Annotations, South Texas College of Law (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 15, No. 2, Ed. 1, September/October, 1986 Page: 2 of 12
12 pages : page 11 x 8.5 in. Digitized from 35 mm. microfilm.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Page 2
ANNOTATIONS
September /October, 1986
EDITORIAL/OPINION
From the Editor
lL's May Not Be Lawyers Yet,
But They're Still Human
There are new faces among us, those anxious, eager and en-
thusiastic new students who are entering law school with all the
hopes and fears we jaded 2L's and 3L's once had so very, very
long ago. We should do more than welcome our new colleagues:
We should reach out and give them the same kind of support,
guidance and help that was (or should have been) extended to us
when we first arrived.
Remember that the first year of law school is a transition
from knowing everything to knowing nothing. Patience is in
order; we were all in that place once.. Remember that these new
students are anything but fools. Suffer them with the same grace
that others suffered you during your first trying year.
These people are the new blood. They will, in a year or two,
be the members and editors in the law review; the top advocates;
the leaders of the student body. And yes, even a new editor of
Annotations is lying dormant in this group of unknowns just
entering. Give these students what they need most during this
first confusing year of law school.
Give them time.
What's in A Name?
Not to belabor this "no-name" deal, though it is difficult to
ignore when it is plastered all over the new South Texas T-shirts,
but Annotations has done some research on the so-called "big-
name" law schools mentioned in the Wall Street Journal article
that paid our school such a nice back-handed compliment (Wall
Street Journal, July 30, 1986, Thomas Petziner Jr., pg. 6).
Harvard University, for example, which is celebrating its
350th anniversary this year, was once a "no-name" school. In
fact, even three hundred years ago, fifty years after it had been in
existence, Harvard was still a "no-name" school in this part of
the country.
If one asked the person-on-the street, it is doubted that few
would even know where Yale and Cornell are located, much less
whether they have law schools. (We know they have law schools,
and thank goodness they do, or STCL would have to content
itself with defeating the lesser-knowns in our Advocacy Competi-
tions. We would not want to carry the burden of being a bully.
Frankly, it is probably much better to be known as a David than
as a Goliath.)
Finally, just out of curiosity, it would be intersting to know
just how many of those students entering Harvard three and a
half centuries ago had ever heard of the Wall Street Journal.
Oh well, it was a fun flap while it lasted.
Wiley's World
Musings on September
To most people, the new year begins in January. To the unenlightened
few, the year begins in September, the beginning of another school year.
It is the time when the perennial law student resolves to finally complete
Constitutional Law and thus graduate in May. Like lemmings to the sea,
there is a biological urge to return to class; a symbolic tilting at windmills
in hopes of grasping the worth of having spent the last twenty Septem-
bers performing the same ritualistic acts. It is blind faith, a jumping off
the academic cliff, freefalling through space with a prayer to land in
green meadows with high grades.
All the students dance and display, seeking that space that carried
them through Trusts, Wills and Estates last semester. New faces and old
friends help us spin the web upon which we balance, hoping to capture
that course, wrap it up and suck it dry before finals.
The seed of the harvest is planted now. The professor is the weather,
bringing sunshine and rain, cold and thunder. What will grow from the
seeds germinating in our conceptual selves is unknown; be it weeds or be
it blossoming trees. It is with much thought and last minute panic at drop
and add that we decide what ground we will till over the next four
months, nurturing our crops over some cold beers and aspirin. What har-
vest will be gathered in December is but hope and conjecture now. It is
time now for the racers to take their marks, to shake out those longings
for sunny days and wine coolers. It is time now to embark upon another
chapter of the journey of law school, seeking knowledge and ultimately,
a better life.
By Prof. R.J. Graving
Judgment at The Hague
It was said of one school of ancient Greek philosophy that it
disputed endlessly about the number of teeth in a horse's head without
ever opening the creature's mouth to count them. Much of the discussion
about the World Court's Judgment of June 26, 1986 in Nicaragua v.
United States is like that. Let us get it straight from the horse's mouth:
THE COURT
(1) By 12 votes to 3,
Rejects the justification of collective self-defence main-
tained by the United States of America in connection with
military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua
the subject of this case;
(2) By 12 votes to 3,
Decides that the United States of America, by training, arm-
ing, equipping, financing and supplying the contra forces or
otherwise encouraging, supporting and aiding military and
paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua, has acted,
against the Republic of Nicaragua, in breach of its obliga-
tion under customary international law not to intervene in
the affairs of another State;
(3) By 12 votes to 3,
Decides that the United States of America, by certain
attacks on Nicaraguan territory in 1983-1984, namely at-
tacks on Puerto Sandino on 13 September and 14 October
1983; an attack cr C rinto on 10 October 1983; an attack on
Potosi Naval Base on 4/5 January 1984; an attack on San
Juan del Sur on 7 March 1984; attacks on patrol boats at
Puerto Sandino on 28 and 30 March 1984; and an attack on
San Juan del Norte on 9 April 1984; and further by those
acts of intervention referred to in subparagraph (2) hereof
which involve the use of force, has acted, against the
Republic of Nicaragua, in breach of its obligation under
customary international law not to use force against another
State;
(4) By 12 votes to 3,
Decides that, by laying mines in the internal or territorial
waters of the Republic of Nicaragua during the first months
of 1984, the United States of America has acted, against the
Republic of Nicaragua, in breach of its obligations under
customary international law not to use force against another
Continued on page 10
DK.mtj
L^tvieuj
OM e
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Cunningham, Ben J. Annotations, South Texas College of Law (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 15, No. 2, Ed. 1, September/October, 1986, newspaper, 1986; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth144439/m1/2/: accessed May 7, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting South Texas College of Law.