In classroom discussions and in written assignments from students, professors often seek to impose a gender neutral approach to the discussion.  Not all CEOs are male (although most of course are), nor are all judges.  There may be an element of political correctness to the approach but it likewise recognizes that students, as lawyers, will confront plenty of judges and clients who are women and they had better start thinking in gender neutral terms, otherwise they risk causing offense. 

So we noted with interest the colloquy that took place before the DC Circuit in FEF v. PCAOB.  A panel consisting of three judges, Brett Kavanaugh, Judith Rogers, and Janice Rogers Brown, heard the case.  The following colloquy occurred between a judge on the panel and Michael Carvin, counsel for the appellants.  

• MR. CARVIN:  So when we get a new President next year who has decided he wants to change the way things are done, he is going to be absolutely powerless to do it, because he's going to be sitting there with a corporation whose terms haven't expired and who he cannot redirect in any way, even if he thinks we are damaging the economy. And the --
• THE COURT: Of whatever sex.
• MR. CARVIN: Excuse me?
• THE COURT: Of whatever sex.
• MR. CARVIN: Of whatever sex.
• THE COURT: He or she.
• MR. CARVIN: And/or race, that's entirely true.
• THE COURT: All right.

This colloquy today would be accurate since Hillary Clinton has conceded.  But at the time of the oral argument, she was very much a candidate. 

Gender neutrality in the classroom.  Gender neutrality in the courtroom.  Its a good idea. 

We have posted on the DU Corporate Governance web site most if not all of the important documents on the case, including the assorted amicus filed in the appellate case.