Twice a year, I travel to Washington, D.C., as part of my board obligations for the American Association for Justice. I always carve out time to strap on my running shoes and take the same walk: my hotel to the White House to the Lincoln Memorial to the World War II Memorial to the Washington Monument down Constitution Avenue around the U.S. Capitol to the Supreme Court and back to my hotel.

We will tackle polarization and dwindling public trust in the system, and what we can do about it as lawyers, later in the year. For now, the best place to start is, well, the start. The singular question that has plagued me in my mission to discover what lawyers should be doing to support the Constitution is how are lawyers supposed to collectively support the Constitution when we are also tasked with disputing each other in Court as to how that very same Constitution should be interpreted?

If I were to describe my father in a way everyone can understand, I would say he is Bill Nye the Science Guy, but without the bowtie. Despite growing up with little money on a farm in Worms, Nebraska, he has multiple degrees and was valedictorian of every school he has ever attended. But he would tell you it is not because he is smart, it is because he is curious and industrious.

On April 3, 2015, Anthony Ray Hinton was freed from prison, having spent 30 years on death row for murders he did not commit. The two victims were managers of two fast food restaurants in Birmingham, Ala., and were murdered during the course of robberies. There were no eyewitnesses to the murders. There was no fingerprint evidence. A third robbery occurred, and the manager identified Mr. Hinton in a lineup, even though during the time of that crime, Mr. Hinton was at work.

When the BAMSL staff informed me that I could write a stream of consciousness wrap-up article for my final President's column, I asked how that would be any different from the other columns I have written? Well, this column is supposed to highlight accomplishments of our one-year tenure. Hence, it should be a very brief column.

Since its founding in 1874, the two most important goals of our bar association have been to promote civility among our members, and to provide educational opportunities for those members. If there is one thing that I have realized from my time in your bar association’s leadership ranks, it is the amazing way our local judges at both the state and federal levels support our association. It makes sense if you think about it (which I never did), in that the judges benefit greatly by having a civilized bar, and hence fewer spats over which they must referee.

This is indeed an interesting time to chair the BAMSL Minorities in the Legal Profession (MILP) Committee. Nationally, many are asking questions about the role of lawyers and courts to end discrimination in its varied forms. Across the state, bar associations are developing committees and surveys to quantify and increase diversity within the legal profession, while lawyers legislate and litigate racially charged topics like wrongful conviction and Critical Race Theory in our schools.

If you are like me, you might have assumed that one reason the Dred and Harriett Scott case is so well known is that it was unique in American jurisprudence. Surely, it must have been rare for an enslaved couple living in a slave state in the 1840s to have the courage to sue their master in a court of law for their freedom? Think again.

The year 2021 began exactly the same way 2020 ended: Virtually.

I was thrilled when Bob Tomaso offered me the opportunity to write this month's President's column in celebration of women lawyers. While not knowing then exactly how best to express my gratitude to all our amazing women leaders, as I sit here in the shade at my daughter's softball game, I feel like I can sense their leadership and strength.