Law Review Board Forum

[Lesion of Doom]

Besides EiC, obviously, is there any marketability boost from being on the board? Perhaps as a member of the actual executive board, relative to being just an articles-type editor? I applied last week and am now questioning my decision.

Also, on every recent cite check I've had the first set of footnotes. Why?????????

[mcmand]

http://bitterempire.com/memorandom-re-h ... g-to-suck/

[Vursz]

Besides EiC, obviously, is there any marketability boost from being on the board? Perhaps as a member of the actual executive board, relative to being just an articles-type editor? I applied last week and am now questioning my decision.

Also, on every recent cite check I've had the first set of footnotes. Why?????????

no

[imnottelling]

Do you have an SA lined up? Is it at a place where most get job offers? If so, then I would say absolutely not. The sick is not worth it. If you don’t have a job lined up I would still heavily question it because you could use that time looking for a job. My biggest law school regret was doing LR board.

[Samarcan]

The answer to your question depends very heavily on the particular law review -- so, in part, the particular law school you attend. At some schools just being on LR has some perks, while at others it's just manual labor. But you'd be surprised at the extent to which it's *not* manual labor (not just citechecking and Bluebooking) and it does have wide-ranging benefits even if you're not the Editor-in-Chief.

All of this varies from school to school. At some schools being on LR will be a boost for all kinds of things (Big Law connections with alum who do care about LR from their own days, clerkships, government work, etc.). Again, hard to know the scope of networking effects and the LR resume boost in the abstract. I'd suggest you ask others (maybe via CS office) from your schools, alums or maybe even some professors (the ones who are less academicky and more in tuned with the real world.). And take the sweeping comments on TLS with a grain of salt; people who lump all LRs into the same descriptive bucket are doing something pretty stupid.

[Anonymous User]

for clerkships , is there any reason to think that judges prefer articles editor over managing editor? i figure a senior position would give a boost, but i'm not interested in senior board.

[A. Nony Mouse]

for clerkships , is there any reason to think that judges prefer articles editor over managing editor? i figure a senior position would give a boost, but i'm not interested in senior board.

I have heard this, though I can't say I've seen anything to prove it in practice (it hasn't come up with the hiring that I've seen). The idea is that articles editors are in the writing weeds, which transfers directly to what you do as a clerk, while managing editors tend not to have as much to do with the actual articles. (I don't know what counts as senior board for your journal so not sure if you were looking for a reason not to do managing editor or not to do articles editor.)

All that said, there are going to be plenty of judges who don't parse any board positions all that finely. I don't know that doing a non-EIC board position is going to make enough difference to be worth it if you're going to hate it/it will take away from stuff you'd rather do.

[Lesion of Doom]

Do you have an SA lined up? Is it at a place where most get job offers? If so, then I would say absolutely not. The sick is not worth it. If you don’t have a job lined up I would still heavily question it because you could use that time looking for a job. My biggest law school regret was doing LR board.

Yes, I do have an SA in NY at a place with the typical offer rate, I think. I ultimately applied because it seems from my lonely 2L vantage point that the 3Ls actually socialize and form close friendships. While undertaking the OCI process last summer, I got connected to a group of young attorneys through a former managing editor who all remained in close contact. So my thought was perhaps some networking benefit would accrue. But I don't really want to do it.

[Lesion of Doom]

The answer to your question depends very heavily on the particular law review -- so, in part, the particular law school you attend. At some schools just being on LR has some perks, while at others it's just manual labor. But you'd be surprised at the extent to which it's *not* manual labor (not just citechecking and Bluebooking) and it does have wide-ranging benefits even if you're not the Editor-in-Chief.

All of this varies from school to school. At some schools being on LR will be a boost for all kinds of things (Big Law connections with alum who do care about LR from their own days, clerkships, government work, etc.). Again, hard to know the scope of networking effects and the LR resume boost in the abstract. I'd suggest you ask others (maybe via CS office) from your schools, alums or maybe even some professors (the ones who are less academicky and more in tuned with the real world.). And take the sweeping comments on TLS with a grain of salt; people who lump all LRs into the same descriptive bucket are doing something pretty stupid.

Thank you for these comments. I should have mentioned in the OP that I'm at a T1 and therefore regard networking as relatively more important to my career — especially early career — than people at more prestigious schools. There's no question that doing LR as a 2L benefited me during the job hunt, but I was curious if others had thoughts about the actual board.

[mcmand]

While undertaking the OCI process last summer, I got connected to a group of young attorneys through a former managing editor who all remained in close contact. So my thought was perhaps some networking benefit would accrue. But I don't really want to do it.

It's 50/50 whether you bond with your fellow board or they want to kill you/you them once the editing process goes to shit at some point in the year, or if one or more people stop pulling their weight.

I liken journal/law review board to forced group projects in high school and college. You may connect with some group members, but someone (or a few people) will inevitably clash.

I recommend getting friends outside of law review and/or outside of law school.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Eh. I really liked my law review board, and everyone was chill (or as is more likely, we were all neurotic about the same things and so got along). My impression is that my school's LR was unusually congenial, but still.

[1styearlateral]

I was the managing editor of the LR (directly under EiC), but IME that didn't seem to matter to potential employers beyond just being on LR. That's just the impression I got, though.

[mecarey]

Most things you do in your career (and almost everything you do in school) will gradually be phased out of your resume/CV and firm profile as you gain experience. If you look around at firm profiles, there are two things that are consistently mentioned with law school regardless of how many years the practitioner has been practicing: honors (Coif, cum laude, etc.) and law review board positions (_____ Editor). Whether or not the experience of law review board actually adds value, it IS a title that will stick with you throughout your professional career.

It's really not THAT bad, many schools give credit hours for it, and for whatever reason it is a title that will stick around forever. Plus, some employers and judges look for it. It can only open doors, and won't close any.

[lolwat]

If I saw the lack of a board position on someone's resume I might ask why they decided not to go for it. I don't know if it really matters to most people, but to me it's almost like a "why didn't you put in the effort" type of thing. I'd expect some sort of answer that suggests that you didn't take the board position because you wanted the time to do something else of value (e.g., moot court, part-time school-year job at a firm, and so on).

In terms of work, while my experience is obviously limited to my one year being on the board of my LR, I guess I also don't really understand why everyone thinks being on the board (but not EIC) is that much worse than not being on the board but still being on LR. Of course, if you hate LR to begin with, you'll hate being on the board even more, but still...

Re networking, I don't keep in contact with any of my fellow board members anymore, but it certainly wasn't a horrible year to spend being on the board with them. I suspect if I ended up in the same legal market as most of them are in, I'd probably get lunch with them every once in a while.