Positions on Law Review Forum

[You Gotta Have Faith]

Apart from being the Editor-in-Chief, a position that all employers know about, do the other several positions on a Law Review (they seem to vary considerably from journal to journal) seem to be helpful things to have under your belt?

I think that the main three things I'm asking are: (1) will it benefit you in your personal/professional growth and (2) will it help you land a job/clerkship/internship? (3) Is the extra work worth it, when you could be focusing on school or other endeavors?

Genuine answers are appreciated, especially from those with experience. Do employers notice or even care? Discuss.

(edit for spelling)

[BarbellDreams]

It doesn't matter what position you have on LR. If you have LR on your resume employers notice.

[leobowski]

It doesn't matter what position you have on LR. If you have LR on your resume employers notice.

Mmm, not exactly. Editor in chief is a huge leg-up, and managing editor is slightly more prestigious than other positions. But outside of executive positions, it doesn't really matter what editor you are.

[thecilent]

I wonder if people ever just put lr on their resume, without being on it. Wonder if all employers check that

[You Gotta Have Faith]

So basically everyone who has actually replied has said it's not a huge deal, unless you are the Editor-in-Chief, or maybe the Managing Editor. Yet the poll seems to indicate otherwise. Would anyone else care to weigh in on why they don't think it matters?

Keep in mind, there is the presumption that you already have the generic title that everyone on LR has, such as Associate Editor, Staff Editor, Senior Editor, etc. etc. (whatever your school calls it). My question is whether that additional random title, where you actually do extra work for the LR, is worthwhile?

Thanks to the few who have replied so far.

[FalafelWaffle]

I wonder if people ever just put lr on their resume, without being on it. Wonder if all employers check that

I know people who lied on their resume and got away with it in the short run. But unless you're a superstar, prepare to be blackballed if people find out.

[D-ROCCA]

E-board is definitely worth doing if you want to clerk.

[You Gotta Have Faith]

E-board is definitely worth doing if you want to clerk.

Someone else told me that judges like that a lot. Do you think firms and other organizations share the sentiment?

[BarbellDreams]

It doesn't matter what position you have on LR. If you have LR on your resume employers notice.

Mmm, not exactly. Editor in chief is a huge leg-up, and managing editor is slightly more prestigious than other positions. But outside of executive positions, it doesn't really matter what editor you are.

This isn't what I meant. Its obvious that an editor-in-chief position looks better than a staff position, but OP was asking if its worth doing if you're "only" staff and I replied with it doesnt matter what you are because anything that has to do with LR will get noticed on your resume.

[bdubs]

I wonder if people ever just put lr on their resume, without being on it. Wonder if all employers check that

I know people who lied on their resume and got away with it in the short run. But unless you're a superstar, prepare to be blackballed if people find out.

Finding out if you were on a journal is a 30 second google search now, I doubt anyone gets away with this.

[thesealocust]

Multiple sources confirm that it is very important for many - but not all - clerkship slots, especially the most competitive ones.

Outside of that I have a hard time imagining that it would matter, because most hiring done at that stage is going to have more to do with you developing a practice than it will your paper credentials. You won't be on e-board before 2L OCI, for example, and when lateraling things like who you know and what work you have done are going to be what comes into play.

If you want to gun for a clerkship, you'd probably be a fool not to try for e-board. If you enjoy law review, it makes sense to take on more responsibility. Otherwise I think the costs would greatly outweigh the benefits.

[spondee]

1. Many judges put considerable weight on e-board. Mine certainly does. While there are exceptions, the more substantive editing/writing work, the better.

2. I don't know of other organizations that would care, but hiring for hard-to-get gov positions/PI might be one place where e-board could come into play as a tie-breaker.

3. The work can be exhausting, and can definitely ruin a lot of weekends/free time. That said, you will probably learn at least a little, and potentially a lot in the process. I use the skills I learned as an editor all the time in my current job (clerk).

When screening resumes, how can you be sure a position (other than EIC) is a senior board position? What one journal calls a Managing Editor, another may call an Executive Editor, which another journal may not consider senior board at all. Etc.

[vamedic03]

...

[0Lgunner]

Is it more worthwhile to focus on grades or trying to get an e-board position?

[vamedic03]

...

[billbrasky]

Is it more worthwhile to focus on grades or trying to get an e-board position?

Focus on grades--they're more important than having an e-board position.

[Younger Abstention]

Put "Board Member" on your resume. So XXX Law Review, Board Member: Articles Editor. It might be a little douchey, but if you're doing all that extra work, you want it to be noticed during the clerkship hunt. Otherwise, you might as well just take a senior editor position, which sounds better to the lay person than a lot of board titles.

[vamedic03]

...

[Younger Abstention]

Put "Board Member" on your resume. So XXX Law Review, Board Member: Articles Editor. It might be a little douchey, but if you're doing all that extra work, you want it to be noticed during the clerkship hunt. Otherwise, you might as well just take a senior editor position, which sounds better to the lay person than a lot of board titles.

What I meant by "lay" is someone unfamiliar with board vs. non-board positions. I thought that was fairly obvious.

[leobowski]

Is it more worthwhile to focus on grades or trying to get an e-board position?

Focus on grades--they're more important than having an e-board position.

Meh that's arguable. Students that are top 10%+LR can be competitive with students at the very top of the class+ no LR. Especially with elite govt/PI positions and clerkships. I can't really speak to firm jobs, but I can imagine it being the same.

Of course, editorial board alone isn't going to carry you--as exemplified by the story about that jobless EIC at Chicago-Kent.

[Younger Abstention]

Is it more worthwhile to focus on grades or trying to get an e-board position?

Focus on grades--they're more important than having an e-board position.

Meh that's arguable. Students that are top 10%+LR can be competitive with students at the very top of the class+ no LR. Especially with elite govt/PI positions and clerkships. I can't really speak to firm jobs, but I can imagine it being the same.

Of course, Chicago Kent alone isn't going to carry you--as exemplified by the story about that jobless EIC at Chicago-Kent.

[Snooker]

At Susman Godfrey, editorial board is very important. To clerkships, it's said to be important as well. But many lawyers I know do not think ed board is useful at all, and I'm inclined to agree with the latter group. A real job would be more beneficial than doing the whole read/select articles, or edit endless footnotes thing. In general, when it comes to applying for law firm jobs, if the boss was ed board, then ed board will help. If the boss is not on ed board, then ed board probably will not help. I have asked people directly about this. The people who were LREV EICs swear by it; people who just did law review membership think the whole thing is dumb.

Self-serving bias is alive and well in law. After all, it's often said this is a prestige-driven field, and prestige does not predict ability.

[vamedic03]

At Susman Godfrey, editorial board is very important. To clerkships, it's said to be important as well. But many lawyers I know do not think ed board is useful at all, and I'm inclined to agree with the latter group. A real job would be more beneficial than doing the whole read/select articles, or edit endless footnotes thing. In general, when it comes to applying for law firm jobs, if the boss was ed board, then ed board will help. If the boss is not on ed board, then ed board probably will not help. I have asked people directly about this. The people who were LREV EICs swear by it; people who just did law review membership think the whole thing is dumb.

Self-serving bias is alive and well in law. After all, it's often said this is a prestige-driven field, and prestige does not predict ability.

Huh?

[beachbum]

This is gonna sound incredibly ignorant, but can you explain what exactly it is you do on E-Board? What's so time-consuming about it? And how many hours/week are we talking? Thanks.

[vamedic03]

This is gonna sound incredibly ignorant, but can you explain what exactly it is you do on E-Board? What's so time-consuming about it? And how many hours/week are we talking? Thanks.

Depends on the Law Review - everyone has different systems.

There are basically 3 stages for the publication process:

(1) Selection of content. Some Law Reviews divide this up between a group of people; others use 1 or 2 Senior Articles Editors (or Articles Development Editors, or some other variation) to select the articles that will go through a final review process. This review process varies between LR's. After selection, the LR will secure the article for publication. A couple notes - the top 10 law reviews are receiving >3000 submissions/year and a large portion of these are in a 3-4 week period in the spring. This is an intense part of the LR process. Notes/Comments will undergo some similar form of review/selection.

(2) Editing the article. All the citations are confirmed. Sources are collected, copied, compiled. Above the line and below the line editing occurs. This is typically where the 2L/3L non management LR members are involved (there are a variety of names for the general membership). Some management level LR member will be shepherding the piece through the process and will communicate back and forth with the author.

(3) Preparation for publication. After everything has been substantiated and the major editorial changes have been made, the piece will be prepared for publication. I.e., final formating will occur, final reviews of style and compliance with bluebooking etc. Then the piece will be sent to the printers.

Shepherding the pieces through this process is extremely time intense. Significant work occurs in selecting the pieces (i.e., going from 3000 submissions to 20 published articles), editing the pieces, and then preparing them for publication. The managing editors are intensively managing this process and it takes a lot of time and dedication to publish 2000-3000 pages of high quality scholarship a year.