The Ethics of Implementation: Institutional Remedies and the Lawyer's Role

The issue addressed in this article is whether and to what extent a lawyer has an ethical responsibility to pursue implementation of the remedy in institutional reform litigation. Institutional reform litigation refers to cases in which an individual or class of individuals sues a large organization in order to vindicate constitutional or statutory rights. The types of cases with which this article is concerned are the "public law" type, such as school desegregation, prisoners' rights and patients' rights cases, although included under the rubric of institutional reform can be, inter alia, antitrust, reapportionment and bankruptcy cases. The implementation stage of institutional reform litigation arises after an individual or class of individuals prevails at the liability stage, or pursuant to a settlement, and a court orders the defendant organization to change in order to vindicate the plaintiffs' rights. At that point, the defendant organization, whether it be a prison, mental hospital or school district, usually has the burden of implementing the order. One conclusion drawn is that the ethical duty of the lawyer must always be consistent with the lawyer's "special responsibility for the quality of justice."

Two and a Half Cheers for the Midwestern Bourgeoisie: Role of the Virtues in Tempering Business Decisions

A recent book (The Bourgeois Virtues: Ethics for an Age of Commerce, D. N. McCloskey), raises the matter of the role of the virtues in business and economic choice, arguing that capitalism can indeed, be virtuous or at least better than the alternative(s). This argument is especially timely in light of the apparent excesses on Wall Street and in some banking/financial institutions. Excessive greed and often the lack of business ethics contributed in substantive ways to the financial crisis and near economic meltdown we have been experiencing. As McCloskey, (2006, pp. 1-2) argues (in setting the stage for the complex argument made in this 616-page book!): “The book … is directed toward you who are suspicious of the phrase ‘bourgeois virtues,’ pretty sure that it is a contradiction in terms. And the book is directed, with less optimism about changing their minds, toward you who think the phrase is worse: a lie. ‘Bourgeois virtues’ is neither. The claim here is that modern capitalism does not need to be offset to be good. Capitalism can on the contrary be virtuous. In a fallen world bourgeois life is not perfect. But it’s better than any available alternative. American capitalism needs to be inspirited, moralized, completed. Two and a half cheers for the Midwestern bourgeoisie (middle-class, small business owners…. yet)… Many a businessman is an ethical shell or worse. Even the virtues of the bourgeoisie, … do not lead straight to heaven.”