Operation Protect and Defend Completes Successful First Year
By Christopher Krueger - Photos by Mary Reich Photography

The Law Day dinner celebration of Operation Protect and Defend culminated an effort by a group of lawyers and judges to establish a program to educate high school students about our Constitution and American history.

The program, officially known as "Operation Protect and Defend -- Lawyers and Judges Committed to Civic Education in the Public Schools," kicked off as a pilot program during the spring of 2003. In its first year, the program consisted of a lecture in March, an essay contest called the Story of America, and the Dialogue on America -- visits to classrooms by teams teachers of lawyers and judges during the months of April and May.

The response to the program exceeded organizers' expectations. The essay contest received nearly 300 essays from students. The lecture by author Mark Curriden was attended by approximately 600 students. Forty-five lawyers and 31 judges from the federal and state courts visited 37 government classes for Dialogue on America sessions, and a sizeable number of lawyers and judges could not participate when the number of volunteers significantly exceeded the number of classroom spots.

"Frankly, I think we underestimated the remarkable response of both lawyers and judges," said U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr. "Obviously, that portends great things for the future."

Identifying A Need For Civic Education

The initial impetus for Operation Protect and Defend came from Judge Damrell. In April 2002, Judge Damrell gave a speech in the United States Courthouse in which he cited the statistics showing that a significant percentage of high school and college students lack a basic understanding of the Constitution and American government.

A small ad hoc committee of judges and lawyers began meeting to seek ways to address this disturbing trend. The committee was guided by the belief that lawyers and judges, who take an oath to "protect and defend" the Constitution of the United States as a condition of bar admission, have a special responsibility to educate future voters and jurors. The ad hoc, which included Judge Damrell, U.S. District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., Third District Court of Appeal Presiding Justice Arthur Scotland, U.S Magistrate Judge Kim Mueller, Joseph Genshlea of Weintraub, Genshlea, Chediak, and Sproul, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Robin Taylor, began consulting with school superintendents, principals, teachers and students.

The ad hoc committee identified programs that could be implemented in the program's first year. The committee sought and received sponsorship from the Sacramento County Bar Association and the Federal Bar Association. In the fall of 2002, the members of the ad hoc committee were joined by representatives of various bar associations to form a 28-member steering committee. A teacher advisory committee, consisting of teachers from the Sacramento and San Juan Unified School Districts, was also formed to provide the steering committee with educational expertise in developing programs.

Telling A Compelling Story

From the beginning, Operation Protect and Defend sought to target average high school students rather than students in honors or advanced civics or history programs. The committee's rationale was that these students were more likely to benefit from additional programs related to civics and government. The remaining question however, was what the basis of the curriculum would be.
Toward the end of 2002, the steering committee decided to use the story contained in Curriden's book, Contempt of Court: The Turn-of-the-Century Lynching that Launched a Hundred Years of Federalism, as the basis for its pilot program. Published in 1999, Contempt of Court recounts the story of Ed Johnson, an illiterate black man who was arrested in 1906 in Chattanooga, Tennessee for the rape of a young white woman, Nevada Taylor.

As explained in Curriden's book, reports of the crime deeply inflamed the white citizens of Chattanooga. Although Taylor initially stated that she did not know whether her attacker was white or black and then stated that she believed that he was black, one of the city's newspapers immediately declared that the crime was perpetrated by a "Negro brute." The night that Johnson was arrested, a mob unsuccessfully attempted to storm the jail in order to lynch Johnson.

The response of the trial judge to the passions in the community was to order that the trial be held immediately and to refuse requests for a continuance. As a result, a jury from which blacks had been excluded convicted Johnson a mere 17 days after the crime had been reported. As recounted by Curriden, a lynch mob atmosphere pervaded the trial. On the third day of trial, after hearing testimony from the victim, one juror attempted to rush toward the defendant, yelling, "If I could only get at him, I'd tear his heart out right now." That juror remained on the jury. The trial judge sentenced Johnson to hang.

After trial, Johnson's cause was taken up by two African American lawyers, Noah Parden and Styles Hutchins. They filed a writ of habeas corpus in the federal district court, which was denied. Ultimately, Parden traveled to Washington, D.C., for an appointment with Justice John Marshall Harlan, who had famously dissented from the Supreme Court's decision in Plessy v. Ferguson that sanctioned racial segregation. Parden described the facts of Johnson's trial. After meeting with the other justices in a special Sunday morning session, Justice Harlan sent a telegram to Chattanooga ordering a stay of execution.

The response to Justice Harlan's order in Chattanooga was swift. A mob stormed the jail and took Johnson to a nearby bridge where they lynched him.

Evidence later showed that Sheriff Joseph Shipp had given all but one of his deputies the night off on the date of the lynching even though he had heard rumors that a lynching would be attempted. Six men, including Shipp, were subsequently tried and convicted of contempt of the Supreme Court's order.

Involving Teachers In The Process

With Johnson's story as a focus, the steering committee devised several educational programs. Led by McClatchy High School Teacher Ellen Wong, the teacher advisory committee devised a three-day lesson plan based on Johnson's story. The materials, including excerpts from the book and from the Supreme Court opinion in United States v. Shipp, were distributed to seven local high schools.

The distribution of the materials was followed by Curriden's lecture, the essay contest, and the Dialogue on America classroom visits.

Several teacher participants commented that they particularly appreciated the program's consultation of educators in devising the program.

"Public education is under assault from every angle," said Rio Americano teacher Sharon Gillum, a member of the teacher advisory committee. "We are under assault from the media. We have students say, 'If you knew anything you'd make more money.' To have another profession say, 'We have a goal of assisting you, how to we do that?' instead of wagging a finger at you, is refreshing."
Wong said that working with members of the legal profession was an interesting. "I think there's some real value in interacting with people in a different profession."

Were the Kids Affected?

Did the program make a difference to its target audience -- the high school seniors? Program organizers believe that hearing the story of Contempt of Court did get kids thinking about the importance of our Constitution and justice system.

Jean McEvoy, a steering committee member who screened the student essays, said she was shocked by the emotions displayed in addressing the topic. "The depth of these kids' thinking about discrimination, how they have experienced it in their own lives and how they've dealt with it showed me these kids do give a damn."

Judge Damrell said he saw "a lot of passion in the essays, a lot of personal feelings expressed. You could tell the students were addressing their own or their families' encounters with the justice system and society in general. You saw kids beginning to express an understanding of what this country is about."

Passion was also evident at Curriden's lecture. During the question-and-answer session, one young woman asked Curriden a question that was both perceptive and a bit cynical.

"In reading the excerpt (from the Supreme Court's decision), it seems as though the Supreme Court was more upset by the fact that they were disobeyed rather than the fact that a man was killed in cold blood," the student said. "Would it be fair to assume this?"

Curriden replied that, while the justices of the Supreme Court were outraged by the lynching of Ed Johnson, they were prompted to prosecute the contempt action by the defiance by the Chattanooga mob.

Looking Toward The Future

Robin Taylor, who served as the steering committee's coordinator and guiding force, said she was impressed by the number of lawyers and judges who worked together to make the pilot year of Operation Protect and Defend a success. Involving representatives of numerous bar associations, sections and affiliates, in a shared project also helps the local bar as a whole network together better, she said.

Taylor said that Operation Protect and Defend intends to expand its programs to more schools in spring 2004. There has also been a suggestion that the program consider initiating a program for eighth graders, although a decision has not yet been made.

At the same time as it expands locally, the program is also being expanded nationwide, Judge Damrell said. The Committee on Civic Education of he United States Judicial Conference has selected Operation Protect and Defend as one of five programs to be distributed to circuits across the country.