Fashion Dos-and-Don'ts, Brought To You By the Seventh Circuit

Fashion is always a hot topic here at Above The Law. Last year, a partner at Winston & Strawn got females’ panties in a bunch by questioning the length of their skirts. In the fall, our post on suitable interview suits generated quite the long thread.
We seldom tire of talking about short shorts and see-through blouses, and we’re not the only ones. The judges and lawyers of the Seventh Circuit weighed in on fashion faux pas at a conference in Indianapolis this past week, reports the New York Times:

The topic was first raised by a United States district court judge, Joan H. Lefkow, of the Northern District of Illinois as the panel discussed good and bad trends in courtroom practice. Judge Lefkow said some women should dress more appropriately in court. According to an article in the National Law Journal and from the accounts of others in the room, she said one lawyer had shown up for a jury trial in a velour outfit that looked for all the world as if she was “on her way home from the gym.”
While the lawyer won her case, Judge Lefkow suggested to the judges and lawyers in the room that unseemly clothing in court was the kind of issue that should be the subject of quiet conversation in law firms.

What? Winning isn’t all that matters?
Judge Lefkow’s remarks led to some not-so quiet conversation during the rest of the panel. The judges voiced their disdain for loud ties, short skirts, and other titillating attire.
Read about their opinions, and share your own, after the jump.


Apparently, law students in moot court competitions are especially clueless when it comes to the laws of fashion. The male judges were excited to vent about inappropriate dress by female legal types:

Judge Michael P. McCuskey, chief judge of the federal district court for the Central District of Illinois and a member of the panel, said that at moot court competitions in law schools, he had seen participants wearing “skirts so short that there’s no way they can sit down, and blouses so short there’s no way the judges wouldn’t look.”

Short blouses? What does that mean? Were those moot court competitors baring their midriffs, or did Judge McCuskey get so flustered by the exposure talk that he said short when he meant low-cut?
Males didn’t bare the brunt of the criticism, though if you own a tie with smiley faces, don’t sport it in court:

A member of the audience, Judge A. Benjamin Goldgar of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois, joined the minicolloquy, saying that titillating attire was “a huge problem” and a distraction in the courtroom as well, and that “you don’t dress in court as if it’s Saturday night and you’re going out to a party.” In the spirit of sexual equity, Judge Goldgar added that he was also unhappy with lawyers who sport loud ties, some with designs like smiley faces.

Sponsored

The NYT was as amused by the judges’ remarks as by lawyers responding to them in comments around the Web:

At the Web site of the American Bar Association’s ABA Journal, one woman parodied the male judges’ comments: “I’m sorry, Sugar, I’d love to listen to what you’re saying, but I have a penis. As such, I am only able to use one sense at a time.”
She added: “What garbage! Poor men can’t control themselves, so women have to respond.”
That sentiment was countered by a comment from a man: “Yes, please ladies, by all means use your sexuality to get what you want (after all, that’s the only excuse you have for dressing in the manner described in this article).”

We invite our male and female readers to battle it out in the comments over the weekend if you’re unlucky enough to be working. And if you are one of the poor fools working this holiday, you may want to check out our open thread on what to wear to the office on the weekends.
At a Symposium of Judges, a Debate on the Laws of Fashion [New York Times]
Earlier: Time for Winston Women To Go Burqa Shopping?

Sponsored