Roy Graham: Let’s help extravagance make the most of its moment

Lawyers know well how a single precedent can prompt change.

Every so often the U.S. Supreme Court lays down the law in a powerful way—abortion, gay marriage, “separate but equal” and its reversal, gun rights, to name a few.

Then the question becomes: Will the states follow, or will they craft their own laws? Remember when force was needed to enforce desegregation of schools? The photos of that moment remain iconic
and unforgettable.

But precedent doesn’t exist only in law—it exists in life.

There was a missed precedent recently in gossip news. The widely reported story of Travis Kelce purchasing a half‑million‑dollar ring for Taylor Swift comes to mind. No doubt the gesture was heartfelt.

But imagine if he had chosen differently. Suppose instead of a $500,000 ring, he purchased a modest one for $2,000—still well beyond what most Americans can afford—and announced that the remaining $498,000 had gone to food banks, Boys and Girls Clubs, the Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, his place of worship, and the Salvation Army.

That act would not only have been charitable—it would have been precedent. For Taylor Swift’s millions of admirers, it could have launched an avalanche of giving. Fans might have redirected smaller gifts in tribute, donations in proportion to their means but multiplied by sheer numbers, igniting a public wave of generosity.

All faiths promote charity, and many hold that the highest form of giving is done anonymously.

And this is where lawyers come in.

Our profession already understands this. Attorneys are among the most consistent contributors of pro bono hours, bar‑related charitable donations, and community service.

We devote our training to amplifying fairness where inequity exists. We push ourselves beyond what the law requires because we sense society demands more. We don’t just advise on what is legally permissible—we often counsel what ought to be done, for justice’s sake.

So perhaps we should remind the broader public—and especially people of influence—that ethical leadership often begins with a statement, not a statute.

If the headline had read, “Kelce Buys Modest Ring, Donates Half a Million to Charity,” the cultural ripple would have been substantial.

Imagine tens of thousands of fans giving in solidarity, millions raised, programs expanded—all because one figure in the spotlight shifted the conversation from indulgence to generosity.

There is no law against buying extravagant gifts, nor should there be. But justice, at its heart, isn’t satisfied with what is merely permissible. Justice asks us to consider the impact of our choices on those with fewer chances.

Lawyers already know this instinctively. We live it through our service and our ethics. What remains is helping others see it.

So the next time a well‑heeled client hires you to make a large purchase or close a big deal, ask if they also give to charity.

Risky? I think not. You may be pleasantly surprised by the response—and you may find it brings you closer.•

__________

Roy Graham is a criminal and family lawyer in Bloomington. Opinions expressed are those of the author.