Did Laurence Tribe Sell Out?
“The role of advocate calls for constructing persuasive arguments that will generate favorable outcomes for clients. This is very different from the function [academics] perform as scholars.” In this manner, working for a client, over the long term, can prove corrupting, not just because of the money but because of natural human loyalty.
.. It may come as a surprise for those who regard Tribe as a progressive hero to learn that he also began to devote much of his time and effort to working for large corporate clients. In particular, Tribe developed a lucrative practice often premised on invoking his clients’ constitutional rights as “corporate persons” to try and avoid federal and state regulations.
.. In that sense, the current condemnation of Tribe can be seen as part of a larger progressive backlash against the use of the Bill of Rights to serve corporate interests.
.. When I asked Tribe whether he thought that his practice might have deviated too far toward the service of private interests, he responded, “My litigation practice over the past three decades includes only cases in which I thought I was advancing an important public interest through my advocacy.” Tribe, in other words, isn’t saying that his work is justified just because legal scholars should be given some latitude for paid work. He’s arguing, instead, that his work is part of his academic mission.
.. But for work to be considered in the public interest, it ought to be, at least in part, on behalf of clients who are in some way underrepresented, or present views that would not be heard. This is true of some of Tribe’s work; but in much of it he is empowering the powerful.