Charles Stimson Hates Being Counterproductive

One of the blogosphere's better contributions to the body politic was drawing attention to the outrageous comments of Charles "Cully" Stimson, the Pentagon official in charge of "detainee" affairs, about the law firms who were representing Guantanamo prisoners pro bono.  Stimson said:

I think, quite honestly, when corporate C.E.O.’s see that those firms are representing the very terrorists who hit their bottom line back in 2001, those C.E.O.’s are going to make those law firms choose between representing terrorists or representing reputable firms, and I think that is going to have major play in the next few weeks. And we want to watch that play out.”

The reaction in the blogosophere and the legal community was immediate: Stimson was roundly condemned not merely for attempting to deny due process to the Guantanamo prisoners, but for attempting to destroy the very ideas of zealous representation of one's client, of the ethical obligation to perform pro bono work, and of the vital distinction between a lawyer and his client.  Framed published more posts about this particular issue than any other subject in its history; those entries are some of Framed's most-searched for essays.  Stimson ultimately resigned to spend more time with his family.

It was therefore with great interest that I noted this interview by The Talking Dog with Attorney Wesley Powell, one of the lawyers representing Guantanamo detainees pro bono:

The Talking Dog: We're a little more than a year or so after the unfortunate remarks made by former Defense Dept. official Cully Stimson. Can you tell me if the Government's periodic ostracism of pro bono habeas counsel has effected your legal practice in any way, and how your Guantanamo representations have effected your overall legal practice?

Wesley Powell: Cully Stimson, if anything, proved ultimately beneficial to habeas counsel. My firm was among those listed in the Wall Street Journal editorial and then on the radio show on which Stimson spoke. The management of my own firm went out of their way to commend me for my representations, and were very offended that this guy would try to intimidate firms into dropping these clients. There are a number of prominent Republicans in my firm and the team I work in, and they have all been very supportive and offended by this as well. So, Stimson's remarks, if anything, caused a rallying around of the habeas counsel, at least as far as I am aware. No one has had a negative word to me; my corporate clients have been very supportive and think it is cool that I am doing this work. Other than taking time that might otherwise be spent for more business development and more billable hours, this has not effected the remainder of my practice. It's one of those things-- we all make personal sacrifices to be in this profession to begin with-- taking on this kind of representation just means more of them.

Much as people love to hate lawyers, when they see their choice of counsel under assault, they tend to get very protective of those folks who bill them through the nose and by the hour.  As Digby notes, the fact that Stimson's call for a boycott of the Guantanamo firms has actually increased support for them is some powerful cause for optimism.

More on Charles Stimson:

Charles Stimson Hates America
Charles Stimson Hates Apologizing
Charles Stimson Hates Korematsu
Charles Stimson Hates General Electric
Charles Stimson Hates His Profession
Charles Stimson Hates Resigning
Charles Stimson Hates Democracy
Charles Stimson Hates Being Alone