Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age
By Alan Dershowitz
(Little Brown & Co., 2002 — 550 pages)
Reviewed by Ina R. Bort
From the New York Law Journal
April 24, 2002
"Why are there so many Jewish lawyers?" No, that's not a line from The Producers. It's the title of chapter 37 of Alan Dershowitz's most recent publication, Shouting Fire. I use "most recent" somewhat liberally, as most of the writings compiled in this hefty tome have appeared at least once before. Dershowitz wants to make sure that those of us not fortunate enough to have been subscribing to periodicals like the Chronicle of Higher Education or the Jerusalem Report in the 80's and 90's don't miss out on his valuable contributions thereto.
The aforementioned chapter 37 happens to be, in my opinion, the most interesting of the 50-plus others, particularly when read in tandem with the chapter that follows, entitled, simply enough, "O.J. Simpson." Perhaps this is because I happen to be one of the "so many." Or perhaps it is because these chapters provide a particularly unobstructed view into the mind of Alan Dershowitz.
In case you were wondering, the reason why there are so many Jewish lawyers is because Jews, says Dershowitz, are contentious by nature. They've been that way since the beginning. Abraham, the first Jew on record (aside from Madeleine Albright), began arguing with God almost immediately after his conversion. The Talmud is "the first preserved record of legal arguments," and rabbis have long served as advocates and arbiters of disputes. Given this long history, it's not surprising that "today's Jews — who make up 2 percent of the population of the United States and a fraction of a percent worldwide — have become a dominant force in the legal profession." Particularly impressive is Jews' ascendancy in a profession long haunted by anti-Semitism and exclusionary law firms. Within a very short period of time, "Jews had moved from pariahs to partners."
At the same time, Dershowitz claims, Jews' position at the pinnacle of the profession is a precarious one. Not because fewer Jews are becoming lawyers, but because American Jews are vanishing altogether, due to low birthrates and intermarriage.
That being said, says Dershowitz, the disappearance of the Jewish lawyers will not translate into the disappearance of their impact on the practice of law. Dershowitz ascribes many of the positive developments in the practice to Jews, developments that are here to stay (hopefully). With "the influx of Jews into the legal mainstream over the past 30 years," the profession has become "less conservative" and more open to "the integration of other excluded groups," like women and Hispanics. And thanks to Jews like Steven Brill (who knew?), the law has become "more of a 'business' and less of a 'learned profession'" which, according to Dershowitz, has "made things more honest." (How exactly Brill's Court TV and The American Lawyer have made the profession more honest is not explained).
Dershowitz also explains that Jews' empathy for those in trouble has led to their disproportionate involvement in "pro-bono representation, cause-oriented litigation, government service, human rights and civil rights work, constitutional protection, and other public-interest activities."
Turning from the general to the specific, as is his wont, Dershowitz then explains why he is the consummate Jewish lawyer. "When I confront a personal or professional problem. I consult Jewish sources as well as contemporary American sources." And his "Jewish views help [him] challenge conventional wisdom." Indeed, he became a criminal defense lawyer, at least in part, because Jews are "taught from the earliest age that [they] . . . must always remember that they were persecuted, and that [they] . . . must stand up for those who now face prosecution." (The fact that Dershowitz's law practice appears to specialize on "those [billionaires] who now face prosecution" is not addressed).
This is all well and good, but the warm feelings that emanate from Chapter 37 sadly dissipate by the bottom of Chapter 38's first page.
That chapter deals a rather significant blow to Dershowitz's assertions regarding Jews' compassion and ability to empathize with the downtrodden. Rather than use the opportunity in this book, purportedly about civil rights, to even try to discuss his representation of O.J. Simpson as an outgrowth of his life-long commitment to vindicating the civil rights of his client-defendants, even those whose guilt seems all but certain, Dershowitz wastes the chapter by re-printing an article he wrote in 1995 — at the height, apparently, of his insecurities concerning his role on the "dream team."
The Jews profiled in the O.J. Simpson chapter are the antithesis of compassionate souls. They are the petty authors of reams of hate mail sent to Dershowitz on account of his representation of a man accused of killing a Jew (Ronald Goldman). Dershowitz takes the opportunity to reprint some of this hate mail verbatim - letters which, among other things, refer to him as a "lying Jew," profiting from his representation of a "Jew-killer" who should only develop "terminal cancer or even better, ... [be] a victim of a vicious crime." Dershowitz describes how much of the mail focused on his supposed greediness, a "lawyer who [would] sell his own mother — if the price is right."
It's not at all clear what Dershowitz is trying to accomplish by regaling us with these letters. He certainly isn't advancing the Jewish cause by doing so — a cause that he seemed to embrace wholeheartedly in Chapter 37, not to mention in many of his other writings. Here, however, he paints a picture of Jews as people at least as small-minded, self-involved, and insular as the anti-Semites who once tried to bar them from the legal profession. If Dershowitz wants to champion his own decisions to represent O.J., (which he does: "My job is to advocate zealously, within the rules. That is what I did in the Simpson case, and I am proud of my work.") he should do so affirmatively and with dignity, and without demonizing those who criticize him for having made that choice.
Besides, there are many — Jews and non-Jews alike — who criticize Dershowitz for having joined the "dream team." I find it hard to believe that Dershowitz did not receive hate mail from non-Jewish correspondents as well. By omitting these letters from his discussion altogether, Dershowitz paints an unfairly imbalanced picture, and exudes an attitude of superiority over his fellow tribesmen who haven't yet learned what it means to be a "real Jew" — to be, that is, an unwavering devotee of Alan Dershowitz's.
