David Boies challenged America’s lawyers to “bring the rule of law to its full fruition here in this country … to fulfill the goals and lofty rhetoric of our founding fathers,” as the keynote speaker at the Opening Assembly of the 2010 ABA Annual Meeting in San Francisco.

The rule of law was the assembly theme, as ABA members gathered in the Herbst Theater of the War Memorial Veterans Building, site of the signing of the charter of the United Nations in 1945.  

President Carolyn B. Lamm pointed to ABA efforts from activities of the Section of International Law to such projects as the Central European and Eurasian Law Initiative, the Rule of Law Initiative and the World Justice Project as advancing United Nations goals to spread democracy based on law around the world.

Boies, co-counsel with Ted Olson in winning a federal district court ruling Wednesday that overturned California’s Proposition 8, cited “numerous challenges to the rule of law in our own country,” in applying that theme at home.

When our nation was born, it consisted of “wes” and “theys,” Boies said, with the “wes” being white male property owners and the “theys” comprising everyone else.  As the national history unfolded, the circle of “wes” expanded to encompass more and more segments of society.  

“We have an opportunity to expand the circle of ‘wes’ until there are no more ‘theys,’” said Boies, urging lawyers to work toward ensuring that “liberty and equality and protection of individual rights is something that every citizen equally enjoys.”

To achieve that goal, Boies identified four challenges confronting his audience.

First, he suggested the rule of law works best when adversaries have equivalent resources, whether those resources are plentiful or sparse.   But the “time when our system tends to break down is when one party has tremendous resources and the other party does not.”  Those are the times that “threatened to undermine the protections of the rule of law… [and lawyers] need to find ways to reduce the imbalance,” he said.  He urged reducing procedural advantages that favor the “better resourced party,” and urged lawyers to not “use discovery as a war of attrition,” for example. 
   
Second, he called for “better tools to help juries” decide important but complex cases, such as allowing jurors to ask questions and take notes on testimony.

His third challenge was to “improve judges and the judicial machinery,” citing a “crisis in terms of financing the justice system in the United States.”  First year associates in his law firm are paid higher salaries than federal district court judges, and state court judges earn even less, he said.  “If we can’t afford to spend a fraction of what we are spending to expand that system to Iraq, something is wrong with our sense of priorities,” he maintained.  

All lawyers must stand up for the independence of judges, resisting threats to their safety when they make unpopular decisions, said Boies, noting that there already have been threats to harm the judge who  ruled in the Proposition 8 litigation.

Boies’ cited predictably equal application of the law without regard to the identity of the parties as the final challenge to the rule of law, saying that when rights depend on who is asserting them, “the rule of law is undermined.”

After a period of dramatic change at the Supreme Court and in her personal life, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is looking forward to being one of three women on the high court for the foreseeable future.

Although some have speculated she might step down next year, the 77-year-old Ginsburg told The Associated Press on Tuesday she has no plans to retire anytime soon and still wants to match Justice Louis Brandeis, who stepped down at age 82.

Ginsburg talked with the AP as the Senate began debate on the all-but-assured confirmation of high court nominee Elena Kagan, chosen by President Barack Obama to replace John Paul Stevens. Last year, Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined the court after David Souter retired.

Ginsburg said the court's demanding work helped her cope with the death of her husband, Martin, in June. They had been married 56 years.

She had two opinions to write in June and constant trips between the court, her home and the hospital. "I had no time to dwell on the loss that I knew was going to be sooner rather than later," she said.

A public interest law firm is preparing to sue the Canadian owners of a pipeline that ruptured in southern Michigan and dumped hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil into a Kalamazoo River tributary.

The Great Lakes Law Center on Monday sent Enbridge Inc. a notice of intent to file suit if a settlement isn't reached within 60 days. The letter accuses the company of violating the Clean Water Act.

The Detroit-based law center says Enbridge could face more than $26 million in civil penalties based on the Environmental Protection Agency's estimate that the spill exceeds 1 million gallons. The company estimates the total at 820,000 gallons.

A phone message seeking comment was left with Enbridge, which reported the spill a week ago.

The State Investment Council has hired a law firm to help recover damages and losses from questionable investments and fees paid to third-party marketing agents.

The council on Tuesday approved the selection of a Day Pitney LLP, which has nine offices on the East Coast, including in New York, Boston, Washington, D.C., and Hartford, Conn.

The law firm will receive a sliding scale contingency fee based on what it recovers for the state.

1 of the council's former outside investment advisers has pleaded guilty in a New York pension scandal and acknowledged that some investment deals in New Mexico were done because of pressure from politically connected individuals. The names of those people have not been disclosed.

With more than $67 billion of its insurance coverage placed into a special receivership fund, Ambac Assurance Corp. is flirting with financial ruin. Yet at the same time, lawyers and consultants helping Wisconsin regulators navigate the complex case have collected nearly $18 million for their efforts.

And the meter is still running.

At the top of the billing list, state records show, is Foley & Lardner, the Milwaukee-based law firm with close ties to Gov. Jim Doyle. Employees of Foley have contributed $355,596 to Doyle's campaigns since 1999, more than any other group from one employer, according to data analyzed by the nonpartisan Wisconsin Democracy Campaign at the Journal Sentinel's request.

Foley, the state's largest law firm, has billed the state $6.6 million for its work on the Ambac case since it was hired in February 2008 - more than four times the next highest sum paid to an outside special counsel for one case since Doyle took office in 2003, according to the state attorney general's office.

Three Foley attorneys, including David Walsh, a longtime friend and major contributor to Doyle, have billed more than $1 million each for their Ambac work. Walsh and members of his family have contributed $64,520 to Doyle's campaigns since 1999, including $40,520 since 2003, topping the list of all individual contributors to Doyle, according to the Democracy Campaign, which analyzes campaign finance reports filed with the state.

Marc Marotta, a Doyle confidant who chaired his 2006 campaign and served on the governor's cabinet, is a Foley partner who has billed 24 hours on the Ambac case. State Insurance Commissioner Sean Dilweg, who hired Foley for the Ambac case, was a top aide to Marotta in the state Department of Administration before being named insurance commissioner in 2007.