Do Kirkland & Ellis and the Biden Administration Have the Solution to Crime?

With Roe v. Wade getting overturned today, this post is probably a day late and a dollar short.  But here it is anyway:

Paul Clement and Erin Murphy, who won the case in the Supreme Court against New York state’s relatively strict handgun law,  New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, have announced that they are leaving the law firm they were at, Kirkland & Ellis.  According to them, Kirkland & Ellis told them that the firm would no longer take firearms cases and that they needed to stop representing clients such as the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association or leave the firm.  Not surprisingly, Clement and Murphy are leaving K&E.¹  In any case, the lesson is clear: K&E doesn’t want to provide legal representation to unpopular clients – or at least certain unpopular clients.

Also yesterday, President Biden’s Education Department announced proposed new regulations that would greatly expand the type and scale of complaints that college students can bring under Title IX, as well as making changes to how complaints are handled.  Among other things, the proposals return to a standard of “preponderance of the evidence” for complaints of sexual assault.  During the Trump administration, the Education Department revoked guidance from the Obama administration that recommended schools used the “preponderance of the evidence” rule and issued regulations allowing colleges to use a standard of “clear and convincing evidence.”  The new proposals and other rules also limit the right of the accused student to have a live hearing and to cross examine the person making the accusation.  These changes are justified on the grounds that sexual assault is so common on college campuses, that something has to be done.

Which made me wonder if these two situations provide a blueprint to deal with the increase in crime in the United States.  First, maybe law firms and lawyers shouldn’t provide a defense to people charged with unpopular crimes, like murder, assault, rape – or whatever.  If that is how law firms are dealing with representing unpopular clients in Second Amendment cases, should lawyers do the same with other types of unpopular clients?

Second, in situations where there is a virtual epidemic of crime, like President Biden’s Education Department says is happening with respect to sexual assault on college campuses, maybe we need to cut back on the rights of defendants to have live hearings, cross examine witnesses, etc.  If that’s what we need to do because of what is happening on college campuses, should we do the same because of what is happening on city streets?

No, of course, not.  But because very few people have a sense of humor any more, let me give this SARCASM ALERT: While I would hope it is obvious, in case anybody misses it, let me state – and emphasize – that this post is sarcasm.  It is not serious at all; it just seemed a little too funny to  pass up.
------------
¹ See here and here.
² See here and here.