Law Day celebrated its 50th anniversary on May 1, 2008, and the Houston Bar Association planned a number of activities to commemorate this milestone, focusing on education and community outreach. In 1958, President Dwight Eisenhower proclaimed the first Law Day as “a day of national dedication to the principle of government under law.”
Each year, the American Bar Association develops a theme based on the rule of law and encourages local bar associations throughout the nation to develop programs and activities to promote the theme. The 50th Anniversary theme was “The Rule of Law: Foundation for Communities of Opportunity and Equity.”
The HBA Law Week Committee was co-chaired by Michael K. Oldham of Gibbs & Bruns, L.L.P.; Denise Scofield of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP; and Jennise W. Stubbs of Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP. Law Week Committee members were Vicky Alvarez, Bret Bosker, Kristi Hamlin, Bruce Johnson, Daniella Landers, Brendetta Scott, Ruth Shapiro, Elizabeth Steierwald, Anastassios Triantaphyllis, Caitlin Tucker and Marlene Williams.
Poster Winners
The winners of the HBA Law Day Poster, Essay and Video contests were honored at the Law Day Luncheon, along with their parents and teachers. Pictured with one of the first place posters are, from left, Blake Pratz of Smith Barney, who provided cash prizes for the poster and essay contest winners; Jo Simmons of Smith Barney; HBA Law Week Co-chair Jennise Stubbs; Wade Brokmeyer, first place essay winner; Juan Jose Coronado, 2nd place video winner; Matthew Mendoza, 2nd place essay winner; Kathryn Langemeier, 1st place poster winner; HBA Law Week Co-chair Michael Oldham; Amanda Eakin, 1st place video winner; Gary Gibbs, 2nd place video winner; Hernan Jaimes, 2nd place video winner; and Frank Hinnant of Innovative Legal Solutions, who provided cash prizes for the video contest.
First Place: Houston Bar Association Law Day Essay Contest
The Rule of Law:
Foundation for Communities of Opportunity and Equity
By Wade Brokmeyer
Faith West Academy
The Continental Congress had enough. For several years, the British colonies on North American soil had been subject to what were seen as persecutions from their king, George III. The people were ordered to provide shelter for British troops, stripped of what they viewed as fundamental rights, and publicly humiliated should they refuse to comply with the government. Outraged at the way the crown was organizing the colonies, Congress sought to declare independence on the grounds that they, and the rest of the country, could not exist under a tyrannical government based on the rule of men. What they desired was a system that was under restraint; one that would not strip away the rights of the people and grow out of control, but be limited and kept within its legal boundaries. What they came to draft after winning independence was the Constitution, which changed the government by basing it upon the rule of law as developed by the Magna Carta in the 13th century. It is this form of order that has dissolved the fear of an almighty government and protected the essential rights of the citizens of the United States of America.
The style of government created under the Constitution was, and still is, regarded as one of the most liberating of the world. There is a reason why the United States of American is referred to as the Land of Freedom, and it is the overwhelming lack of restraint that someone feels when they first step foot onto the shores of the continent. Because of the Constitution’s basis on the rule of law, it is the highest and most supreme law of the land; no act of the federal government is more superior, as was decided in the Supreme Court case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803. Being forced to comply with these limitations prevents the government from infringing the rights of the people and becoming overtly tyrannical. For instance, Congress is not allowed to establish a state religion due to the Establishment Clause of the Constitution, and as a result, a person’s right to choose which religion to practice is saved. Moreover, because everyone has this same freedom, a sense of equity is created. All people, and not just a select few, are able to live the lives that they want to live without fear of being oppressed by the government and being subject unto tyranny or dictatorship. No group in the country’s entirety undergoes persecution or becomes favored; all people are equally treated and given the same opportunities as the majority. All of this because of detailed rules that each branch of government must follow.
In a country based on the rule of men as opposed to the rules of law, more people are likely to know only fear and tyranny from the national power. It is in these states where the people are deprived of their natural rights. They are not guaranteed a right to own land or a right to practice the religion they wish to practice, but are forced to obey the decrees from whoever holds the most power. If this is the case, there will always be a group of people who are persecuted; it is simply a matter of factual reasoning. Constant persecution from the government causes discontent, which in turn encourages rebellion. Historical evidence is riddled with instances in which a minority became so outraged that it violently attempted to overthrow the government; America itself is an example. A government that constantly subjects itself to these risks cannot hope to stand for a long amount of time.
Chiseled at the top of the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. are the words “Equal Justice Under Law.” It is a perfect description of the way the rule of law in the United States works; all people, regardless of race, creed, or sex, are able to live a life free from fear and free from want, all because the government must subject itself to a higher authority, the Constitution. An oppressive body is far out of the question.
