AB INITIO - THE BIRTH OF A LAW SCHOOL

Opening a law school is not undertaken on a whim. A decision of this magnitude demands serious consideration from many people. It requires a strong commitment from the institution and community. But most of all, it calls for a certain "spark," a vision that this educational experience will truly make a positive impact on our world.

But I'm getting ahead of myself. Let's go back about 80 years, when in 1923 the College of St. Thomas (renamed the University of St. Thomas in 1990) opened a law school on its St. Paul, Minnesota campus. Hit hard by the economic depression in the United States, the law school closed in 1933. However, the idea of a great law school at St. Thomas never died.

During his long and successful tenure as president of the University of St. Thomas, Monsignor Terrence J. Murphy dreamed about re-opening the law school. Monsignor Murphy believed that a professional school was an essential component of an influential university. He often shared these ideas with his friend and colleague, Father Theodore M. Hesburgh, C.S.C., the then president at the University of Notre Dame. Father Hesburgh encouraged his St. Thomas counterpart to pursue the law school goal and introduced Father Murphy to me, the then dean at Notre Dame Law School. I added "coal to the fire" of Monsignor Murphy's dream.

When Father Dennis J. Dease succeeded Monsignor Murphy as president of St. Thomas, the pursuit of the law school dream added a supportive partner. Father Dease envisioned a law school that would genuinely reflect the school's Judeo-Christian foundations while at the same time dramatically expand the credentials of its graduates through a wide array of joint degree offerings.

Father Dease was advised that the most expedient and effective route to re-opening the law school might be merging with an existing law school. Talks were initiated with a good law school program that was not affiliated with a university. Since I had the experience in legal education and the interest in St. Thomas, I was asked to serve as a consultant to advise on this proposed merger. The existing law school desired an affiliation with a strong university such as St. Thomas, and the University of St. Thomas wanted to re-open their law school as soon as possible, therefore the merger seemed like a good idea. However, questions about governance and how decisions would be made at the merged institution could not be resolved and merger discussions broke down at that time. I encouraged the President and Board of Trustees at St. Thomas to explore the feasibility of beginning their own law program.

I felt strongly that there should be more faith-based law schools. Fortunately, Notre Dame also saw this as an important way to use my knowledge of, and passion for, Catholic higher education. I was considering the prospect for St. Thomas to "take the cuttings from Notre Dame and start a new vineyard."

Several years later, the University of St. Thomas appointed a very influential Law School Advisory Board to explore the idea of reopening the St. Thomas School of Law. This board represented a wide variety of legal and professional opinions, including attorneys from national law firms, judges from the Federal Court of Appeals and Minnesota Supreme Court, CEO's from Fortune 500 corporations, political leaders and University presidents. This board had the combined experience, prominence, diversity and wisdom to advise on the need for a law school as part of the University academic composition.

The University of St. Thomas Board of Trustees, based on strong recommendation of the Law School Advisory Board, hired Anthony Santoro, President of Roger Williams University to do a feasibility study for re-opening the law school. Merger possibilities were designated as part of the study. At the same time, the Board appointed me to again act as a consultant. Although President Santoro and I had worked together on ABA accreditation visits for other law schools, we decided that it was best if we did not consult with each other until after the feasibility study was completed. That procedure would assure that the Board of Advisors and the Board of Trustees would get independently developed advice.

Things were beginning to heat up. Next month, I will talk about the results of the feasibility study and the decision of the Board of Trustees.

David T. Link
Dean
University of St. Thomas School of Law
March 28, 2000

For more information please contact:

University of St. Thomas School of Law
MPL 440
1000 LaSalle Ave
Minneapolis, MN 55403

E-mail: Lawschool@stthomas.edu
Web: http://www.stthomas.edu/lawschool
———————————————————————
Discussion

• It is one of the most exiting situtation. The foundations of a new law school demand courage, time, leadership and quality.

  Three main points are important, from my point of view. The curriculum, the research and the leadership. The curriuclum means to have a good theoretical and practical basis. Theoretical, in the first one or two years. Legal reasoning is very important for students and lawyers.From the other side a good curriculum means a good staff of professors. Specially a combination of old a young professors. With interest in line of researching in a long run period (one or two).

  This is very important for the aqusitions of the library of the law school. For the last two or three years the curriculum could be more and more practical. But in any case the field of ethics or values could be a good possibility for students. The development of new courses about the new technologies, about the internationalization and globalization fo the law (international trade law, etc) could be another advantage.Finally, a curriculum shall have a distinction, a focus (bussines or international matters or agriculture, etc)

  A second element is the research. Lines of research with a long run perspective are very important too. Every student can unerstand that the main point of research are under this line of research. Long run means 5 to 10 years. This help for the aquistion of text books and other publications and the deep of the knowledge of the researchers.

  The third element is the leadership. Leadership of the head of the school ot understand the situation of the school, the best possibilities for the school and to adquire a goodreputation for the school. Leadership to come with the school to a good end in a short medium and long run.

  I took part in the foundation and first year development of a law school (and his library). Thiss were the problems that I saw not only in this new law school. I saw this problem in old law school.

  Sergio R.Pena-Neira
  Universidad del Mar
  Valparaiso, CHILE

• I'm keen about the developments of legal fields such as schools of legal studies.I appreciate the historical values of a law school as presented by Dean Link butI strongly fell that it would be more useful and meaningful, if Dean Link could nurture us with his vast/knowledgeable experience on how would a law school lead a new role into this era of dot.com world globally. I personally think that we need to give this a 'deep' thought as the world is changing fast. The Courts all round the world are trying hard to accommodate such a change but it seems that law schools have taken their 'sweet' own time for such a change! Could our new law graduates challenge the new World with great confidence in the next decade?

  Chen K.C.
  Singapore

• He failed to mention that Minnesota already has three law schools (U of Minnesota, Hamline, and William Mitchell) and many would argue that the market is has been glutted for years. Why not a discussion about supply and demand for legal services?

  John Norquist
  Washington, DC