Bias CLE 599 to 1
Sunday, October 02, 2022
Jerry Blackwell - Wrestling with the Past
The U.S. Senate is preparing to vote on the nomination of Jerry Blackwell to be a federal judge for the District Court of Minnesota. Mr. Blackwell recently made headlines as one of the prosecutors in the trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin. But Blackwell made headlines a few years ago for a different reason.
The previous headlines involved two related issues in 2006. The first was the opposition of the Minnesota Association of Black Lawyers (MABL) to the Maslon Edelman law firm joining a minority-recruitment consortium of Twin Cities legal employers. One purpose of the consortium was to combine resources and send a single representative to minority job fairs. Maslon’s membership in the consortium was delayed and later denied because three lawyers from the firm had represented the plaintiffs in two lawsuits against the University of Michigan’s affirmative action program. Jerry Blackwell, on behalf of MABL, said that offering membership to Maslon would carry an “unacceptable taint” that would “frustrate the goal” of attracting minority attorneys.
The second issue was “Bill and Jerry’s Shrimp Boil,” a legal reception co-sponsored by the consortium, Twin Cities Diversity in Practice (TCDIP). The reception was for “minority attorneys, minority summer associates, and minority law students. No other guests, please.” I had some involvement in publicizing the shrimp boil controversy. For me, it was just a throwaway comment in a larger piece about the Maslon controversy. But the shrimp boil seemed to generate the most hot water. We can only guess as to the reasons, but Judge Tony Leung resigned from TCDIP in October of 2006, at the height of the controversy.
The American Bar Association’s Model Code of Judicial Conduct prohibits membership in an organization that practices “invidious” discrimination. To oversimplify it a bit, invidious discrimination is illegal in most public settings. The reason for the discrimination is illegitimate, even hostile. Until a final ruling on a particular organization's discrimination case, there is little guidance on which organizations a judge can join. Even though I would not choose to attend the blatantly discriminatory (“No other guests, please.”) shrimp boil, I do not think laws or legal ethics should prohibit it. After the shrimp boil, the authorities could come after religious, scouting, and fraternal organizations. I would err on the side of allowing freedom of association. Society has pretty much made up its mind on allowing minority scholarships and minority job fairs. Is a reception that much worse?
This does not mean that Senators should not ask Mr. Blackwell about the issues, particularly the Maslon controversy. Would he recuse himself from cases involving Maslon Edelman? Does the “taint” still exist for the law firm? If not, when did it fade? Should litigants appearing before Judge Blackwell be concerned about the law firm they hired and what other clients the firm has?
As far as the shrimp boil, Mr. Blackwell appears to have hidden it in plain sight. His judiciary committee questionnaire mentions “Bill and Jerry’s Charity Shrimp Boil” but has it ending in 1999. Among several articles listed is a 2006 Star Tribune article by Katherine Kersten criticizing the decision by MABL, TCDIP, and Blackwell. Interestingly, the questionnaire asks if any of the non-bar association organizations he has joined are discriminatory, but it does not ask the same question about the various bar associations. It could be an oversight, or it could be that whole invidious question again.
At a hearing on his nomination, Senator Durbin asked Mr. Blackwell for some encouragement on matters of race. Blackwell spoke (approximately two hours and thirteen minutes in) about “e pluribus unum” and how the reaction to the George Floyd killing was better than the 1960s, this time with “all races, colors, and persuasions” protesting. Maybe Jerry Blackwell has changed. Maybe he might have a different guest list at any future legal reception he might host. Maybe someone in the Senate will ask the question.
The previous headlines involved two related issues in 2006. The first was the opposition of the Minnesota Association of Black Lawyers (MABL) to the Maslon Edelman law firm joining a minority-recruitment consortium of Twin Cities legal employers. One purpose of the consortium was to combine resources and send a single representative to minority job fairs. Maslon’s membership in the consortium was delayed and later denied because three lawyers from the firm had represented the plaintiffs in two lawsuits against the University of Michigan’s affirmative action program. Jerry Blackwell, on behalf of MABL, said that offering membership to Maslon would carry an “unacceptable taint” that would “frustrate the goal” of attracting minority attorneys.
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/minneapolis-mn-thurs-sept-7-2000-bill-and-jerryïs-annual-news-photo/1154151594
(picture of Jerry Blackwell in his shrimp boil apron from 2000 Star Tribune article)