice Defenders Program has been advised of its successful grant application (pending

final review and confirmation) to the State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights,

and Labor. The global "Justice Works" Program, to be implemented in partnership with the

ABA Rule of Law Initiative, will provide assistance cases involving LGBT persons and/or their

advocates, focusing initially in Kenya and EI Salvador. The grant award is $500,000 over two

years.

Meanwhile, in Angola, JD Program volunteers secured a favoreble decision from the UN

Working Group on Arbitrary Detention on behalf of a detained democracy activist. Pro Bono

counsel also helped attorneys in Mozambique defeat high-profile defamation charges against

journalists reporting on government corruption. In Malaysia, the Program observed

proceedings against an activist facing charges for screening a film on atrocities committed in Sri

Lanka, contributing to her acquittal. In Honduras, the Program observed proceedings to select

new Supreme Court judges, successfully urging the Nominating Board to adopt a detailed

questionnaire to evaluate the candidates' past record.

The Program is currently recruiting volunteers with expertise in national security law and fair

trial standards. Resumes may be submitted to justicedefendersC~americanbar.ors.

2

ABA Commission on Immigration

Midyear Business Meeting

San Diego, IL

Friday, February 5, 2016

Minutes

Commission: Chair Mary Meg McCarthy, Special Advisor Karen T. Grisez, Gabrielle Buckley, HollyCooper, Doreen Dodson, Angie Junck, Michelle Lamar Saenz-Rodriguez, Hon. Dean Lum, Julie MyersWood, Tom Saenz, Maureen "Chi-Chi" Onyeagbako, Wendy Wayne

Advisory Committee: Eleanor Acer, Linus Chan, Maureen Ketler Schad, Cyrus Mehta, Alien Orr, MichelleReed, Manasi Raveendren

ABA Staff: Tanisha Bowens-McCatty, Vanessa Cecena, Kristi Gaines, Anni-Michele Jean-Pierre, MeghanJohnson, Elizabeth Knowles, Robert (eob) Lang, Meredith Linsky, Krishma Parsad, Julie Pasch

Liaisons: Denise Gilman, Robert (Bob) Juceam, Hon. Ira Sandron, Nadine Wettstein

Guests: Steve Scudder, Reid Trautz

Welcome and Updates: Commission Chair Mary Meg McCarthy called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.Pacific time.

Approval of 2015 Fall Meeting Minutes: The Fall Business Meeting Minutes were approved with minorrevisions.

Update on Appointments Process: Reminders provided to Commission and Advisory Members tosubmit self-nominations through the online appointments process.

Spring and Annual Business Meetings: The Spring Business meeting will be held on Friday, May 6th asan in-person meeting in Washington, DC. Prior to the meeting on May 6tb, the Commission will co-sponsor a erogramwith the Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice around the anti-immigrant rhetoricin the media at the National Press Club from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. Meredith Linsky suggested theCommission organize an advocacy dinner on the evening of Thursday, May 5 h̀. Nadine Wettstein alsoadvised that a regional immigration/criminal collaboretive meeting of DC, MD, and VA criminal andimmigration lawyers is being planned for Thursday, May 5`"during the day; Nadine suggests that thisevent could be coordinated with the Commission's spring meeting.

There may be a conflict with a symposium on May 5-6 h̀ that the Unaccompanied Minor Immigrant

Working Group (WG) is organizing. The symposium will bring together funders and non-profit

organizations that want to develop or strengthen their pro bono programs. Additionally, Meredith and

Karen Grisez have been requested to present with the Standing Committee on Pro Bono at the

Grantmakers Concerned with Immigrants and Refugees (GCIR) conference, which also takes place on

May 4-6th.

The Annual meeting will take place in San Frencisco, CA on August 5, 2016. The fall meeting will take

place in Harlingen, TX on November 3-4, 2016.

Report on detention center visit and border tour: The Commission debriefed on the tour of the Otay

Mesa detention facility and the border ride-along tour. One member noted that the Otay Mesa facility

is different than the one visited in Brownsville, Texas and that the Otay facility feels extremely prison-

like. Although there is a library with many fiction books, the library did not have any hard copy law

books. Legal materials are only available on the online on the librery computer.

Elizabeth Knowles provided an overview of the assessment and treatment available for detainees with

mental health disabilities. The group discussed concerns regarding the lack of adequate treatment of

trensgender individuals in addition to the lack of freedom of movement of detainees throughout the

facility.

The commission members requested that Bob Lang work with the Detention Task Force to follow upon

the lack of legal materials available and accessible in the law librery and identify how to have materials

approved and added to the Otay Mesa library. Bob will identify the person within Immigration and

Customs Enforcement (ICE) who can approve library materials, review the standards, and advocate for

adding additional legal materials to the library based on the standards; the group will also work to

ensure that access to the materials is meaningful and detainees are given instruction on how to use the

resources provided. Bob Lang confirmed based on the standards that library materials provided on a CD

ROM comply with the standards as long as they are accessible.

Texas v US

Update: The US Supreme Court granted certiorari on January 18, 2016. MALDEF represents intervenors

and was granted inclusion in the case by the 5th Circuit; MALDEF was also granted intervention by the

Supreme Court and are parties to the proceedings as Respondents. The governments brief is due in

early March and the states' brief is due early April. Oral argument is scheduled for April 18th. The

primary parties (the government and the states) have sought to expand their briefs; decision on the

requests is pending. The Supreme Court asked the parties to address a question about the take care

clause within the questions presented.

Amicus Process: An ABA Amicus brief has to be supported by ABA policy and the position we will take

must come squarely from ABA policy. An ABA amicus brief is not a brief on the merits, but a brief in

which we present a unique or helpful perspective that only the ABA can provide which may aid in the

analysis or resolution of the issues. The Arizona v. US ABA amicus brief referenced the Commission's

extensive work on policy development, direct service work and volunteer experience. The Commission

is developing a proposal to the ABA Amicus Committee to request permission to submit a brief. The

ABA Amicus Committee has had an initial meeting and is considering a possible amicus. A conference

call is scheduled for Monday afternoon between the ABA Amicus committee, the Commission, the

Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice and the Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice.

The Commission's perspective is that we have adequate policy and that our focus should be the

federelism perspective, or why the states cannot be found to have standing and how the narrow

concern of the states should not be enough to trump federel implementation of this immigration

program. An alternative strategy could be to support the argument that there is a legal basis for taking

executive action and that the action is not arbitrary and capricious. The Amicus Committee has advised

that the brief should be short, approximately SO pages or less. The Fried Frank law firm has agreed to

prepare the brief if the ABA Amicus Committee approves the request.

Programming: Our proposed program on privatization did not receive presidential showcase status for

the Annual meeting. The Commission decided not to pursue this program.

With the Supreme Court pending, the proposed Midyear program for this Midyear did not come

together. The group queried what should be done next: a program on executive action, one on business

immigration and employment issues, or a discussion on the anti-immigrant rhetoric? Potential speakers

could include Tom Saenz, Representative Zoe Lofgren, or other Commission members. A suggestion was

offered to focus the executive action themed program on the US v. Texas case and weave in the

business law components; possibly have the generel counsel of IBM, or a representative from one of the

San Francisco companies speak to the value of immigration. Another member suggested a program on

the 30 h̀ anniversary of IRCA. Since the group determined to hold the Commission's business meeting on

Friday, August 5 h̀, we will have the program from 3:30 to Spm on the 5`", followed by a reception or

similar event at 5:30pm. Judge Dean Lum will develop the program.

Administrative Reform Priorities: Linus Chan presented a draft document setting forth

recommendations on how to improve the credible fear process and adjudication of asylum cases. White

House officials have indicated that they may be open to recommendations from the Reformine the

5 sv tem report. The recommendations include allowing the Asylum Office the authority to adjudicate

the asylum applications for those who pass the credible fear process. Linus wrote a short outline on the

authority with the pro bono support of the Dorsey and Whitley firm, who will prepare a more

comprehensive report. He also reached out to stakeholders to provide more input. The draft document

includes concerns and questions, and critiques of the proposal as well. Linus requests comments by

February 12`" to finalize the document and submit to the White House. Eleanor Acer, Manasi

Raveendran, Denise Gilman, Karen Grizez, Maureen Onyeagbako, Mary Meg McCarthy and Reid Trautz

have committed to review and provide feedback. Karen Grisez recommended that we coordinate

directly with the Asylum Office, independent of the White House and DHS.

Past discussion of this issue has been in the context of allowing the asylum officer to decide at the time

of the credible fear interview (CFI) whether to grant asylum. Linus asks if adding an additional step in

the process would be better to allow for the individual to be released, secure counsel and increase the

grant rates. Linus proposed separating the process: continue to allow the CFIs; allow the asylum officer

to give a positive credible fear finding and separate that from the secondary decision of whether the

asylum officer will consider the case for a positive discretionary asylum finding. This suggested process

would delay the issuance of the I-862, which gives the court jurisdiction, and allows the individual to be

released from custody, secure an attorney, begin to recover from the trauma and allow the asylum

officer to consider the case for an affirmative asylum process. Additionally, this process does not extend

the timeline on detention.

Karen Grisez indicated that the initial recommendation to approve asylum at the CFI originated from

the US Committee on International and Religious Freedom. However, many groups who represent

asylum seekers at the credible fear process feel that Linus' approach is better. Eleanor Acer fears that

the backlog of the asylum unit will only get worse. She offered a suggestion to abandon the use of the

credible fear process at the border and refer individuals directly to the asylum interview stage. There

was a query if individuals referred to 240 proceedings and receive notices to appear (NTAs) could

possibly be released and have the proceedings terminated to allow them to proceed with an affirmative

asylum application before the asylum office. Linus will look into these considerations, including reaching

out to advocates in the field who have been looking into this issue.

Cyrus Mehta presented ideas on other areas for potential advocacy on administrative reforms. One

area in which the Commission could take a stand is related to high skilled immigration. Beneficiaries of

green card applicants are caught in a lengthy and often decades long backlog, in particular in the

employment based third preference categories. Administrative reform can improve the situation, such

as allowing for early adjustment of status application filing or the unitary counting of derivatives. There

are many ideas that can be proposed to help both family and employment based beneficiaries and

would be consistent with the ABA's objective of keeping families together. Many administrative reform

recommendations were included in the November executive order. Between now and June, Cyrus,

Gabrielle Buckley, Doreen Dodson, and Allen Orr will determine what applicable ABA policy may exist

and if this would bean issue ripe for a potential white paper.

Mary Meg McCarthy proposed afollow-up to the 2010 Reforming the Svstem report prepared by the

Arnold &Porter law firm. This would be a "report card" to assess the progress made in implementing

the 2010 recommendations. We have reached out to Arnold and Porter to inquire if they would be

interested in preparing the follow-up report card and the firm is considering the request. Kristi Gaines

advised that Appleseed issued a similar report and a subsequent follow-up update, which could be a

model for our draft. We will inform Arnold and Porter that the scope of the report will be narrowly

focused only on the immigration court and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) sections of the

original report. Karen Grisez, Michelle Lamar Saenz-Rodriguez, Manasi Raveendran, Michelle Reed, and

Eleanor Acer agreed to join a committee to work on this project.

Immigrant ChildrenUMI Working Group: Meredith Linsky offered an update on the Unaccompanied Minor Immigrant

Working Group (WG). The work of the WG continues; there is a full time staff person in Chicago,

however, the part-time consultant is no longer on contract. The WG recruits and matches pro bono

attorneys with legal service programs. The WG plans to focus on a few cities with great need. The list of

cities will be finalized at a WG meeting during Midyear. Reid Trautz was present to discuss the

collaboration between the WG and AILA. AILA has been instrumental in developing a mentor pool to

support pro bono volunteers and legal service providers. Currently the WG is coordinating with AILA to

receive the final mentor list, confirm how to share the names, and establish how the WG proposes to

match the mentors either to a case or with an organization.

UAC Standards Update: The Task Force is assessing the format for an update of the Standards. The

Commission has received a commitment from the Akin Gump law firm to help prepare the update with

services from 2016 Summer Associates. An outline of the proposed content has been circulated to the

Commission for feedback. Based on the outline, the scope of the update is narrower than initially

discussed. Kristi Gaines explained that the Criminal Justice Section regularly updates its standards and

that process can serve as a model for COI. She advised that once standards are updated the ABA will

adopt the entire new document as policy.

Angie Junck made a request for the ABA to provide recommendations on Special Immigrant Juvenile

Status (SUS) jurisdiction and the US Citizenship &Immigration Services (USCIS) interpretation of the

Trafficking Victim Protection Reauthorization Act (NPRA). The group queried if this issue could be a

specific policy recommendation that should be presented to the House of Delegates on how children

should be represented, apart from the standards. Kristi confirmed that the ABA does not really haveanything on the substance of the statute or how it can apply. A call will be set up to further explore thisissue with Christina Cooper, Maureen Schad, Angie Junck and others.

Detention: The Southern Poverty Law Center has issued a report on the frightening nature of family

raids. Families that have experienced raids are being housed at the Dilley and Berks facilities. The

numbers are down and the credible fear process is going quickly. Anyone released is receiving an ankle

monitor, with the exception of the few cases in which the CARA Project is able to intervene.

EOIR just issued a new priority docket memo. It is unclear who is subject to the priority docket. This will

be a challenge for coordinating pro bono representation.

Commission members agreed that it is important to issue a letter opposing the use of ankle monitorsand to frame it as a custody issue. Denise Gilman offered the perspective that any form of restraint onliberty should be based on an individual showing of flight risk or danger; and at that point, anassessment of the appropriate types of restrictions should be made, with ankle monitors being the mostextreme restriction. Kristi will continue to advise the Commission on the teM of the letter.

Access to CounselImmi¢ration Justice Proied: Elizabeth Knowles presented on IJP general updates. IJP has greater access

to detainees in the CFI and reasonable fear interview (RFI) process. The attendance list is being

circulated in a different way to capture more people. They may need to add additional LOP

presentations at the detention center each week to keep up with the demand. The Office of Chief

Counsel has stated that Otay Mesa is reaching capacity. An optional expansion could increase the

capacity from the current 1500 to 2500 maximum. The population is rapidly increasing and is currently

around 900. The facility has new courtrooms that have been outfitted with video conterencing

equipment. Finally, UP will soon be moving into new office space.

Senior Staff Attorney Krishma Parsad presented on the National Qualified Representative Program

(NQRP) team, which currently has 37 active cases and are averaging an additional 4 new cases a month.

Of the current caseload, 30 cases are detained and 7 cases are non-detained. Two of the non-detained

cases will be transferred to Los Angeles and UP will keep the remaining 5; the transferred cases will

continue to be eligible for a qualified representative. UP currently has 3 cases before the BIA; two of

those cases were certified to the BIA and one of those was denied and remanded to make additional

arguments and present new evidence because the U did not properly adjudicate. They have not reached

resolution in many cases and the numbers corroborate this: 4 cases have been granted, 4 cases have

administrative final orders, and the rest of the cases are on remand or appeal. There is one client

currently before the 9`" Circuit pro se. This client has been detained a long time and is one of the

first Franco clients; ICE has determined that he should not be detained anymore. Krishma informed that

they are currently losing asylum, withholding and Convention Against Torture cases at the immigration

judge (U) level and are appealing. They were previously getting traction with "particular social group'

but they are now losing at the appeal level on "well-founded fear of persecution:' The U is noting the

trend and is no longer addressing social group but specifically addressing well-founded fear and denying

the cases. This issue is of concern and needs to go up to the 9 h̀ Circuit, otherwise this pattern will not

change. Krishma is aware of grants in otherjurisdictions based on similar facts, however, those

decisions are not persuasive before the San Diego judge. They have had success with bonds and have

been getting good decisions on bond remands based on erroneous determinations of danger and flightrisk. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is agreeing to release plans. The team has had 5 casesterminated for prosecutorial discretion and 12 clients granted bond, and 8 of those have bonded out.Unfortunately, the clients are getting tired of fighting and are accepting removal orders. TheCommission advised that C01 and the Association of Pro Bono Counsel are resources to help addressappeals to the 9`" Circuit.

Vanessa Cecena provided an overview of her work as the NQRP Social Worker. Vanessa does a lot ofwork around the bond process to help the clients obtain supporting information for the bond hearing.She also works to develop treatment and release plans. Depending on the services needed, she willreach out to the family to work to develop the letters of support and get additional documents tostrengthen the case for the hearing. Vanessa reaches out to the different mental health providersdepending on the services needed and prepares written documentation to confirm her efforts and thesupport the providers can offer. If the bond is granted she reaches out to the family of the detainee toverify if they can pay the bond. She also coordinates communication with the deportation officer, thefamilies, and ICE to make sure the actual release goes smoothly. If the detainee is ordered removed,Vanessa is in contact with the consulate to coordinate release to the home country and works to ensurethere is someone in the home country there to pick the person up. Vanessa spends about half of herweek at the facility. She develops psychosocial assessments, does art therapy with the detainees, draftsdeclaretions, helps clients create coping mechanisms and work through anxiety, and verifies that theyare receiving psychotropic medications and monitors if they are having suicidal thoughts. Vanessa alsogoes to court with the clients and helps them cope during the hearing by guiding them throughbreathing exercises and checking in with them during breaks.

ProBAR: The Children's Project started a 5 year contract with Vera in October. It includes new fundingfor direct representation for detained children who are going to court and also for children releasedfrom local shelters who reunify in the local area. The contract also requires the office to do datareporting within a very fast timeframe, as well as providing know your rights presentations andindividual screening to all children within 10 days from the date of arrival at the ORR shelter, which is achallenge. The contract has stringent time and reporting requirements. The office has also receivednew resources through the Vera contract, such as a streamlined legal referral system (theUnaccompanied Child Online Referral Database, UCORD). This is a helpful resource, even though siteshave recently stopped accepting referrals because they fill up quickly. The Vera network also includestechnical support through the Children's Immigration Law Academy (CILA).

Bed numbers of unaccompanied children have increased to 2,182 in 17 shelters. This is an increase from

1,920 beds in January. The facilities are currently over capacity. This causes challenges in providing

services: lack of office space in the shelter to provide services and repeated mass transfer of children to

camps in locations that lack Iegal service providers.

The Children's Project will be changing office locations to accommodate the growing staff. Additionally,

they have hired a consultant and are considering restructuring to meet the demands of growth.

Currently the office has 69 staff: 17 attorneys, 36 paralegals, 16 administrative staff.

Managing Attorney Julie Pasch reported on the Pro BAR Adult Office. The Port Isabel Detention Center is

nearly at capacity. More than 85% are people who are already in the credible or reasonable fear

process or have received a notice to appear. This is a departure from the previous October and

November where only 40% of individuals were in this situation. ICE is holding 200 people at the EastHidalgo Detention Center, which is a substantial change. ProeAR was only providing services there

before as needed. The detainees at East Hidalgo are waiting for CFI/RFI and then are transferred to PortIsabel, or other facilities occasionally, once they pass the interviews and receive an NTA. ProeAR servesa majority of detainees from Central America and Mexico. Recently, Pro BAR has been seeing moreindividuals from Eastern Europe, specifically from Romania and Albania, among the detainee population.The majority of the Eastern European groups have retained attorneys. Additionally, ProBAR continuesto see individuals from Somalia, India, China and Bangladesh. Large numbers of people who receive

negative credible and reasonable fear determinations are primarily from Central America, Mexico, India

and Somalia. ProBAR has also noticed trends in the immigration judges requiring certain types of

identity documents to issue bond or release.

CILA: CILA now has four staff members: two senior staff attorneys, a program assistant, and a director.

CILA started an Emergency Reception Center (ERC) project to serve the newly opened ORR facility inNew Mexico. CILA already hired the staff attorney for the ERC and a program assistant will be coming

on board. The ERC will coordinate volunteers, train them and provide technical assistance as needed.CILA is waiting to see if the ERC services will actually be needed. CILA has also been holding stakeholdermeetings. Staff members have traveled throughout Texas to meet with local service providers to

determine their needs for trainings and other resources. Additionally, CILA has been invited by the

Houston Bar Association to provide a training program for the Family Law Section. Development of the

online platform is the next big task, as well as getting a technology database implemented. CILA has

developed a training schedule and will host the first national webinar on February 26 h̀ on ethical issues

in representing children in immigration proceedings. On April 1 t̀ CILA will have its first day Tong training;

the training will include instruction on advanced family law and asylum law. CILA will lineup more

webinars and quarterly day long trainings. CILA is receiving more technical assistance requests.

DSII &Detention Ugdates: Last year there was a total of 5 Detention Standards Implementation

Initiative (DSII) visits. This year we are planning to meet with Andrew Lorenzen-Strait to assess the

governments follow-up, either by the field office or HQ based on our submitted DSII reports. We want

to determine the best way to get the government to implement the recommendations set forth in the

ABA reports. Bob Lang hopes to engage with the government to understand the value of the ABA

detention reports and ways to make them more useful. There is a list of targeted places where we

would like to conduct D511 visits this year, which coincides with where we receive the most complaints

from the detainee hotline. A document identifying the detention center standards in force (2000, 2008

or 2011) for specific detention facilities has been circulated to the Commission. Bob Lang is working

with ICE to obtain authorization to release this document beyond this group.

Notario Fraud Task Force: Cyrus Mehta presented on initiatives of the Fight Notario Fraud Task Force.

Cyrus has done research on notario fraud and U visas. Most administrative case law on the issue is

negative but one case recognized extortion as a qualifying criminal activity in a case of notario fraud.

This decision is in contrast to other AAO decisions. We could try to prepare an advisory, or panel, aimed

at prosecutors on how to charge a notario with a crime that may qualify for U Visa relief. An advisory

could analyze the cases and provide practice pointers on how prosecutors can bring action against

notarios and how this will benefit the public, especially the immigrant community. The effort could also

incorporate the obstruction of justice context and the element of physical or mental distress. We could

possibly partner with AILA on this and have prosecutors be the target audience. The Task Force will

meet and prepare an outline and workflow on this.

Part of the executive order authorizes the Department of Labor (DOLE to assist in the U Visa certification

process. DOL has issued a memo seeking the exercise of authority with respect to the expansion of U

Visa crimes in the areas of extortion, forced labor, and fraud in foreign labor contracting. DOL is also

extending authority into the T visa area as well and there have been some high profile cases.

The Board of Governors approved the Commission's request to host a collaborative webinar focused on

law enforcement with AILA National and the AILA DC Chapter in early to mid-March. A pro bono

training was held on December 2"' in DC in conjunction with the Maryland-based Ayuda organization.

The training successfully trained 12 pro bono attorneys on how to represent notario fraud victims and

file private rights of action. The USCIS Public Engagement Office has a new officer working on notario

fraud and she has reached out to connect regions and share resources. On February 3 -5, the

Committee for Immigration Reform Implementation (CIRI) is hosting its Ready America conference. CIRI

has been questioning how it will continue to operate pending the outcome of the Supreme Court

decision in Texas v. US. A group processing workshop to help organizations prepare BIA recognition and

accreditation applications will be taking place at the start of the conference.

Legislative update: Kristi Gaines provided a legislative update. There are three general topics of

interest for the Commission that have taken place within the past few weeks. The first is hearings

genereliy regarding the renewed surge in the fall of children and families. Although the surge has

reduced, the hearings were already scheduled. These hearings will drive movement during the first part

of the year. The second is related to the release of unaccompanied children and the case that happened

with trafficked children. This will be an impediment to issuing release policies for children and also a

potential impediment to family members. Enacting heightened standards to protect children will be the

argument and we will hear more about this. The third relates to the admission of Syrian and other

refugees and the SAFE Act. The SAFE Act would heighten the review and approval process far refugees

and make it difficult for anyone to enter as a refugee. The Senate introduced the bill and was 5 votes

away from scheduling an official vote. If there had been enough consensus to have an official vote on

the measure, there would have been enough votes to pass the Act. These are the most current

legislative happenings in immigration and will most likely be part of the conversation for the 2017

funding bills. Appropriations may be the only area where Congress will act.

The ABA is looking at a broader set of recommendations of things that the Administration can do in its

last year that do not require Congressional authority or regulatory change. In other words, these would

be actions that do not require regulation or legislative change, will have no or very little monetary cost,

will improve overall efficiency of the system, and also have a low risk of negative political fallout. The

suggestions could be policy changes or guidance changes that are in line with the ABA's positions. Kristi

has worked with Meredith and Mary Meg to come up with a short list for immigration. There is an ABA

working group that is developing documents with different focus areas: legal argument, impact on

gender based populations, and policy arguments that impact and improve the effectiveness of the

system. The ABA is working to make the case for the recommendations in different ways to give the

Administration the authority to do this. Commission members offered the suggestion of adding in an

issue around the one year deadline for asylum filing and explained that DHS and EOIR could issue policy

guidance or an interpretation offering more flexibility. An additional suggestion was related to a budget

department request that the Department of Education and Health and Human Services report back on

3

the cost of educating undocumented students. There is concern regarding the request and we should

encourage the Administration to ignore the request because it may deter school attendance. ABA policy

is that children should not be denied rights, benefits, or privileges regardless of legal status, which

would include public education. Kristi advised that she will work with Meredith to finalize the list and

provide additional details.

Liaison Reports/Requests

Jude Sandron-Judicial Division: The Judicial Division will be will be hosting a CLE program at the

National Conference of Administrative Law Judiciary, titled "The Roie of the Courts in Protecting

Children and Screening Criminals in the Immigration Process;' on August 4 h̀ from 1:30-3pm in San

Francisco. The Government and Public Sector Lawyers Division is a co-Sponsor. The section is seeking

co-sponsorship from the Commission; Judge Sandron will work with Judge Lum on the details, including

confirmation of the title and a brief description, and to confirm if the Commission will co-sponsor. Also,

the upcoming Judicial Chair wants to focus on the issue of human trafficking and the section seeks the

co-sponsorship from the Commission on a related program. Judge Sandron will clarify the description

and confirm if the Commission was previously approached about the co-sponsor request; Judge Sandron

will follow-up with Meredith and Mary Meg.

Denise Gilman-Section of Civil Ri¢hts and Social Justice: CRSJ is planning a panel for the upcoming

annual meeting titled, "Refugee Crisis: Challenges in Europe and the US Southern Border." The panel

will look at what is happening with Syrian refugees in Europe and also at influxes at the southern border

of the US and explore why the Central American migration should be considered a refugee crisis which

does not require a law enforcement focused response. This is a presidential showcase program and will

take place on Saturday. CRSJ is hoping to collaborate on this. Also, in March CRSJ will be scheduling a

webinar that will look at issues around Syrian refugees in the U5, in particular responses and issues

related to resettlement in the states.

Nadine Wettstein-Criminal Justice Section: A regional immigration/criminal collaborative meeting of DC,

MD, and VA criminal and immigration lawyers is being planned for Thursday, May 5`"during the day.

This event could be coordinated with the Commission's spring meeting and held at the ABA's DC office if

there is space.

Bob Juceam-American Immi¢ration Lawyers Association: Bob Juceam provided a brief update on

pending resolution 105, proposed by the Commission on the Future of the Legal Profession, and

inquired if the Commission has taken a position on the resolution. Mary Meg confirmed that the

Commission has not taken a position. The resolution provides guidelines to states considering

regulatory mechanisms for dealing with the delivery of legal services. Bob advised that AILA will oppose

the resolution. Bob explained the reason for AILA's opposition: the proposal has an absence of core

values; there is no mention of funding, oversight, or enforcement; and the document as written does

not state if it is in favor of non-lawyer practice or not.

Doreen Dodson provided additional context for the resolution. The Conference of Chief Justices

approved the resolution and sent it out. The resolution intends to give guidance to the state supreme

courts on how to regulate non-lawyer entities, laying out what the core values should be (e.g.

confidentiality). Doreen is in favor of the resolution and feels it is a useful guide to courts as they look at

these entities, such as Awo and Legal Zoom, and how they should be regulated. Doreen advised that

those opposed to the resolution feel that the practice of law is for lawyers and a policy that

acknowledges this activity gives support to the notion that that non-lawyers should be practicing law.

However, she points out that the rebuttal is that it is the jurisdiction of each state to define the practice

of law.

Steve Scudder advised that the Standing Committee on Pro Bono will support the resolution with the

proviso that language is added that pro bono is core to the profession. This has been done with the

inclusion of a footnote.

Bob and Doreen have been asked to advise the Commission on the outcome and the next steps. It is

likely that the resolution may be pulled and deferred until the Annual meeting, with more discussion

taking place between now and that time.

Conclusion: The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m. Pacific time.

10

American Bar Association

Section Of Family Law 2016 Spring Meeting


DEADLINE DATE: Friday. April 8. 2016

RETURN Via e-mail to Cindy Swan: Cynthia.Swan(5)americanbar.org


Liaison To: COMMISSION ON LAW & AGING

Submitted By: PAULA G. KIRBY


SEE ATTACHED.


1. Senior Lawyer Division (SLD) spring meeting in Tempe, AZfocuses on Dementia issues and Alzheimer's—hoping for recordturnout.

2. Real Property Trust & Estate spring meeting in Boston alsofocused on dementia and Alzheimer's.

3. ABA GP Solo working on elder abuse issues.4. Soliciting articles for the SLD Voice of Experience quarterly,

which reaches 62,0000 ABA members.


CONTINUE SUPPORT FOR AGE-RELATED CLE ISSUES & LIAISON

4. Are you aware of current or "up and coming" topics in family law of which the Sectionshould take notice? If so, please state the issue, and offer your suggestions.

2016 SPRING ABA FAMILY LAW QUARTERLY IS DEDICATED TO

DIVORCES OVER 50

5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting? Submitwritten agenda items to Cynthia Swan at [email protected], Directorby April 8, 2016. (Items not requiring Councilaction may be moved to the Non-Discussion Agenda, pending review by the Section Chair.)

NOT AT THIS TIME

1





Liaison To: ABA Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession (hereinafter “the Commission”)

Submitted By: Brandes S. G. Ash

1. Attach a copy of your most recent Conference Call. I’ve been in communication with Keevin Woods, the Director of the Commission for Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession, regarding Commission initiatives and how the Family Law Section can be of assistance. (Keevin can be reached at [email protected] and/or (312) 988-5638.) Will A. Gunn serves as the Commission’s Chairman. 2. Please tell Council three (3) projects/activities your group is currently

working on (or planning to work on in the upcoming year). This year marks the 30th year anniversary for the Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity, a committee that has worked hard to advance the causes of ABA minority members. What many current members and/or ABA newcomers may not realize is that the Commission is especially relevant and necessary, even today. While it has been a little more than sixty (60) years since the first black lawyers were admitted into the ABA, the legal profession is still not entirely representative of our country’s demographic. Notwithstanding, the Commission has made several efforts to include minority, women, and LGBTQ lawyers.1

Our current President, Paulette Brown, the ABA’s first African American female president, discussed these challenges in the November 2015 edition of the ABA Journal: “only12 percent of our profession is racially and ethnically diverse, making it the least diverse of all comparable professions.” Professor Deborah L. 1 Smith, Ravay. “30 Years of Excellence: ABA Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession”


2

Rhode further expounded upon this point in an earlier Washington Post article when she discussed how “Latinos, African Americans, Native Americans and Asian Americans make up less than ‘7 percent of law firm partners and 9 percent of general counsels of large corporations. In major law firms, only 3 percent of associates and less than 2 percent of partners are African Americans.’”

As the Commission’s publication, The Innovator, highlights: “[r]esearchers point to several factors to explain the underrepresentation of racial and ethnic minorities in the profession. However, ‘unconscious bias and exclusion from informal networks of support and client development remain common.’”

To that end, President Brown instituted a comprehensive diversity agenda, by establishing The Diversity and Inclusion 360 (DI360) Commission. Specifically, DI360 created four (4) working groups to address diversity in the profession to include: the Pipeline Working Group, which addresses barriers faced by diverse students throughout the school (K-12 through Law School/ Bar Passage) pipeline; the Implicit Bias Working Group explores implicit bias in our judicial system and focuses on educating members of the judiciary as well as state prosecutors and public defenders on said biases; the Economic Case Working Group “which seeks to expand economic opportunities for diverse attorneys by working with organizations closely allied with general counsels and by considering recommendations that would encourage corporate law departments to increase their legal spend with diverse attorneys”; and the Diversity & Inclusion Working Group, which seeks to examine various opportunities for the ABA to lead diversity and inclusion efforts in the legal profession.2

Accordingly, there are a number of initiatives on the horizon, to include the upcoming publication of the The Innovator, the Spirit of Excellence Awards Nominations, and a call for applications to the Collaborative Bar Leadership Academy:

A. PUBLICATION OF THE INNOVATOR a. The Innovator is published twice a year by the Commission on

Racial & Ethnic Diversity in the Profession and is accepting, on an ongoing basis, submissions for publication. For those interested, articles should be between 500 to 1500 words and address issues that are/would be of interest to minority lawyers and/or individuals and organizations seeking to promote racial and ethnic diversity and inclusion in the legal profession. Topics may encompass recent events, case decisions, diversity and inclusion news, emerging trends, or other general topics of interest. Please

2 Clanton, Karen. “Creating the Blueprint for the Road Ahead in Diversity & Inclusion”

3

send submissions or inquiries to Daiquiri J. Steele at [email protected]

b. Recent Publication:

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/images/racial_ethnic_diversity/innovator_issue_01_final.pdf

c. The next publication is due to be released soon.

B. SPIRIT OF EXCELLENCE AWARDS

a. Each year, the Commission presents several lawyers with Spirit of Excellence Awards for their work to promote a more diverse and inclusive legal profession on an individual basis and/or within various corporations and law firms. The Spirit of Excellence Awards was recently held on February 6, 2016 at the ABA Midyear Meeting in San Diego, CA. Honorees included Sarah Deer, Professor at the William Mitchell College of Law in Saint Paul, Minnesota; Hugo Chaviano, Director of Labor for the Illinois Department of Labor; Victor Marquez, Principal, The Marquez Law Group in San Francisco, CA; and Joanne A. Epps, Dean and Professor at the Temple University Beasley School of Law, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

i. The 2017 Spirit of Excellence Awards ceremony will take place in Miami, Florida on Saturday, February 4, 2017 during the ABA Midyear Meeting at the Manchester Grand Hyatt hotel. Nominations are currently being accepted.

b. An electronic nomination form can be downloaded from the ABA website, in the manner described below, and submitted via email to [email protected] or mailed to The ABA Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession, 2016 SPIRIT OF EXCELLENCE AWARDS (321 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654):

i. Visit the ABA website Home page at www.americanbar.org

ii. Click on the ‘ABA Groups’ tab iii. Click on the ‘Office of Diversity & Inclusion’ tab iv. Click on the ‘Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in

the Profession’ tab v. Click on ‘Spirit of Excellence’ awards

vi. Click on the ‘Call for Nominations’ tab 3 http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/images/racial_ethnic_diversity/innovator_issue_01_final.pdf




4

c. All nomination materials are due on or before July 3, 2016.

d. Nomination Guidelines

i. All nominees must be ABA members. ii. A fully completed nomination form will consist of a

nominee’s resume and/or curriculum vitae, as well as a photo and narrative biography.

iii. The Commission asks that no more than three (3) letters of support be submitted for nominees.

iv. Individual Award and Corporate Award submissions are to be submitted as separate documents.

e. In nominating someone for an Individual Award, the following must be addressed:

i. Describe how the nominee has achieved professional excellence in his or her field.

ii. Describe how the nominee has served as a role model in overcoming hardships or barriers and achieving success and excellence in the legal profession.

iii. Describe how the nominee has influenced racially and ethnically diverse individuals to pursue and/or to succeed in legal careers.

iv. Describe how the nominee has opened doors, broken down barriers or otherwise promoted the full and equal participation of racially and ethnically diverse individuals in the legal profession. Describe the nominee’s work with or efforts on behalf of racially and ethnically diverse lawyers from racial or ethnic groups other than the nominee’s own.

v. Describe the nominee’s service or work in the community.

f. If nominating someone for a Corporate Award, be prepared to address the following:

i. Describe the nominee’s position within the corporation or law firm, including areas of responsibility and oversight.

ii. Describe and specify the nominee’s individual role with regard to the corporation’s or law firm’s efforts to advance and promote the full and equal participation of racially and ethnically diverse lawyers in the broader legal profession.

iii. Describe the impact that the corporation’s or law firm’s diversity efforts and accomplishments have had in advancing and promoting the full and equal participation of

5

racially and 4ethnically diverse lawyers in the broader legal profession.

iv. Describe any other efforts made by the nominee individually to promote diversity in the profession.

C. COLLABORATIVE BAR LEADERSHIP ACADEMY (‘CBLA’) a. The Collaborative Bar Leadership Academy is a collaborative

effort among the American Bar Association, Hispanic National Bar Association, National Bar Association, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, National LGBT Bar Association, and the National Native American Bar Association.

b. The CBLA’s mission is to strengthen the pipeline of diverse bar association leaders through leadership training and professional development programs. The CBLA benefits current and future bar leaders, the bar association community, and the legal profession overall and lays the foundation for further collaborative efforts by the sponsoring bar associations to foster diversity and inclusion in the legal profession.5

c. Persons are encouraged to apply for the upcoming class to be held

June 26-28, 2016, in Seattle, Washington.

d. A registration fee of $100 will be charged to confirmed participants. To register, click here.

i. The CBLA is in its fourth year. 3. How can the Section of Family Law and its leadership assist you and your

group in accomplishing your goals? In speaking with Keevin, he made it clear that the Family Law Section- especially the Diversity Committee- could be of assistance to the Commission by encouraging members to apply for participation in the CBLA. In addition, The Innovator is always looking for new articles; so, Section members are encouraged to submit their writing(s) for publication. Section members are also encouraged to nominate their peers for the Spirt of Excellence Awards. Keevin also suggested that the Family Law Section be mindful of President Brown’s D1360 initiatives and incorporate the plan into our programming.

5 http://www.americanbar.org/groups/bar_services/events/barleadershipacademy.html

https://americanbar.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8qYOce2jHXz7MfH

6

4. Are you aware of current or "up and coming" topics in family law of which the Section should take notice? If so, please state the issue, and offer your suggestions.

5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting?

Submit written agenda items to Cynthia Swan at [email protected], Director by April 8, 2016. (Items not requiring Council action may be moved to the Non-Discussion Agenda, pending review by the Section Chair.)

Yes, I can provide my report at the next Council meeting.


1





Liaison To: ABA Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession (hereinafter “the Commission”)

Submitted By: Brandes S. G. Ash

1. Attach a copy of your most recent Conference Call. I’ve been in communication with Keevin Woods, the Director of the Commission for Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession, regarding Commission initiatives and how the Family Law Section can be of assistance. (Keevin can be reached at [email protected] and/or (312) 988-5638.) Will A. Gunn serves as the Commission’s Chairman. 2. Please tell Council three (3) projects/activities your group is currently

working on (or planning to work on in the upcoming year). This year marks the 30th year anniversary for the Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity, a committee that has worked hard to advance the causes of ABA minority members. What many current members and/or ABA newcomers may not realize is that the Commission is especially relevant and necessary, even today. While it has been a little more than sixty (60) years since the first black lawyers were admitted into the ABA, the legal profession is still not entirely representative of our country’s demographic. Notwithstanding, the Commission has made several efforts to include minority, women, and LGBTQ lawyers.1 Accordingly, there are a number of initiatives on the horizon, to include the upcoming publication of the The Innovator, the Spirit of Excellence Awards Nominations, and a call for applications to the Collaborative Bar Leadership Academy: 1 Smith, Ravay. “30 Years of Excellence: ABA Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession”


2

A. PUBLICATION OF THE INNOVATOR

a. The Innovator is published twice a year by the Commission on Racial & Ethnic Diversity in the Profession and is accepting, on an ongoing basis, submissions for publication. For those interested, articles should be between 500 to 1500 words and address issues that are/would be of interest to minority lawyers and/or individuals and organizations seeking to promote racial and ethnic diversity and inclusion in the legal profession. Topics may encompass recent events, case decisions, diversity and inclusion news, emerging trends, or other general topics of interest. Please send submissions or inquiries to Daiquiri J. Steele at [email protected]

b. Recent Publication:


c. The next publication is due to be released soon.

B. SPIRIT OF EXCELLENCE AWARDS

a. Each year, the Commission presents several lawyers with Spirit of Excellence Awards for their work to promote a more diverse and inclusive legal profession on an individual basis and/or within various corporations and law firms. The Spirit of Excellence Awards was recently held on February 6, 2016 at the ABA Midyear Meeting in San Diego, CA. Honorees included Sarah Deer, Professor at the William Mitchell College of Law in Saint Paul, Minnesota; Hugo Chaviano, Director of Labor for the Illinois Department of Labor; Victor Marquez, Principal, The Marquez Law Group in San Francisco, CA; and Joanne A. Epps, Dean and Professor at the Temple University Beasley School of Law, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

i. The 2017 Spirit of Excellence Awards ceremony will take place in Miami, Florida on Saturday, February 4, 2017 during the ABA Midyear Meeting at the Manchester Grand Hyatt hotel. Nominations are currently being accepted.

b. An electronic nomination form can be downloaded from the ABA website, in the manner described below, and submitted via email

2 http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/images/racial_ethnic_diversity/innovator_issue_01_final.pdf



3

to [email protected] or mailed to The ABA Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession, 2016 SPIRIT OF EXCELLENCE AWARDS (321 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654):

i. Visit the ABA website Home page at www.americanbar.org

ii. Click on the ‘ABA Groups’ tab iii. Click on the ‘Office of Diversity & Inclusion’ tab iv. Click on the ‘Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in

the Profession’ tab v. Click on ‘Spirit of Excellence’ awards

vi. Click on the ‘Call for Nominations’ tab c. All nomination materials are due on or before July 3, 2016.

d. Nomination Guidelines

i. All nominees must be ABA members. ii. A fully completed nomination form will consist of a

nominee’s resume and/or curriculum vitae, as well as a photo and narrative biography.

iii. The Commission asks that no more than three (3) letters of support be submitted for nominees.

iv. Individual Award and Corporate Award submissions are to be submitted as separate documents.

C. COLLABORATIVE BAR LEADERSHIP ACADEMY (‘CBLA’) a. The Collaborative Bar Leadership Academy is a collaborative

effort among the American Bar Association, Hispanic National Bar Association, National Bar Association, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, National LGBT Bar Association, and the National Native American Bar Association.

b. The CBLA’s mission is to strengthen the pipeline of diverse bar association leaders through leadership training and professional development programs. The CBLA benefits current and future bar leaders, the bar association community, and the legal profession overall and lays the foundation for further collaborative efforts by the sponsoring bar associations to foster diversity and inclusion in the legal profession.3

3 http://www.americanbar.org/groups/bar_services/events/barleadershipacademy.html


4

c. Persons are encouraged to apply for the upcoming class to be held June 26-28, 2016, in Seattle, Washington.

d. A registration fee of $100 will be charged to confirmed participants.

To register, click here. i. The CBLA is in its fourth year.

3. How can the Section of Family Law and its leadership assist you and your

group in accomplishing your goals? In speaking with Keevin, he made it clear that the Family Law Section- especially the Diversity Committee- could be of assistance to the Commission by encouraging members to apply for participation in the CBLA. In addition, The Innovator is always looking for new articles; so, Section members are encouraged to submit their writing(s) for publication. Section members are also encouraged to nominate their peers for the Spirt of Excellence Awards. Keevin also suggested that the Family Law Section be mindful of President Brown’s D1360 initiatives and incorporate the plan into our programming. 4. Are you aware of current or "up and coming" topics in family law of which

the Section should take notice? If so, please state the issue, and offer your suggestions.

5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting?

Submit written agenda items to Cynthia Swan at [email protected], Director by April 8, 2016. (Items not requiring Council action may be moved to the Non-Discussion Agenda, pending review by the Section Chair.)

Yes, I can provide my report at the next Council meeting.

https://americanbar.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8qYOce2jHXz7MfH





RETURN Via e-mail to Cindy Swan: [email protected]


Liaison To: Commission on Youth at Risk __________

Submitted By: ___Ann M. Haralambie__________


[see attached]


The Commission is working with the Commission on Homelessness andPoverty on grant applications to funders to support Youth2Work, ProjectStreet Youth, and a legal network for homeless and disconnected youth. Thefunding would create pilot programs in 3-5 cities in order to expand knowledgeof employment resources, reduce legal barriers to employment, and improveoutcomes for opportunity youth. The Commission held its Youth2Workoutreach at Just in Time for Foster Kids and also made attorneys available toassist youth with legal issues. YAR found at this event that two-thirds of theyoung adults in attendance had legal issues that they wanted to discuss withattorneys; many of the legal issues impacted their ability to find or maintainemployment. YAR plans to hold this event in San Francisco during theAnnual Meeting as well.

The Commission is hosting a wbinar, “Rethinking Juvenile Justice: AdolescentBrain Science and Legal Culpability,” on Wednesday, June 10, 2015, 1:00 PM- 2:30 PM ET

Looking ahead to the Annual Meeting, CYAR is working with a number ofcosponsors on a day-long conference entitled The 50th Anniversary of In reGault: The Legacy of Children’s Right to Counsel, on Friday, August 5, at thelaw offices of Morrison and Foerster in San Francisco. The conference willfocus on the unfinished business of the Gault decision for children’s attorneysin juvenile delinquency and dependency cases. Youth at Risk will also hold itsannual Children’s Breakfast on Sunday, August 7, for those who are involvedin children’s legal issues.

As part of the Coordinating Committee on the Legal Needs of HomelessYouth, YAR will assist with a national summit on the needs of homeless youthin collaboration with the Family and Youth Services Bureau of HHS in fall,2016. Youth at Risk is also working on policy resolutions with several entitiesto dismantle or reverse the “school to prison pipeline” for potential approval bythe HOD at Midyear 2017.


The YAR Commission has expressed an interest in having the FLS moreconnected to the Commission in matters involving child welfare.


5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting? Submitwritten agenda items to Cynthia Swan at [email protected], Directorby April 8, 2016. (Items not requiring Council action may be moved to the Non-Discussion Agenda, pending review by the Section Chair.)

[no]


Commission on Youth at RiskMinutes of Midyear MeetingFriday, February 5, 2016

Vanessa Williams, chair, brought the meeting to order and welcomed both in-person and call-inparticipants. Present were Barbara Howe, Judge Marguerite Downing, Jay Elliott, Qiang Bjornbak, CarlaLaroche, Gar Patterson, Lindsay Joyner, Sahmra Stevenson, Evelyn Tomaszewski, Beth Whittenbury, AnnHaralambie, Theo Liebmann, Michelle McLeod, Tony Musto, Iris Green, Franchesca Hamilton-Acker,Judge Jay Blitzman, Garry Bevel, P. Rodriguez, Janet Fink, Mary Vandenack, Alpha Buie, Paul Freese andRuthe Ashley.

Because of conflicting schedules, several items were announced out of order so that participants couldgo to other events.

New Business: Lindsay Joyner, liaison from the Young Lawyers Division, announced that they havedeveloped two toolkits for distribution to youth agencies. One is on Internet safety and is a part of thisyear’s project, World Wise Web. The other is an anti-bullying initiative that was started by YLD and isnow part of the Section on Civil Rights and Social Justice (formerly IRR). She’s happy to assist anyonewho would like toolkits or has ideas for distribution.

Updates: 1. Theo Liebmann, special advisor to the Commission, discussed preliminary research that has beencompleted by two law students and was sent to Commission members just prior to the meeting. Onearea is on ban the box legislation and focuses on the states/cities that have enacted legislation and thecommon features of those statutes. The other area is on maltreatment of children while they are infoster care. After discussion, Vanessa suggested that everyone review the materials in order to have aphone conference to decide on next steps, including possible policy.

2. SCOPE review: The report for the SCOPE committee is completed and is awaiting a decision.

3. Board of Governors: Ruthe Ashley discussed her role in evaluating our annual plan, and theSCOPE review. She suggested that the Commission clarify with the BOG its consistent work on diversity,since the issues impacting youth at risk necessarily include all children and young people of color,disability, gender and sexual orientation. She also suggested that CYAR collaborate more with COREJ,and encouraged the Commission to apply to the Enterprise Fund for a seed project that included entitieswith whom it has not previously partnered. Ruthe also announced that the ABA budget for 2017 willrequire a cut in programming of one million dollars.

Midyear Meeting Events1. Youth2Work: The event at Just in Time was most successful. 30 young adults, about 80% ofwhom had been in foster care at some time in their childhood, were approximately 50% Hispanic and25% African-American, ranged in age from 20-29 with a median age of 25, and about 75% of whom weremale, attended. Two-thirds of the youth, or 20 people, requested legal assistance with issues rangingfrom housing, sealing records, personal injury resulting in a disability, debt collection from student loans,court costs and fines, tickets, new cases and immigration. 3 young people were offered jobs with one ofthe workforce agencies, as life coaches, as a result of the event. All of the supporting agencies andorganizations were very pleased with the event.

Barriers to employment and education are evident from the 6.5 million young people ages 18-23who are not working and are not in school. Judge Blitzman spoke of the programs in Lowell, MA, andothers discussed the Christo Rey network, both of which try to reach this population.2. CLE session on Gun Violence as a Public Health Issue – its value was summarized.3. Poverty Roundtable was attended by Paul Freese and Sahmra Stevenson. Focus was ondeveloping best practices for poor families and youth, and on housing issues.4. HIV/AIDS conference was attended by Evelyn, who indicated that the same issues wereaddressed as at the Poverty Roundtable.

Annual Meeting Events1. In re Gault conference: we have a location at Morrison and Foerster on Friday, August 5, for theday. At this time our cosponsor is the Criminal Justice Section, and we will contact other juvenile justiceorganizations as potential cosponsors as well. 2. Youth2Work: participants want to do an event in San Francisco on Saturday, August 6; potentiallocation is the Willie Brown Academy. Suggestion to network with bar associations in the Bay Area, andJudge Downing indicated she would pull together a list of those groups. Suggestion to include a clothescloset for job interviews.3. The Children’s Breakfast will take place on Sunday, August 7, and the Commission will meet afterthat event.

Coordinating Committee on Homeless Youth:Judge Downing explained the breadth of the committee; approximately 23 ABA entities do some

work involving homeless youth. Co-chairs Casey Trupin and Angela Vigil suggest that CYAR initiate aYouth Advisory Council to have youth representation on legal issues affecting them. The Council wouldinvolve young people ages 18-26, look for best practices to recommend to other entities, among othergoals. Linda will ask for volunteers to serve on this subcommittee. One suggestion is to find a funderthat can finance an app that lists services, by city or region, for disconnected youth.

New Business: (in addition to Lindsay’s report, above)CYAR and the Commission on Disability Rights have planned a webinar on student misconduct,

but instead are going to cosponsor an in-person program during ABA Week in DC. Enterprise Fund applications are due February 19.CYAR is working with the Commission on Homelessness and Poverty on grant applications to

funders to support Youth2Work, Project Street Youth and a legal network for homeless anddisconnected youth.

Meeting was adjourned at 6:02pm.

April 13, 2016 Commission on Youth at Risk Minutes from Conference Call on April 8, 2016 The call began at 3:00 pm on Friday, April 8, 2016. Present were: Michelle McLeod, Iris Green, Ann Haralambie, Janet Fink, Vanessa Williams, Lindsay Joyner, Tony Musto, John Ratnaswamy, Beth Whittenbury, Theo Liebmann, Gar Patterson, Gabe Fuentes, Carla Laroche, Judge Blitzman, Judge Downing, Paul Freese, Alpha Buie and Linda Britton. Vanessa explained that the primary purpose of the call was to review plans for the Annual Meeting in early August in San Francisco. Our events begin on Friday, August 5, 2016, and will go through the weekend. 1. Gault Conference: The 50th Anniversary of In re Gault; The Legacy of Children’s Right to Justice is the tentative name for our one-day conference on Friday, August 5, from approximately 9:00am to 4:00pm at the law offices of Morrison and Foerster, 325 Market Street, San Francisco. At this time we have four cosponsors: the Criminal Justice Section; the National Juvenile Defender Center in DC; the National Center for Youth Law in Oakland, CA; and the Youth Law Center in San Francisco. Linda reported that the cosponsors are discussing the content of the day, with the plan that there will be four sessions plus a lunch speaker. Thoughts thus far include:

• Judge Peter Cahill, Arizona, and Lisa Pferdeort will begin the day with the origin and history of the Gault case. This presentation utilizes documents that were stored in the National Archives, because nothing was kept by the State of Arizona.

• NJDC has suggested a session on the role of race and disproportionality in the jj system. They also suggested an ethics session on the role of the juvenile defender.

• Jennifer Rodriguez from YLC has suggested a panel on how we can use brain science to treat youth as full citizens and push for more productive outcomes and a - (i.e. family based community dispositions instead of institutional placements, habilitation in form of education and jobs instead of only punishment, etc).

• All of us have interest in a youth panel. • Linda has continued to be in touch with Bryan Stevenson. He is unable to yet make a

commitment due to a resentencing hearing that is scheduled on Aug. 4 and that he hopes will be resolved without a hearing. Other possible speakers are being contacted, for example, NJDC is trying to contact Robert Listenbee of OJJDP. James Bell was suggested as a potential speaker as well.

Judge Blitzman suggested that we should consider a session on where Gault can be advanced – allowing bail for juveniles and amending transfer statutes, for example. Vanessa reported that the budget for the day, which includes speaker travel expense, food, CLE fees, and videotaping, is about $10,000. Cosponsors have agreed that the costs should be shared. For the Commission, that means that we need to raise about $2500. Vanessa asked Commission members to assist with ideas for fundraising. Questions were posed about the possibility that the law firm might sponsor food, and Linda will check into whether the firm is willing to provide additional support. Alpha and Judge Downing indicated that they can suggest some groups that may be able to make small donations. There was discussion over whether attendees should pay for lunch. 2. Outreach Event: Vanessa suggested that the Commission consider combining the Children’s Breakfast with an outreach event on Saturday morning, August 6. Many members indicated they have conflicts on Saturday morning and so there will be no Commission event on Saturday morning. Vanessa suggested that Linda begin work on an outreach event for Saturday afternoon. Linda intends to contact Alpha to review possible sites for the event. 3. Children’s Breakfast/CYAR Meeting: Last year, in Chicago, the Children’s Breakfast was not well-attended because of a conflict with campaign speeches for ABA officers. There was discussion about moving forward with the breakfast and then having a meeting afterward on Sunday, August 7. Linda said that if there are projects that the Commission wants to consider in the fall, she can obtain experts to present information at the August meeting. 4. Policy Proposals: The Commission has wanted to draft policy around employment, and so there was additional discussion about working on a broad policy to dismantle barriers that youth face when trying to find a job or begin training for a career. Suggested was a policy that called for greater “ban the box” initiatives by employers and colleges, as well as an affirmation of youth rights to confidential, expunged and sealed records. The Commission also discussed policy around school misconduct as a second proposal. Linda indicated that a number of entities want to draft additional policy on dismantling the school to prison pipeline, and she will keep the Commission informed about those efforts. It was suggested that both policies prioritize best practices in the accompanying reports, e.g., Angel’s Nest Transitional Living Program, that provides housing for older youth who were in foster care and are pursuing education and employment. Vanessa stated that the next conference call will specifically focus on policy. Paul Freese also suggested that we review Nicholas Kristof’s book and PBS documentary, “A Path Appears” that discusses problems faced by the poor. The call ended at approximately 4:05pm. Respectfully submitted, Linda Britton





Liaison To: _ABA Section of International Law___________________

Submitted By: _Annie Jacobs and Michael Coffee___________________

1. Attach a copy of your most recent Meeting Minutes. 2. Please tell Council three (3) projects/activities your group is currently working on (or

planning to work on in the upcoming year).

We are closely following the family law work of the Hague Conference on Private International Law.

There is interest within the membership of both the International Private Client and International Family Law committees in seeking ways to foster on-going, active collaboration with the Family Law Section.

3. How can the Section of Family Law and its leadership assist you and your group in

accomplishing your goals?

FLS leadership could assist liaisons with SIL/FLS collaboration by providing liaisons with close guidance respecting ABA policies and procedures and by, as appropriate, presenting liaisons’ efforts to overall ABA leadership.

4. Are you aware of current or "up and coming" topics in family law of which the Section

should take notice? If so, please state the issue, and offer your suggestions.

• With the final state enactment of the 2008 amendments to the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, we anticipate that the United States may soon become party to the 2007 Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance.

• At the Hague Conference on Private International Law, an Experts’ Group will continue to meet to consider private international law issues surrounding the status of children, including issues arising from international surrogacy arrangements. In particular, it will focus on the recognition of parentage determinations.

• The Hague Conference on Private International Law will develop a non-

binding “navigation tool” to provide best practices on how voluntary family law agreements can be recognized and enforced pursuant to the Abduction, Child Protection and Child Support Conventions.

5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting? Submit

written agenda items to Cynthia Swan at [email protected], Director by April 8, 2016. (Items not requiring Council action may be moved to the Non-Discussion Agenda, pending review by the Section Chair.)

No, unless leadership sees any benefit to discussion of any of the topics addressed in response to questions 3 or 4 above.






Liaison To: Uniform Law Commission, Joint Editorial Board for Uniform Family Laws

Submitted By: Melissa Kucinski and Sam Schoonmaker _______________

1. Attach a copy of your most recent Meeting Minutes. The Joint Editorial Board met in Chicago on December 12. Minutes from the meeting are attached. 2. Please tell Council three (3) projects/activities your group is currently working on (or

planning to work on in the upcoming year). The minutes are very detailed and describe what the Uniform Law Commission is drafting, studying and considering. 3. How can the Section of Family Law and its leadership assist you and your group in

accomplishing your goals? Please review the minutes and give input on the substantive issues before the JEB. 4. Are you aware of current or "up and coming" topics in family law of which the Section

should take notice? If so, please state the issue, and offer your suggestions. The JEB currently is comprised of representatives from the ULC, ABA, AAML and AFCC. The Association of American Law Schools and the State Department also attend as liaison members. The JEB may consider adding either a liaison member or a new member organization within the next year. The ABA liaisons may need to vote. 5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting? Submit


No.


1

Joint Editorial Board for Uniform Family Law

December 12, 2015

Palmer House Hotel, Chicago, Illinois

Meeting Minutes

Attendees

Uniform Law Commissioners: Barbara Atwood (Chair), Harry Tindall (Emeritus

Member), Suzanne Reynolds

Reporter: Linda Elrod

ULC Staff: Liza Karsai (for portions), Lindsay Beaver

ABA Advisors: Melisa Kucinski, Sam Schoonmaker

American Academy of

Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML): Linda Lea Viken, Catherine Petersen

Association of Family and

Conciliation Courts (AFCC): Mary Ferriter, Nancy Ver Steegh

Association of American Courtney Joslin

Law Schools (AALS):

State Dept. Office of Private

International Law: Mike Coffee

Introduction and Welcome

The meeting was convened at 9:00 a.m.

Chair Atwood welcomed the committee members. She noted that the JEB is composed of a core group of

organizations involved in family law reform. She reviewed the JEB-UFL Memorandum of

Understanding, noting that the purpose of the JEB is to promote education of the bar and public with

respect to family law acts, provide timely reports to the respective organizations on board activities,

review unofficial amendments proposed to the acts, review court decisions interpreting the acts, publish

commentary or arrange for articles to encourage uniform interpretation of the act and vet proposals for

drafting projects and study committees for new uniform family laws.

A motion to approve the meeting minutes from the December of 2014 was approved.

Update on International Developments

Mike Coffee provided an update on international developments and projects with a family law focus.

Surrogacy and Status of Children - The 2015 Council on General Affairs and Policy of the Hague

Conference on Private International Law created an experts’ group to explore the feasibility of starting

work on private international law issues relevant to status of children, including issues arising from

2

international surrogacy arrangements. The State Department is contemplating holding a public meeting

in advance of the February experts’ group meeting. If the Department does hold a meeting, it will publish

a notice in the Federal Register. Mike Coffee will send a link to the notice to ULC staff to circulate to the

JEB-UFL membership.

Civil Protection Orders – The issue of whether there should be a project to, among other things, recognize

and enforce civil protection orders is an area of ongoing work at Hague Conference. (In 2015, the ULC

promulgated the Uniform Recognition and Enforcement of Canadian Domestic Violence Protection

Orders Act, which deals with this issue in a more narrow way.) A number of questions have been raised

in regard to adequacy of protections in another country for issuing order, internationalization of an

instrument, the level of ease at which a perpetrator could get a domestic violence protection order, and

asylum claims based on home country’s failure to protect from domestic violence. In March 2015, the

Council on General Affairs and Policy invited the Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference to do more

exploratory work in this area, subject to available resources.

Voluntary Agreements in Family Law Area – In November, an experts’ group met to discuss the role that

family law conventions play in enforcing family law agreements (such as mediated agreements) as well as

the need for any new international instrument on this topic. Mike notes that, in the United States, some

feel like there is not much of a need for this instrument because, if you have a voluntary agreement, you

can have it incorporated into a court order which can be enforced. It can also be enforced as a matter of

contract.

Cohabitation Outside of Marriage – The Council on General Affairs and Policy asked the Permanent

Bureau to prepare a questionnaire on private international law issues relating to cohabitation outside of

marriage and to report back in 2017. This could justify holding a public meeting if the focus of the

questionnaire is on policy issues. (There would be less of a need for a public meeting if the questionnaire

merely focuses on the status of current law.) The committee recognized the importance of this issue in

light of the growing populations of unmarried couples.

Abduction Convention – A working group at the Hague Conference has been meeting for a couple of

years working on a guide to good practice for article 13(b) of the Convention, which provides that a court

does not have to order the return of an abducted child if there is a grave risk that return would expose the

child to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation. The next

meeting will be held in January.

The JEB discussed problems of UCCJEA/Hague interface. There is some concern state courts are turning

cases into custody (best interest of the child) cases instead of straight return cases. There is some

sentiment circulating that federal judges tend to have a better understanding of treaties.

Child Support Convention – State Department is pleased that Congress passed the federal implementing

legislation for this Convention. All but five jurisdictions have enacted UIFSA 2008, including

Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and U.S. Virgin Islands. Once all jurisdictions have

implemented UIFSA 2008, the State Department would ask the President to sign the instrument of

ratification. The Convention will enter into force for the United States after it deposits this instrument

with the Government of the Netherlands. The majority of countries currently party to the Convention are

European. Canada and Mexico are still considering at this time. The Caribbean determined that it

probably did not have the resources to establish central authorities.

3

Child Protection Convention – The Convention was signed in 2010. The ULC amended UCCJEA to

conform to international aspects in 2013. The State Department is working to address other issues

presented by the Convention, which will likely require federal legislation.

Enactment Status of Approved Family Law Acts

The committee then reviewed the enactment status of approved family law acts. A list of current

enactments of family law acts was included in the meeting materials. Reporter Elrod asked if we could

include the acts that are retired such as Uniform Premarital Agreement Act which 26 states have and the

Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act which served as basis for many state laws.

Drafting Committees

The committee next discussed the status of current drafting committees on new family law acts.

Uniform Family Law Arbitration Act

Chair Atwood and Reporter Elrod, also Chair and Reporter for the Family Law Arbitration Drafting

Committee gave an overview of the committee’s work. The committee last met in November. An ongoing

concern is the preemptive effect of the Federal Arbitration Act over portions of the uniform act.

The uniform act will allow for pre-dispute family law arbitration agreements. There appears to be a lot of

hostility to arbitration in the consumer contexts. While family law arbitration does not have the same

baggage as commercial arbitration, the drafting committee still wants people to know what they are

getting into by waiving the process.

Custody and support may be an ongoing point of discussion. Some states do not allow arbitration of

custody matters. In some states, like South Dakota, alimony would be exempted.

Revisions of Uniform Parentage Act

This project was just approved for drafting. The committee will be tasked with making sure that the act

applies equally to same sex couples. It will also address the issue of identifying information for gamete

providers and the child’s right to genetic information. Commissioner Jamie Pedersen will chair the

committee. Professor Courtney Joslin will serve as reporter. It is projected for a first reading in July 2016.

Non-Parental Rights to Child Custody and Visitation

The committee, chaired by Debra Lehrmann, is expected for a final reading in 2017. Jeff Atkinson is

reporter. The draft is aimed at persons who do not have legal parental status but have a basis for seeking

custody or visitation based on de facto status or being grandparent/stepparent. The JEB noted that Maine

legislation equates de facto parentage with full parentage. This will be something for this committee and

the Revisions to the Uniform Parentage Act Drafting Committee to work closely on.

Director Karsai raises the issue of same-sex couples that adopted each other in the years before the

Obergefell decision. Parentage issues become complicated when the adopted couple then have children.

4

Harry Tindall raises the question of whether we are likely to have an act that allows for a child to have

three parents. California and Maine allow for this by statute, and Louisiana allows for this outcome

through case law.

Coordinating Committee to Draft Technical Amendments to ULC Acts after Obergefell

This committee is in the preliminary stages. It will be chaired by Commissioner Gail Haggerty and it will

likely entail a two-year process. It will likely progress in tandem with the Revisions of Uniform Parentage

Act project.

Proposals Referred from the Committee on Scope and Program

An Act to Address the Practice of “Rehoming” after a Failed Adoption

The consensus of the JEB is that rehoming has broader implications for international relations and

therefore it is not a topic for uniform law. A uniform law might intrude on child welfare and guardianship

practices in a state. Furthermore, this activity is already not sanctioned under current laws.

An Act to Address Barriers to Adoption of Foster Children

The Interstate Compact for Placement of Children deals with this issue. (Harry Tindall notes that the

Interstate Compact for Placement of Children is under amendment.) In addition, federal law provides for

adoption subsidies and welfare incentives. Congress may be in a better position to take this on.

The article that was circulated with JEB materials is dated. ULC staff is directed to conduct further

research to identify whether there has been anything further written on this issue. The JEB does not think

that there is a role for a uniform law here, but perhaps it will weigh-in by writing a letter.

Proposal Referred from Other ULC Committees

Scope of Minor Guardianships in the Amendments to Uniform Guardian Power of Attorney Act

The JEB notes that the underlying act has not been revised since 1969. If the committee is undertaking a

whole scale revision, then it would be odd to exclude typical guardianships of minors. However, the

drafting committee should avoid issues related to juvenile delinquency and other areas that are too far

afield. The JEB raised a number of anecdotal scenarios, including people invoking guardianship to get

child into a better school district, single mothers with chronic illness invoking guardianship during

prolonged periods of medical treatment, and grandparents becoming guardians of grandchildren with

deceased parents.

Enforceability of Unilateral Waivers under the Uniform Premarital and Marital Agreement Act (UPMAA)

and the Uniform Probate Code (UPC)

The UPMAA does not address unilateral waivers. However, there is some interest in the probate

community in having the UPMAA amended to clarify its stance on unilateral waivers. Without this

clarification, some argue, the act creates an unintended loophole. The consensus of the JEB is to

recommend that the UPC be amended to clarify that the unilateral waivers need to comply with the

requirements of the UPMAA, except for the joint signature requirement.

Proposal for New ULC Study Committees

5

Uniform Equitable Distribution Jurisdiction Act

Professor Tom Oldham proposes a uniform law be created to unify current family law jurisdiction rules

in order to increase the likelihood that all matters will be heard in one forum that has a substantial

relationship with the parties. This would create less room for forum shopping and related injustices.

However, some practitioners currently rely on forum shopping when advantageous to their clients.

Eliminating this practice would be a big change, particularly in cases involving high net worth clients

with multiple homes, where transient personal jurisdiction is more easily obtained. The JEB considered

whether the solution to this issue would be focused on choice of law reforms.

The consensus of the JEB is to take the proposal under advisement. The JEB recognizes that Professor

Oldham’s proposal is very broad. The JEB will ask Professor Oldham to consider narrowing his proposal

and providing more clarification on transient jurisdiction. Chair Atwood will follow-up with Professor

Oldham.

Cohabitants’ rights

A 2013 proposal submitted by Reporter Elrod did not receive approval from the Committee on Scope and

Program. However, there is continued support for such a project. The JEB acknowledges a growing

population of unmarried couples and recognizes that it may be appropriate timing to recommend a study

committee be formed to look into drafting a uniform act on this topic.

Several issues were discussed including the recognition that unmarried cohabitant may want the option of

not incurring obligations, the recognition that cohabitating couple would need to be distinguished from

roommates, the correlation between level of affluence and the decision not to marry but cohabit, and

delineation of cohabitants’ rights as distinct from common law marriage.

Reporter Elrod will prepare a proposal to the ULC Committee on Scope and Program advocating for the

formation of a study committee to consider the feasibility of a uniform law addressing this topic. (The

JEB will most likely submit this proposal for the Committee on Scope and Program’s July meeting.)

The JEB considered an article about marital status discrimination by Professor Courtney Joslin looking at

the growing number of unmarried couples the moral condemnation and stigmas that attach.

Interstate Sharing of Putative Father Registry Data

A Joint Resolution recently passed by the Utah Legislature urges the Interstate Sharing of Putative Father

Registry Information. This Joint Resolution was forwarded to the ULC Committee on Scope and Program

for the purpose of determining whether Scope should recommend further research or review on the

particular topic. After discussion, the Committee on Scope and Program referred the proposal to the JEB-

UFL for further review, with the request that the JEB report back its findings at the January 2016 meeting

of Scope. The proposal has also been referred to the Study Committee to Revise the Uniform Parentage

Act for the purpose of considering this issue for possible inclusion in the Revised Act.

Professor Courtney Joslin is the recently appointed reporter for the Study Committee to Revise the

Uniform Parentage Act. She will bring this up at the Committee’s next meeting. The JEB also

recommends that Utah consider pursing this issue with the appropriate federal office. Perhaps this issue

could be tied to a Title IV-D mandate.

Adult Visitation

6

The Catherine Falk Organization submitted to the Committee on Scope and Program a proposal to

appoint a study committee to study the feasibility of a state law which would create a legal process for the

adult children of parents to petition the courts for visitation in situations where no conservatorship exists

and the caretaker of the parent is denying visitation. The JEB agreed that this proposal should be referred

to the Drafting Committee to Revise the Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Act to

consider possible inclusion of this issue in the Revised Act

Post-majority Support for Children

A few states have laws permitting more than the basic child support required in a typical divorce or

paternity case by providing for college tuition support in certain cases. However, the continuation of

financial support into a child’s adulthood remains controversial. The JEB considers this a legitimate issue

and will keep an eye on it. However, it did not find a strong basis for recommending a study committee at

this time.

Notable Cases on Uniform Family Laws

Professor Courtney Joslin referenced a case in Alabama that may go to the Supreme Court. In this case, two women in a long term relationship had children through donor insemination. The children were

adopted by the non-biological mother in Georgia. When the relationship ended, the biological mother

sought to prevent the non-biological mother from seeing the children, arguing that the adoption was

invalid in Alabama, where the visitation was being sought. More information on this case is available

here: http://www.nclrights.org/cases-and-policy/cases-and-advocacy/case-e-l-v-v-l/

Professor Joslin recommends that the JEB monitor and perhaps weigh-in with an amicus brief.

Other Updates

American Law Institute Revision of the Restatement of the Law, Children and the Law

Chair Atwood will be a liaison member of the consultative group for the Restatement of Children and the

Law. She will keep the JEB updated on the progress of this committee.

Study Committee on Model Equal Rights Act

Harry Tindall is chairing the ULC Study Committee on Model Equal Rights Act. The committee will

consider the need for and feasibility of model state legislation on a comprehensive equal rights act. John

McCain has pushed for equality in employment. Congress has not acted.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.



RETURN Via e-mail to Cindy Swan: Cvnthia.Swan(c~americanbar.orq


Liaison To:

Submitted By:


~~-Q-z=~-~~

,~-


... J~ w

Y .t1 '~✓

~~ 9' ~~~~3. How can the ection o ily L and its le rship sist you and your oup in I

accomplish' g your go ?

l~r~


5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting? Submitwritten agenda items to Cynthia Swan at Cynthia.Swan(a~americanbar.org, Directorby April 8, 2016. (Items not requiring Council action maybe moved to the Non-Discussion Agenda, pending review by the Section Chair.)

/V~

ABA SENIOR LAWYERS DIVISIONCouncil Meeting

Saturday, February 6, 20168:30 a.m. Pacific time

Meeting Minutes

1. Call to Order.

DRAFT — 4/4/16

The Council Meeting was called to order by Chair Louraine Arkfeld. The Meeting washeld at the Manchester Grand Hyatt in San Diego, California.

2. Introduction of Council Members and Guests.

A. Council Members (Voting):SLD Officers: Louraine Arkfeld, Chair; William Missouri, Chair-elect; John Hardin

Young, Vice Chair; Marvin Dang, Secretary; Llewelyn Pritchard, Budget Officer; AlbertHarvey, Division Delegate; Ruth Kleinfeld, Division Delegate; John Vittone, Immediate PastChair

Jeffrey Allen; Patricia Banks; Warren Belmar (phone); Charles Brown; Richard Leslie;Edward Madeira, Jr. (phone); Wm. T. Robinson III; Neal Sonnett; John Uilkema; Michael VanZandt; Saul Wolfe

A quorum of the Council was present.

S. Council Members (Non-voting):Charles Collier; Edward Kallgren; Leigh Middleditch (phone); Seth Rosner (phone); Ed

Schoenbaum; Selma Moidel Smith; Richard Thies (phone)

C. Liaison•Harry Truman Moore, ABA Board of Governors

D. ABA staff:Bill Altorfer, Senior Specialist, ABA Digital Marketing and Content Management;

Angela Boykin, SLD Assistant Staff Director; Matthew Dominis, SLD Staff Director; PamelaMcDevitt, Director, ABA Law Practice &Technology Group; Robert Rupp, ABA DeputyPublisher

E. Guests•Tom Bolt; Brooksley Born (phone); Louise Dempsey; Leonard Gilbert; William

Hubbard, Immediate Past ABA President; Lance Leslie; Judy Perry Martinez, Chair, ABACommission on the Future of Legal Services; James Riehl; Carole Worthington

Page 1 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

3. Approval of Minutes.

Marvin Dang, Secretary:

Presented for approval are the following minutes: SLD Council Meeting on August 1,2015, SLD Business Meeting on August 1, 2015, SLD Executive Committee Meeting onSeptember 16, 2015, and SLD Council Meeting (conference call) on January 4, 2016.

UPON MOTION DULY MOVED, SECONDED, AND CARRIED:

The Council approved the following minutes: SLD Council Meeting onAugust 1, 2015, SLD Business Meeting on August 1, 2015, SLD ExecutiveCommittee Meeting on September 16, 2015, and SLD Council Meeting(conference call) on January 4, 2016.

4. Chair's Report.

Louraine Arkfeld, Chair:

A. SLD Automatic Enrollment Membership Proposal.

The ABA Board of Governors yesterday approved on the consent calendar the SLD'sautomatic enrollment membership proposal. It will be effective beginning with the 2016-2017bar year which starts in August, 2016. The SLD needs to be ready to welcome the newmembers. A lot needs to happen between now and then, including IT changes. MatthewDominis, with the help of Bill Altorfer, is working on redeveloping the SLD website.

B. Strategic Plannin~/Rebranding.

The SLD's Strategic Planning Committee met yesterday. Rebranding was discussed.One issue is the use of the term "senior lawyers" for the SLD. The SLD needs to focus on usingthe term "experience". The SLD magazine is called "Experience", the SLD e-newsletter is"Voice of Experience", and the SLD theme is "serving as the advocate for experienced lawyersand American families."

For "Experience" magazine, the March, 2016 issue's theme will be senior driving issues.During the next bar year, there will be four issues of "Experience".

The SLD e-newsletter in January, 2016 focused on the Women Trailblazers in the LawProject. Bill Altorfer did an excellent job on that issue. There will be an e-newsletter everymonth.

C. Upcoming SLD Meetings.

Page 2 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

The SLD 2016 Spring Meeting will be at the Tempe Mission Palms Hotel in Tempe,Arizona starting on Thursday April 28 with a "meet and greet" reception. Friday April 29 willhave programs all day on topics such as Alzheimer's, dementia, brain health, and caregiverissues. There won't be a registration fee to attend the programs. No continuing legal educationcredits will be offered. The Council dinner will be Friday night. The Council will meet onSaturday morning Apri130.

The SLD 2016 Annual Meeting will be in San Francisco from August 4 to 6. The SLD'smain event is the John Pickering Award dinner.

D. Other.

Pamela McDevitt has been a wonderful resource for the SLD over the last several monthswhen the SLD was short staffed.

5. Chair-elect Report.

William Missouri, Chair-elect:

When he is SLD Chair during bar year 2016-2017, he intends to continue educationalopportunities by addressing the physical and financial health of senior lawyers and their families,with information on social security, Medicare, use and misuse of prescription drugs, need forexercise, dental care, and eye care. He hasn't decided where to hold the 2017 Spring Meeting,but among the sites being considered are Baltimore Inner Harbor, Maryland, and NationalHarbor, Maryland which is close to Reagan National Airport.

6. Vice-Chair Report.

John Hardin Young, Vice-Chair:

At the SLD 2015 Spring Meeting, the Non-dues Revenue ("NDR") Committee assessedchallenges and opportunities. That culminated in discussions with various people within ABA.There is a new marketing company for the SLD. The SLD will be totally reliant on NDR whenautomatic free membership starts in August. With 75,000 plus members, the SLD will have themarketing power and ability to raise NDR. To raise that revenue, the SLD needs to havesomething to market. "Content is king and queen now for our future".

7. Budget Officer Report.

Llewelyn Pritchard, Budget Officer:

A. Reimbursement for SLD's Delegates to attend meetings of the ABA House ofDelegates.

Page 3 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

Llewelyn Pritchard requested direction from the Council regarding the reimbursement forthe SLD's two Delegates to the ABA House of Delegates (Albert Harvey and Ruth Kleinfeld) toattend the House meetings during the 2016 Midyear Meeting here in San Diego.

Discussion by Council Members:

The current SLD reimbursement policy only states that the SLD will reimburse votingmembers of the Council up to $600.00 in actual costs to attend Fall, Midyear, and SpringMeetings of the SLD. The policy doesn't address the costs for the Delegates to attend the ABAHouse of Delegates meetings. The House of Delegates reimburses the Delegates for travel(airfare) to the House meetings.

The SLD should cover the per diem for the hotel costs for the extra days that theDelegates need to attend the House meetings. For the 2016 Midyear Meeting here in San Diego,in addition to the $600.00 reimbursement from the SLD that the Delegates will receive, theyshould receive an additional per diem of $200.00 for the day that the House is in session, and forthe day before. The House meets on Monday, February 8, 2016, so the reimbursement wouldalso cover Sunday, February 7, 2016.


The Council approved the following: SLD's two Delegates to the ABA Houseof Delegates will each receive reimbursement from the SLD (a) up to $600.00for attending the SLD 2016 Midyear Meeting in San Diego, (b) an additionalper diem of $200.00 for attending meetings of the House of Delegates on theday when the House is in session (Monday, February S, 2016), and, (c) anadditional per diem of $200.00 for the day before the House is in session(Sunday, February 7, 2016).

Llewelyn Pritchard:

Before the SLD's 2016 Spring Meeting, he will work with Louraine Arkfeld to puttogether a task force to make recommendations regarding reimbursements.

B. SLD Operations Report.

Matt Dominis:

The SLD Operations Report is in the Council materials. There is a historical decline indues revenue. The SLD is curbing costs including reducing staff.

Pamela McDevitt:

Rather than two issues of "Experience" magazine this year, there will only be one. Thesavings will be taken into the next bar year. The SLD is looking at other ways to bring in

Page 4 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

revenue. The SLD is trying to brand the SLD as a resource for the general public as well as forexperienced attorneys. The SLD is also reaching out to families of ABA members. For nextweek's free monthly webinar, the topic is caregiving; over 200 people are registered. In thefuture, if registration numbers are high enough for the monthly webinars, the SLD can getsponsorships for webinars geared toward the public and aging issues. There are non-duesrevenue to be made from tours and cruises offered by the SLD's travel companies. In 2017, theSLD will market those tours and cruises to the entire ABA.

C. SLD Program Support Fund.

Marvin Dang, member of Council of the ABA Fund for Justice &Education:

T'he SLD expanded its Program Support Fund in 2015 to not only receive monies for theWomen Trailblazers in the Law Project (WTP"), but for other purposes. The ABA Fund forJustice &Education ("FJE") did a solicitation in October, 2015 to 300 SLD members who hadbeen in leadership positions when Judith Legg was SLD Staff Director before her retirement. Ofthe 17 donors, 6 hadn't contributed to the ABA before. That appeal raised $500 for the WTP and$2,150 for the Program Support Fund, for a total of $2,650. That solicitation was paid for by theFJE, not the SLD.

The FJE did second solicitation in December, 2015, also at the sole cost of the FJE. Thatsolicitation went to 2,300 SLD members and the FJE followed up with 350 members. $950 wasraised for the WTP and $1,775 for the Program Support Fund, for a total of $2,725.

8. Disability Diversity Pledge.

Marvin Dang, Co-Chair, SLD Diversity Committee:

In the Council materials is a "Pledge for Change —Disability Diversity in the LegalProfession" promulgated by the ABA Commission on Disability Rights. The SLD should affirmits commitment to diversity in the legal profession including diversity with respect to individualswith mental, physical, and sensory disabilities. The SLD should also let SLD memembers knowwhere the SLD stands and encourage SLD members and their firms and affiliates to be similarlybound with a pledge.

Charles Brown:

He was on the Commission for Disability Rights. The Pledge represents a commitmentto the inclusion in the legal profession of people with disabilities.


The Council adopted the "Pledge for Change —Disability Diversity in theLegal Profession" promulgated by the ABA Commission on DisabilityRights; affirmed the SLD's commitment to diversity in the legal profession

Page 5 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

including diversity with respect to individuals with mental, physical, andsensory disabilities; and encourages SLD members to make a similardiversity commitment.

9. Report of ABA Board of Governors Liaison.

Harry Truman Moore, ABA Board of Governors:

He praised the SLD for the great automatic membership enrollment proposal to the Boardof Governors and the work done by the SLD behind the scenes.

Louraine Arkfeld:

Harry Truman Moore was a huge help with the proposal. He's on the Board's OperationsCommittee and was a big supporter of the SLD.

10. Report of Division Delegates to House of Delegates.

Albert Harvey and Ruth Kleinfeld, Division Delegates:

A. Resolution 100 —Alternative Dispute Resolution for Health Care Disputes.

Albert Harvey:

Resolution 100 urges lawyers and other interested parties to use alternative disputeresolution ("ADR") to resolve health care disputes. Additionally in the Resolution, the ABAopposes the use of binding forms of ADR involving patients or residents of long-term carefacilities or other health care institutions unless the parties agree to do so voluntarily and withinformed consent after a dispute arises.


The Council supported Resolution 100 (Alternative Dispute Resolution forHealth Care Disputes).

B. Resolution 105 —ABA Model Regulatory Objectives for the Provision of LealServices.

Background: The ABA Commission on the Future of Legal Services' Resolution 105 willbe before the ABA House of Delegates next week during the Midyear Meeting. TheCommission on the Future of Legal Services is proposing that House of Delegates adopt the"ABA Model Regulatory Objectives for the Provision of Legal Services." The Commission isalso requesting that the House adopt the part of the Resolution that recommends that "eachstate's highest court, and those of each territory and tribe, be guided by the ABA Model

Page 6 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

Regulatory Objectives for the Provision of Legal Services when they assess the court's existingregulatory framework and any other regulations they may choose to develop concerning non-traditional legal service providers."

Judy Perry Martinez, Chair of the Commission on the Future of Legal Services, and WilliamHubbard, Immediate Past ABA Chair, attended this portion of the Council Meeting.

Judy Perry Martinez:

The ABA Board of Governors voted unanimously to support this Resolution. The YoungLawyers Division voted 143 to 95 in favor of this Resolution. This Resolution is not aboutalternative business structures or about approving fee-sharing. The Conference of Chief Justicestook no position on this Resolution; they adopted a resolution of their own that recommends totheir members that they "consider" the ABA model regulatory objectives as they go about theirwork. The 2003 policy of the House of Delegates says clearly that the ABA recognizes that thestate Supreme Court in each jurisdiction will define the practice of law and who can practice law.

William Hubbard read to the SLD Council the resolution of the Conference of Chief Justices.

After Judy Perry Martinez and William Hubbard left the Council Meeting, there was a briefrecess. The Meeting then reconvened.


Comments were made by Louraine Arkfeld, Seth Rosner, John Vittone, Saul Wolfe, Wm.Robinson, Charles Brown, Neal Sonnett, Jeffrey Allen, Seth Rosner, Albert Harvey, RuthKleinfeld, Richard Thies, Warren Belmar, John Young, Llewelyn Pritchard.

Comments in favor of Resolution 105:

• The ABA needs to put forth a model that the states can use and respond to (e.g.respond because the Washington State's Supreme Court decided to license limited legaltechnicians; respond to changes in law and technology that have brought things likeLegal Zoom; respond to other things coming from the Internet because of the need of thepublic for legal services).

• This Resolution is not an endorsement of unauthorized practice of law or aretreat from Model Rule 5.5.

• This Resolution simply says that in this area where legal service providers exist,one ought to regulate them; the alternative would be not regulating them at all. This is avery, proactive approach of the bar to say that protecting the public and competent,efficient, and ethical delivery of legal services is a regulatory goal. The Resolution saysnothing about how you implement that.

Comments opposing Resolution 105:

Page 7 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

• This Resolution is tearing away the fabric of the most fundamental things thatthe ABA stands for. The Model Rules that have been adopted throughout the country arein effect being undermined by this Resolution.

• If this Resolution passes, we are saying to the states that we're not telling you todo it or how to do it, but we are recognizing that it's appropriate to do it.

• This Resolution raises a different standard for non-lawyers to practice law. Itdoesn't encompass all the safeguards in the Code of Professional Responsibility whichthe ABA came up with for attorneys and which the ABA gave to the states and whichmost states follow. For the Code, the leadership of the ABA said to the states that this isa policy that we believe in and this is the way we should go forward. Contrary to that, wehave this Resolution which doesn't establish a high standard for non-lawyers practicinglaw.

UPON MOTION DULY MOVED, SECONDED, AND CARRIED (BY AVOTE OF 12 IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION, AND 4 IN OPPOSITIONTO THE MOTION):

The Council opposed Resolution 105 (ABA Model Regulatory Objectives forthe Provision of Legal Services) and instructed its Delegates to the ABAHouse of Delegates to oppose the Resolution.

C. Resolution 109 —Uniform Bar Examination.

Albert Harvey:

Resolution 109 urges bar admission authorities in each state and territory to adoptexpeditiously the Uniform Bar Examination in their respective jurisdictions.

The SLD Council had previously voted by phone to support this Resolution. The SLD isnow listed as a co-sponsor.

D. Resolution 116 —Urging Public Companies to Diversify Their Boards.

Background: This Resolution urges public companies in the United States to diversifytheir boards to more closely reflect the diversity of society and the workforce in the UnitedStates.


The Council supported Resolution 116 (Urging Public Companies toDiversify Their Boards).

Page 8 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

11. Committee Reports.

A. Nominating Committee.

John Vittone, Chair, Nominating Committee:

During the next bar year (2016-2017), William Missouri will automatically move upfrom Chair-elect to Chair of the SLD. John Hardin Young, as Vice Chair, will automaticallymove up to Chair-elect in 2016-2017.

The Nominating Committee met yesterday and prepared the 2016-2017 slate for ViceChair and Council positions. In the handout that was distributed to the Council today, the slateis:

• Vice Chair (1 year term): Marvin Dang.

• Council Members-at-Large (4 year term): Leonard Gilbert, Sheila SlocumHollis, Saul Wolfe, and Robert Whitman.

• Honorary Council Members (2 year term): Anthony Barash and RichardGoodwin.


The Council received this information today, but because it's not a formal report, there isno vote today. The Nominating Committee will submit a formal report at least 90 days beforethe August, 2016 SLD Annual Meeting.

Because Marvin Dang is currently in the first year of a 2 year term as SLD Secretary, ifhe is elected Vice Chair, the Nominating Committee will need to nominate someone to fill thesecond year of his term as Secretary. The Nominating Committee will send out a solicitation forSecretary after today's Council Meeting.

S. Book Publishing Committee.

Charles Collier, Chair, SLD Book Publishing Committee:

He distributed an e-mail from Robert Rupp to Pamela McDevitt dated December 22,2015.

The SLD's four AARP books ("Checklist for Family Survivors", "Checklist for MyFamily", "Checklist for Caregivers", and "Juggling Life, Work and Caregiving") had gross salesof $444,957.

Net to SLD was $41,919, which is less than 10% of gross sales.

Page 9 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

Printing ($128,157), production ($25,886), and publishing fee ($76,534) totalled morethan 50% of the gross sales.

15%went to the author ($65,953) and another 15%went to AARP ($65,953).

The marketing company, the National Book Network (NBN), made $90,774, which ismore than twice what the SLD received ($41,919).


The SLD should have made a hundred thousand dollars on the books rather than $41,919.The ABA publishing fee and the outside marketing fee should be a smaller percentage.

The SLD should study other ABA sections and divisons which have terminated theirrelationship with ABA publishing or have been able to renegotiate. The SLD should check whatthe other ABA entities are doing in the eBook area.

The SLD should tell the ABA at this point that the SLD doesn't want the ABA to enterinto contracts with authors until the SLD specifically OKs it so that the ABA doesn't tie in theSLD for the next few years.

12. Special Order of Business —ABA Publishing.

ABA Deputy Publisher Robert Rupp attended this portion of the Council Meeting.

Robert Rupp:

For the two caregiver books ("Checklist for Caregivers" and "Juggling Life, Work andCaregiving"), in the rush to publication, the ABA did not give the National Books Network("NBN") adequate time to have the books in their catalogues. If the release of those two booksbeen timed appropriately following NBN's advice, the performance of those two books would becloser to the two family books ("Checklist for Family Survivors" and "Checklist for MyFamily").

"Checklist for My Family" is "emblematic of what a book in this line. should do". It wasmarketed very effectively by AARP through a number of their channels, print, e-mail, andvarious media placements. It was actively promoted at all AARP regional programs.

"Checklist for My Family" has sold almost twice as much units as "Checklist for FamilySurvivors", but the expense is less than for "Checklist for Family Survivors" because the ABAemployed the website, and NBN's advice was followed. NBN was able to book an Amazonorder for 5,000 copies "right out of the gate".

Page 10 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

There is a retirement checklist book that's going to be the next AARP partnership.AARP is very excited about this. The ABA wants to "emulate the success" and performance of"Checklist for My Family" for the retirement checklist book.


Questions were asked of Robert Rupp and/or concerns were raised by Jeffrey Allen, JohnHardin Young, Llewelyn Pritchard, Seth Rosner, and others.

Robert Rupp:

The publishing fee that was paid to the ABA was 17%, which is more than what the SLDreceived from the books. These books sell differently than any other and have a different model:reliance on a big third-party partner for marketing and Amazon is the primary sales channel."There was learning done on these products."

He's "willing to do what needs to be done to flip some math here ... perhaps it's byPublishing not taking its fee, perhaps it's by Publishing bearing the production expense not theDivision." Within his "capacity to commit to today", he will "remove the 17% for all remainingsales of these four titles." They "will not collect the 17%." He is "committed to seeing more ofthe profit for this line of work sit with the Division than sitting with Publishing. These numbersshould be switched. It should be $80,000 to the Division and $40,000 to Publishing". Hedoesn't have the authority to remove the 17% for future titles beyond these four titles.

For the upcoming retirement book "we'll forge the pact as to what will be reasonable forthe retirement book and for all subsequent." As a part, it could include no fee by Publishing.

He said "you have no contract with the ABA; we're a service deparhnent.... We [can]treat this as a special project outside ... the 17% fee is the standard stake in the ground for entitypublishing. We have the capacity on specific projects to play with that, but these are internaltransfers for services within the organization and organization entities."

Beyond what he's committed to today for the four titles, "around the fee structures" hewill "need the blessing of the Executive Director and the Chief Financial Officer on majorsweeping changes:'


The Council expressed its dissatisfaction with the current arrangements thatthe SLD has with the American Bar Association for publication and sale ofSLD books; the SLD will not accept these arrangements any longer; the SLDdoes not agree with the amount of money that the SLD has received from thesales of four books ("Checklist for Family Survivors", "Checklist for MyFamily", "Checklist for Caregivers", and "Juggling Life, Work andCaregiving"); and the SLD wants to receive some recompense from the ABA.

Page 11 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

13. Women Trailblazers in the Law Proiect: Stanford Law Library Proposal.

Louraine Arkfeld:

The proposal from the Stanford Law Library is to create and host a website for theWomen Trailblazers in the Law Project ("WTP") collection. They will create a searchabledatabase of oral history transcripts and make them assessible on the website. Stanford will printand bind hard copies of the transcripts and make them publicly available. Stanford will digitizethe hundreds of audio recordings which the WTP has not been able to afford to do. Stanford willpreserve the collection and make them available via the website, which the ABA has been unableto do because of lack of space on the ABA website. Stanford will promote the collection andwork with other universities to make it widely accessible. Stanford will do this at no cost to ABAor the WTP.

Brooksley Born, Chair of WTP:

Thanks to the untiring work of Angela Boykin, some of the transcripts are on the ABAwebsite. But they're not very accessible and aren't being accessed very well. The ABA has saidthe the WTP can't have the audio recordings or video recordings of the oral histories on the ABAwebsite which is a great disadvantage. What Stanford is offering is something that the ABAreally wouldn't be able to do itself and would enhance the collection and its availability toscholars and the public enormously.

The WTP requests that the SLD Council approve moving forward with Stanford LawLibrary's proposal and authorize the WTP to work with Stanford and the ABA GeneralCounsel's Office to enter into an agreement incorporating the proposal, and then to work withStanford to implement the agreement.


The Council approved moving forward with Stanford Law Library'sproposal, and the Council authorized the WTP to work with Stanford andthe ABA General Counsel's Office to enter into an agreement incorporatingthe proposal, and then to work with Stanford to implement the agreement.

14. Travel and Leisure Committee.

Background: In the Council materials was a memo dated Janury 7, 2016 from the SLD tothe Operations and Communications Committee of the ABA Board of Governors. The SLDrequested approval for nearly 30 travel programs for 2017 with 3 travel companies specializingin tours and cruises for alumni associations, professional associations, and other nonprofitorganizations. The travel providers wish to mail brochures at their expense to SLD membersdescribing these trips, together with cover letters on SLD letterhead signed by the SLD Chair,

Page 12 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

advising SLD members of this opportunity and urging those who are interested to take advantageof these offers.

Ruth Kleinfeld:

The ABA Board of Governors has apparently given approval to these proposed tripswhich will be offered not only to SLD members but to the entire ABA.

This involves updating the SLD website to add information about these trips.

15. ABA E-mail Task Force Report and Website Task Force Report.

Background: There are two ABA Task Force reports, including recommendations toredesign the ABA website and to create a new email policy.

Jeffrey Allen:

He served on both Task Forces. The report on the ABA website is flawed because it doesnot impose any restriction on control of the website by the ABA marketing department. Thereneeds to be a webmaster who is not a marketer.

The e-mail Task Force was not tainted because it was not controlled by the ABAmarketing people. The e-mail Task Force recommended, and the Board of Governors approved,the appointment of an independent e-mail director.

16. Reports.

The following reports were included in the Council materials:

• Liaison report on ABA Center for Human Rights (submitted by Charles Collier,liaison)

• Liaison report on ABA Commission on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity(submitted by Marvin Dang, liaison)

• Liaison report on Lawyer Assistance Programs (submitted by James Rogers, liaison)

• Diversity Committee report (submitted by Marvin Dang, Co-Chair, DiversityCommittee)

• Membership Report (submitted by Angela Boykin)

• United States Supreme Court Trip Committee (submitted by Louise Dempsey andCharles Collier, Co-Chairs)

Page 13 of 14

DRAFT — 4/4/16

17. Other.

a. Tom Bolt, Chair of the ABA Law Practice Division, said that the Division hasappointed a liaison to the SLD. The Law Practice Divison is also amending its Bylaws later thisyear to have someone from the SLD be on the Division's Council. The Division currently has ayoung lawyers representative and a law student representative on the Council.

b. Louraine Arkfeld noted that William Missouri, who will be Chair during the 2016-2017 bar year, has committed to appoint someone from the SLD to be on the Law PracticeDivision's Council.

c. Louraine Arkfeld said that Charles Sabatino of the ABA Commission on Law andAging was involved in a very serious bicycle accident with serious injuries.

d. Marvin Dang announced that this afternoon is the Stonewall Award receptionsponsored by the ABA Commission on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity.

e. Llewelyn Pritchard announced that Selma Moidel Smith will receive tomorrow night(Sunday, February 7) the Inaugural Life Fellows Achievement Award from the American BarFoundation.

18. Adjournment.

There being no further business, the Meeting was adjourned.

MARViN S. C. DANGSecretary of the ABA Senior Lawyers Division

Page 14 of 14

{2793.002/00253336.DOCX-}





Liaison To: __________Young Lawyers Division_________________

Submitted By: ____________Brian Karpf__________________________

1. Attach a copy of your most recent Meeting Minutes. 2. Please tell Council three (3) projects/activities your group is currently working on (or

planning to work on in the upcoming year).

There is a new chair and several vice-chairs, dividing the workload. The group seems more active. They are working on creating a newsletter.

3. How can the Section of Family Law and its leadership assist you and your group in

accomplishing your goals? Continued participation in the YLD Showcase. Holding joint networking opportunities for family law attorneys at the YLD meetings. 4. Are you aware of current or "up and coming" topics in family law of which the Section

should take notice? If so, please state the issue, and offer your suggestions. 5. Do you wish to be on the Council agenda at the next Council meeting? Submit

written agenda items to Cynthia Swan at [email protected], Director


{2793.002/00253336.DOCX-}

by April 8, 2016. (Items not requiring Council action may be moved to the Non-Discussion Agenda, pending review by the Section Chair.)

No.

liaison status report tally - american bar · pdf fileliaison status report tally ... in june...

Documents