School navigation

Advocate Magazine

Commencement 2011

2011 Graduates

Juris Doctor
  • Mubarak F. Abdur Raheem
  • Matthew R. Abts1
  • Adam Tyler Adkin
  • Kelvin Dana Adkins-Heljeson
  • Shidon Aflatooni
  • Anas Saad Albanyan
  • Scott James Aldworth
  • Elliot Randal Alford
  • Mika’il Abdullah Ali2
  • Salahudin E. Ali
  • Cary Lee Allen
  • Joshua Bishop Allen1
  • Ali Hassan Altoukhi2
  • Dina Amira Anani1
  • D. Adam Anderson
  • Mark Allen Apker1
  • Meredith Theresa Armstrong
  • Corina Maria Armstrong-Turner
  • Holly C. Ashkannejhad
  • Vicky Kaur Bajwa
  • Jeff Thomas Balenton2
  • Scott Nelson Barbur
  • Michael Edward Barker2
  • Brenda Susan Barnhill
  • Emerald Liane Beanland
  • Joey Michael Beck
  • Gary Alan Becker Jr.1
  • Erin Elizabeth Bennett
  • Valerie Marie Berg
  • Todd H. Berinstein
  • Emma Ellis Berman
  • Brent Davis Bielski
  • Jeevan Jyoti Bihari1
  • Keir Evan Boettcher
  • Michael Walter Botthof
  • Ian Michael Brown
  • Lindsey Jo Burrows
  • Brenden G. Byard
  • Amanda J. Caffall
  • Shannon K. Calt
  • Cristen Nicole Campbell
  • Benjamin Louis Cecil2
  • Bin Chen1
  • Patricia Ann Clements
  • Bethany Lynne Coleman
  • Catherine Elizabeth Covelli2
  • Jeremy S. Craft1
  • Leland John Daggett
  • Joshua Benjamin Dailey
  • Alexis Lee Davidson
  • Elizabeth Boucher Dawson
  • Adrianne Marie DelCotto
  • Daniel J. DiVittorio1
  • Suzanne Marie Dolberg
  • Matthew Tyler Dominguez
  • Bryan M. Donahue2
  • Erika A. Doot
  • Jacob Cole Egler
  • Terrence Clifford Ehlers1
  • Matthew Jeremy Erdman
  • Robert Glen Erickson
  • Jennifer Jill Esmay
  • Adele Catherine Ewert
  • Ryan Andexer Farmer
  • John Robert Farra
  • Frances Haley Farrar
  • Erin C. Fauerbach
  • Leora Fire
  • Jessica Ann Flint
  • Nathan W. Forbes
  • Alexandria Lee Forester2
  • Dewey Fowler Jr.
  • Ivy Newman Fredrickson
  • Todd Lawrence Friedman
  • Edward T. Fu
  • Cynthia J. Gaddis
  • Tara Colleen Gallagher
  • Eleanor S. Garretson
  • Marcel Joseph Gesmundo
  • Natalie Jane Giller
  • Robert Lowery Gillette II
  • Scott Michael Gitler
  • Raymond John Gradale
  • Kathryn Grado
  • Tanya Marie Green2
  • Virginia Grace Griffin
  • Ian James Griswold1
  • Alexander L. Gund
  • Christine Sabile Almerido Gunn1
  • Nickholas Francis Harrell
  • Nathaniel Jacob Hausman
  • Terence Michael Hegarty
  • Stefan Onno Heller
  • Nicholas James Hennemann1
  • Jennifer M. Herbst
  • Paul A.C. Higa
  • Erin Y. Hisano
  • Theodore Joon Hong
  • Michael Hsu
  • Todd Tomita Jackson
  • Jordan Thomas Jacobson
  • Lisa Janicki2
  • Joshua Paul Soper
  • Laura Jane Stadum
  • Jennifer R. Stocks2
  • Joel J. Strong2
  • David James Susens
  • Randall Aaron Szabo2
  • William Patrick Taaffe
  • Michael Yutaka Tabata2
  • Siu-wah Tam
  • Michael James Tanner
  • Megan Elizabeth Telleria
  • Samuel Damon Terpstra2
  • Joseph Dominic Terrenzio
  • Daniel Thomas Toulson
  • Roberta Susan Traverso/Estes
  • Christopher Joseph Truxler
  • Amy Luisa van Saun
  • Kimberly Lynne Villanueva
  • Ella Moran Wagener
  • Jason Fielding Walker
  • Zachary Blay Walker
  • Erin Aspen Walkowiak
  • Lauren Wallace
  • Chenyu Wang
  • Andrew T. Weiner
  • Alexis K. Westenhaver-Loretz
  • Claire S. Westenhaver-Loretz
  • Timothy J. White
  • Tara K. Williams
  • Christopher Matthew Wisdom
  • Tiffany H. Wong
  • Elektra Bianca Blue Yao
  • Sharon Arianna Sanam Yasrobi
  • Binah B. Yeung
  • James E. Yocom1
  • Zachary James Zerzan
Master of Laws Environmental and Natural Resources Law
  • Tyler Todd Browning
  • Ji-Yoon Choi
  • Whitney Connolly Ferrell
  • Logan Lawrence Hollers
  • Matthew Brian Kurek
  • Johanna Lillian Lathrop
  • Cathy Damee Lee
  • Platinasoka Lin1
  • Cathy Morales
  • Mary H. Mulhearn
  • Leslie Ann Rowley
  • Mark McKelvey Smith
  • Emily Beth Vann
  • Kenneth Robert Webster
  • Jotaro Yokoyama1
Joint Juris Doctor and Master of Laws
  • Gary Alan Becker Jr.2
  • Elizabeth Hunter Zultoski

1 December 2010 graduate.

2 Student had not completed requirements for graduation by commencement date.

Cornelius Honor Society Induction

Twenty-eight graduates were inducted into the Cornelius Honor Society on May 27 during a special reception held at Frank Manor House. Members are selected by the faculty based on distinguished scholarship, leadership, and contribution to the Law School community. The society is named in honor of Dorothy L. Cornelius, who served the Law School for 20 years.

2011 Inductees

  • Adam Tyler Adkin
  • Gary Alan Becker Jr.
  • Amanda J. Caffall
  • Elizabeth Boucher Dawson
  • Erika A. Doot
  • Dewey Fowler Jr.
  • Tara Colleen Gallagher
  • Eleanor S. Garretson
  • Marcel Joseph Gesmundo
  • Stefan Onno Heller
  • Erin Y. Hisano
  • Michael Hsu
  • Jessica Su Johnson
  • Mark Allen Jordan
  • John Travis Krallman
  • Maiya Elaine LaMar
  • Hala H. Lewis
  • Elizabeth Ann Lieberknecht
  • Michael Liu
  • Ashley Adrienne DeBoard MacKenzie
  • Caitlin Ann Overland
  • Joshua Paul Soper
  • Samuel Damon Terpstra
  • Joseph Dominic Terrenzio
  • Roberta Susan Traverso/Estes
  • Amy Luisa van Saun
  • Chenyu Wang
  • Binah B. Yeung

Doug Newell Honored With Leo Levenson Award

The graduating class awarded the 2011 Leo Levenson Award for Teaching Excellence to Doug Newell, Edmund O. Belsheim Professor of Law.

“This is my sixth Levenson,” says Newell. “I was very pleased to receive it. The class was one of my all-time favorites—smart, funny, and fun to teach. I love my job and the award was a really nice added benefit.”

Leo Levenson (1903-81) was a distinguished attorney and member of the Oregon State Bar for 56 years. He was also a highly respected instructor at the Law School for many years. The award in his name is presented annually to a faculty member selected by the graduating class.

A Discussion With Stephen L. Carter

Stephen L. Carter, Yale Law School professor and the author of several influential books on religion, culture, and politics, received an honorary degree and spoke at Lewis & Clark Law School commencement exercises in June.

One member of the Lewis & Clark community who was especially interested in Carter’s visit and remarks was Tom Krattenmaker, associate vice president for public affairs and communications. In addition to his work at Lewis & Clark, Krattenmaker is a writer and columnist specializing in religion in public life and a regular op-ed contributor to USA Today, serving on the newspaper’s board of contributors. Krattenmaker interviewed Carter following his visit to Lewis & Clark.

Stephen L. Carter

Tom Krattenmaker: Professor Carter, given the role your work has played in my own writing life, it’s a real pleasure to speak with you. Your book God’s Name in Vain played a big part in my process of becoming a religion writer and a commentator on the role of religion in our politics and public life. It motivated me and crystallized things for me like no other book

I can think of. Thank you for coming to Lewis & Clark.

Stephen L. Carter: It was really my pleasure. I have known Dean Klonoff since we were students together at Yale Law School, and I was happy to accept when he asked me to come to commencement.

Krattenmaker: Listening to your address, I was particularly struck by the points you made about the way we engage with the people with whom we disagree. You expressed worry that your generation has perhaps not done enough to model the idea that politics at its heart should not be about winning, but about the process of democracy. Why do you feel it is important and necessary that we recommit to that ideal?

Carter: The point of democracy presupposes that people can be trusted with self-government. If they cannot, then we should not have democracy, and we should not have rights and freedoms either. But if we think people can be trusted, then we ought to treat them that way, and we ought to make serious arguments to try to persuade each other—and also listen to each other. If we behave in a way that suggests that the other side never really has a serious point to make, that the other side is composed of knaves or fools, then we are not serious about democracy.

If we are going to have a serious democracy, we cannot think that it’s only about winning. I tell my students that winning is not a virtue except in war. In the rest of life process is the great virtue, I believe, and so are fairness, equality, and justice, which have to do with process. When we treat politics as though all that matters is winning, we are treating it like war, which means we are treating those with whom we disagree as the enemy.

Krattenmaker: In your commencement address, you cited a special responsibility that lawyers have in this matter. Would you please elaborate?

Carter: I often say that we train law students to listen with their mouths.… The way law school is structured, a lot of what we are training students to do is simply to pay attention to the opponent’s arguments in order to find the flaws and pick the arguments apart. That is an important skill; advocacy has its place, particularly in the courtroom or in the negotiation. But in politics, mere advocacy is not enough.

As we know, lawyers as a class are respected in society, and we have a lot of influence. But it’s more than that. We are the ones who tend to be best trained in argument. We are the ones who know how to argue. The question is, do we also know when to argue?

Krattenmaker: Why do you feel this commitment to democracy, to a healthy democratic process, has taken a back seat to winning in our politics? Sometimes I wonder if the more vivid presence of religion in our politics might play a part in this—whether religious arguments have sort of upped the cosmic ante, have turned many issues into matters of good and evil. Does the strong presence of religion discredit the notion of compromise that is such a necessary part of politics?

Carter: I don’t know that I would blame religion in politics for that. Religion in politics has a lot of flaws, but I don’t think that destroying politics is one of them. I think the harm of religion in politics is largely harm to religion, not to politics.

I think it is disrespect for those who disagree with us that causes us to believe the stakes are so high. That’s one of the reasons why in every election advocates for both sides are always saying it’s the most important election in years, a history-making election!

Krattenmaker: Politicians say this to mobilize people and get them to vote a certain way.

Carter: As far as I can tell, these claims have almost always been nonsense. You can make the argument that 1860 was a history-making election, maybe 1864. Other than that, they are just elections.

Elections have taken on this exaggerated importance precisely because we have trained ourselves to believe that people on the other side are evil, that our side has to win the election because otherwise the evil people will take over. Well, I just do not believe that, and I don’t think you can run a democracy that way. What you have then is not a democracy, but a deeply reactionary society that happens to hold elections.

Krattenmaker: That’s a powerful statement. It rings true for me, though, when I think about an online dialog I’m having with an old high school friend who happens to hold much different political views than I do. In her view, compromise is dishonorable. To her thinking, the other side—my side, as it turns out—is bent on destroying the country.

Carter: There is great truth at the heart of liberalism and great truth at the heart of conservatism.… There are a lot of different political points of view that have deep and abiding truths from which all of us can learn. But when we treat elections as these Manichean contests, when we act as though we must win lest there be evil afoot in the world, then we lose sight of the possibility of learning from values that compete with our own.

Krattenmaker: The other thing I notice again and again in the political rhetoric is this notion that if we elect a certain set of candidates, we are going to fundamentally change America. I guess I can see the tactical reasons for this. You get people motivated to vote, and to vote a particular way.

Carter: The late Daniel Moynihan made a really good point when he said that culture is more important than government. I think that remains true. Certainly, politics can nudge culture in one direction or another. But elections do not change America, by and large.

Krattenmaker: In God’s Name in Vain you write about a fascinating figure named Fannie Lou Hamer, an African American woman who intersected in a revealing way with the Democratic National Convention in 1964. Those passages still stick in my memory—how little concerned she was for status and power, how unwilling she was to participate in the wheeling and dealing that go on in politics. This devoutly Christian woman stood firm on the principle of racial justice, which to her was a deeply religious principle. She seems to exemplify the idea of prophetic religious expression in the political arena. Can you think of more recent examples of this?

Carter: Not since the civil rights movement, and I will tell you why. It has to do with the way politics have changed. If you look at Fannie Lou Hammer’s ministry, what is striking about it is the willingness to lose. It was about bringing what she saw as the voice for Christ into the debate, and if she won, she won, and if she lost, she lost. She wanted nothing for herself. She was totally prepared to go back and be the former sharecropper she has been before. That is precisely what made her ministry prophetic, the willingness to be defeated.

Nowadays, it is my experience that people of faith who get heavily involved in politics, whether on the left, right, or in between, really become parts of political machines.

In the end, it becomes part of helping someone win. That is where C.S. Lewis’ caution from 60 years ago becomes so important, when he warned Christians that if they edit their ministry to fit the needs of the election, then their ministry ceases to be Christian…. Your faith becomes impure and compromised because of what you have to do in order to win and, indeed, you become concerned mostly about victory.

I am skeptical that politics can ever really call us to our better selves. People tend to look to political leaders to make us noble and I just don’t think that is realistic…. Let me give you an example of what I mean. Consider attack ads. All of us say we hate them and wish they would stop, but the only way they will ever stop is if voters decide to vote against candidates who run attack ads.

Krattenmaker: If we don’t want this behavior, we might need to vote against people who engage in these tactics—someone we would otherwise support. Is that what you’re suggesting?

Carter: If we will not make that sacrifice, then I think we are silly expecting nobility from politics. We ourselves are encouraging ignobility.

Krattenmaker: Was there a time in our politics when we had our sights set not principally on winning, but on a healthy democratic process?

Carter: I don’t know. Certainly, I am not claiming there was once a golden age. I am claiming that the current age is very dangerous for democracy, and if we go too far down this road I am not sure we will be able to turn away. 

Share this story on

Advocate Magazine

Contact Us