BLS Library Blog

The 43rd anniversary of the January 30, 1973 convictions of former Nixon aides G. Gordon Liddy and James W. McCord Jr. for conspiracy, burglary and wiretapping in connection with the break-in at the Watergate hotel brings to mind the turbulent years leading to the only presidential resignation in US history. The conviction was later upheld in United States v. Liddy, 509 F. 2d 428 (D.C.Cir. 1974).

The BLS Library has an extensive collection of material related to the Watergate scandal. One item was written by a noted alumnus of Brooklyn Law School, the late Leonard Garment (Class of 1949) who later became a member of the BLS Board of Trustees and an Adjunct Professor of Law. Garment (1924 – 2013) was an attorney who served Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford in various positions from 1969 to 1976, including Counselor to the President, acting Special Counsel to Nixon for the last two years of his presidency, and U.S. Ambassador to the Third Committee at the United Nations. Born in Brooklyn, he graduated Brooklyn Law School and joined the law firm of Mudge, Stern, Baldwin, and Todd (later called Nixon, Mudge, Rose, Guthrie & Alexander). There, Garment met Nixon and then worked on his 1968 presidential campaign, later becoming part of Nixon’s White House staff as special consultant to the president. He advised the president and worked on various special projects, particularly on civil and human rights, Indian affairs, and the arts.

His 418 page book Crazy Rhythm: From Brooklyn and Jazz to Nixon’s White House, Watergate, and Beyond (Call No. E856 .G38 1997) is a fascinating autobiography of a Washington/Wall Street insider who thrived despite hard blows dealt him on more than one occasion. Garment tells how he left home early to pursue a career as a clarinet/saxophone player in jazz bands. After serving in WW II, he earned his law degree and soon became a close friend of the former vice president. An important member of the Nixon team, Garment became an all-purpose troubleshooter for the president. The tough-talking administration’s informal envoy to both US Jewry and Israel, Garment (who describes his ex-boss as operationally progressive but rhetorically retrogressive on social issues) also worked on civil-rights programs. He was untainted by Watergate, but his comments on the scandal are marked with perception and compassion. He eventually returned to New York City to serve as Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s special assistant for human rights during his stint as US ambassador to the UN, and then resumed the practice of law. The book is an engaging recollection of a free-spirited advocate who learned from his experiences close to the seats of power.

A Wall Street Journal article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court has granted a writ of certiorari to review the ruling by Judge Jed Rakoff in the case of Salman v. US, 792 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2015). Judge Rakoff, who usually sits on bench of the Southern District of New York, served as a visiting judge temporarily assigned to the Ninth Circuit and wrote the opinion in Salman, which disagreed with last year’s Second Circuit ruling in US v. Newman, 773 F. 3d 438 (2d Cir. 2014). The Newman decision overturned the insider trading convictions of former hedge-fund traders articulating a narrower definition of the crime. The issue in Salman is what constitutes insider trading in a case involving an Illinois businessman’s appeal of his conviction for making $1.2 million trading on tips about mergers from his brother-in-law, a Citigroup banker. With the grant of certiorari, the Supreme Court may now decide a key question in insider trading cases, namely what benefits corporate insiders need to receive for any information they disclose to traders to be illegal. The Justice Department warned that overturning the convictions in Newman prosecution could hinder the government’s campaign to curb insider trading on Wall Street. The Supreme Court denied certiorari in Newman.

Salman was convicted of 2013 of making investments based on confidential information he received from a family member who worked in the health care investment banking group at Citigroup Global Markets in NY. Co-defendants pleaded guilty in 2011 and were sentenced to probation. Salman was sentenced to 36 months in federal prison and ordered to pay more than $738,000 in restitution. His appeal cites the Second Circuit decision in Newman where the court ruled that prosecutors must prove that a defendant had direct knowledge of the leaker, realize that a breach of fiduciary duty occurred and know that the leaker received a personal benefit in exchange for the information. In Newman, the Second Circuit held that the evidence was insufficient to establish that the tippers received a personal benefit in exchange for the tip. The court also explained that there needed to be “proof of a meaningfully close personal relationship that generates an exchange that is objective, consequential, and represents at least a potential gain of a pecuniary or similarly valuable nature.” In other words,  the relationship should suggest a quid pro quo from the recipient.

Brooklyn Law School Library has an extensive collection of material on  insider trading, the latest of which is Insider Trading Law and Policy by Stephen Bainbridge (Call # KF1073.I5 B35 2014). The textbook is for use in law school classes on insider trading, securities regulation, or business associations. It offers a clear and direct exposition of the law and policy concerns raised by this important and high-profile area of the law. The author provides sufficient detail for a complete understanding of the subject without getting bogged down in minutiae. A second item in the BLS Library collection is  worth reading: Circle of Friends: The Massive Federal Crackdown on Insider Trading—and Why the Markets Always Work Against the Little Guy by Charles Gasparino (Call # HG4928.5 .G38 2013). It is a riveting work of narrative nonfiction, as engrossing and explosive as fictional thrillers of the finest magnitude and should serve as a wake-up call to the investing public.

The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case Fisher v. University of Texas this past December. The case centers around the use of race in admissions at the University of Texas at Austin. The University of Texas at Austin considers race as one of various factors in its undergraduate admissions process. Abigail Fisher, who is Caucasian, was rejected for admission to the University’s 2008 entering class. She sued the University and school officials, alleging that the University’s consideration of race in admissions violated the Equal Protection Clause.  Ms. Fisher contends was rejected because of her race.

This case was originally argued before the Supreme Court in 2012 and the Justices issued a narrow opinion sending the case back down to a lower court for another look.  The Supreme Court has taken the case again and will issue their opinion sometime this year.

For those of you interested in this topic, I suggest you take a look at the following books in Library collection.​

Affirmative Action and Racial Equity is a critical resource which helps the reader understand the nuances of the affirmative action legal debate and identify the challenges and potential strategies toward racial equity and inclusion moving forward.

Controversies in Affirmative Action  is an engaging and eclectic collection of essays from leading scholars on the subject, which looks at affirmative action past and present, analyzes its efficacy, its legacy, and its role in the future of the United States.

What precisely is affirmative action, and why is it fiercely championed by some and just as fiercely denounced by others? Does it signify a boon or a stigma? Or is it simply reverse discrimination? What are its benefits and costs to American society? What are the indications determining who should or should not be accorded affirmative action? When should affirmative action end, if it must? In For Discrimination, Randall Kennedy gives a concise summary of the policy.