Professor James Coleman attended Harvard University for undergrad and received his J.D. from Columbia University in 1974. A native of Charlotte, North Carolina, Professor Coleman’s experience includes a judicial clerkship and sixteen years in private practice before becoming a full-time professor. As a partner in a large law firm he specialized in federal court and administrative litigation. He also represented criminal defendants in capital collateral proceedings. Professor Coleman’s other accomplishments are extensive and can be found at the law school’s website.
JJ: Favorite North Carolina restaurant:
JC: Magnolia Grill.
JJ: What is your favorite Holiday and why?
JC: Christmas, because of the presents.
JJ: What is your favorite professional sports team?
JC: The Yankees.
JJ: What is your favorite part about being a professor?
JC: Working with the students and watching them develop at law school and throughout their early careers.
JJ: If you could change anything about the criminal justice system, what would it be?
JC: I believe a lot of the problems stem from attorneys being overwhelmed by the number of cases they have and there being no good system for identifying the cases that deserve a lot of attention from those that do not. In effect they approach all cases the same, and the result is that errors are made, often unintentional, but that nonetheless have catastrophic consequences for a defendant. Innocent people are sometimes convicted, and guilty people are sometimes convicted and sentenced beyond what he or she should be, particularly in capital cases.
JJ: Growing up, who was the most influential person in your life?
JC: Beyond my parents, my guidance counselor Margarie Belton because she saw a great deal of potential in me and pushed me to excel.
JJ: Do you have any thoughts on the BigLaw v. Public Interest law debate with respect to pro bono?
JC: I think it’s a false debate. I think you can work in the public interest at a law firm, at a public interest organization, or at a government job. Further, I think it’s important to work in the public interest as a lawyer because part of what it means to be a lawyer is that we are trustees of our system of justice, and the rule of law, and that has implications that are broader than any particular job we might be holding.
JJ: Some people might criticize your representation of Ted Bundy, what do you say to such critics?
JC: Our criminal justice system is not simply about figuring out who committed a crime, it’s also about convicting people fairly. The problem with the position of choosing not to represent people such as Ted Bundy is that there’s no standard by which you can determine who deserves a fair trial. Our system is predicated on the notion that every defendant deserves a fair trial. In fact, in cases like Ted Bundy’s due process is especially important because that is when the court, the jury, and the public are most likely to take short cuts and not play by the rules because they feel they already know he’s guilty. The problem with that approach is that in the case of the next alleged serial killer, who may be innocent, they will approach the trial in the same manner. I had no qualms about representing Ted Bundy, and I am proud of having represented him.
JJ: You were substantially involved with the Duke Lacrosse case, what are some thoughts you have?
JC: I believe it was a huge miscarriage of justice for the three Duke students. And now, I believe that the claimed students’ supporters who are directing their bitterness against Duke, President Brodhead, and diversity are misguided. Such criticisms have nothing to do with what contributed to the miscarriage of justice, and it’s unfortunate because I think what it means is that we are not learning the lesson that the system can treat anyone unfairly. Attention is being taken away from learning lessons and correcting problems with the system, and is instead being focused on issues that divide people into camps. Such people could have been constructively talking to one another, but they are now merely shouting at each other over issues that have nothing to do with the real problems surrounding the Lacrosse case.
JJ: Both you and your wife are prominent Duke law professors, how many hours a day do you spend discussing the law at home?
JC: Actually, we talk a lot about the law. But she can tell you that when I get home all I really want to do is watch movies on television.
JJ: Obviously race relations in the United States have come a long way. However, race is clearly an issue in all aspects of U.S. law today. What are some of your thoughts regarding race and the law?
JC: I believe it’s similar to the Lacrosse case in that we spend a lot of time focused on the wrong issues. One example is the debate over affirmative action. Without affirmative action I do not think we would be admitting a significant number of minority students in our top universities, and that’s a problem. I believe the elite universities have a moral obligation because it is their role to train leaders from as many groups as they can in this country. The university is the best place to learn to live together, to debate difficult issues, because there is a certain safety found here that does not exist outside of the university. The survival and success of our democracy depends on correcting how we minimize issues of race. We need to address how to overcome the obstacles that have been put in place as a result of our past, so that we can jointly think about the problems that confront us. Also, I believe the issue of race sometimes prevents us from talking honestly about issues, and in order to talk honestly about race you have to trust one another. I believe that the university is a primary place where people from all walks of life can develop that trust, which will enable them to competently deal with sensitive subjects like race.
JJ: What advice do you have for current law students?
JC: Identify what you consider to be important principles underlying justice and practice law according to those principles.
The Devil’s Advocate wishes to thank Professor James Coleman for taking the time to participate in this interview. Also, the opening biography is almost entirely lifted from Duke Law’s faculty profile for James Coleman. Question, comments? Jeffrey.jones@law.duke.edu
