Didn't she win the 1L teaching award?

Didn't she win the 1L teaching award?

A friend of both of ours believes she didn't challenge anyone in class. I also noticed that when someone had a question that would have taken her away from the typical political script, she would deflect or ignore it. She didn't want to analyze the actual reasoning in cases to the same extent as other (ahem, JD) law profs.

Yeah. THat had a lot to do with the section conducting a poll before hand to see who the most popular professor was amongst us. Once we did that, everyone threw their vote to her, even the ones who would have voted for someone else.




A couple of points:

1. She was kind to people, even when they were wrong. I liked her for that.
2. You thought her teaching was politically driven? She generally tried to cover both sides, even though we knew where she stood.

Wait wait wait. Let's get back to your section conducting a poll for 1L teaching awards. Fucking gunner freaks. Let me guess, LTK kept track of the voting in an excel spreadsheet?

To clarify, I don't think she came across as annoyingly biased. My point was that, while covering both sides, her whole approach to con law was more political than it had to be. I realize SCOTUS cases are generally looked at from that perspective more than other cases (esp w/r/t privacy, etc.), but it definitely felt like my least "law-ey" law school doctrinal class, which fit with my stereotype going into it of having a non-JD prof teaching from a UG-style book.

No, but somebody else did. It was important to us she won, especially when the news of her departure started floating around. Sorry you had Bennett for con law, toots.

You fuckers. Barsa should have won. Anyone who teaches property in the style of Christopher Walkin deserves to win a damn award.

moar cow bell?

You fuckers. Barsa should have won. Anyone who teaches property in the style of Christopher Walkin deserves to win a damn award.

When S3 decides to do something together, no one else really has a chance.

gunner freaks

When S3 decides to do something together, no one else really has a chance.

LOL at legal academia. The fucking research they do can be done for free. IMO students shouldn't have to subsidize legal academia. It's a huge circle jerk, and nobody reads it.

LOL at legal academia. The fucking research they do can be done for free. IMO students shouldn't have to subsidize legal academia. It's a huge circle jerk, and nobody reads it.

I've read that law school tuition is actually heavily subsiding other fields, as schools will take some of the law schools income and give it to other departments. That's an even bigger fail than subsidizing legal academia I think.

Challenge: create my fall schedule.

• American Indian Law
• Special Topics in International Criminal Law
• A New World Order: the Role of the United Nations in Advancing the Rule of Law and Human Rights
• Lawyer Memoirs
• Admiralty Law

Thursdays and Fridays off!

edit: sorry, just remembered, DF already made 40% of this joke in the 2L thread. Wait, do you not have to take 5 classes after 1L year? Because if not thank god.

• American Indian Law
• Special Topics in International Criminal Law
• A New World Order: the Role of the United Nations in Advancing the Rule of Law and Human Rights
• Lawyer Memoirs
• Admiralty Law

Thursdays and Fridays off!

edit: sorry, just remembered, DF already made 40% of this joke in the 2L thread. Wait, do you not have to take 5 classes after 1L year? Because if not thank god.

Ha, a lot of TTT's do that. Schools like NU don't, they instead just squander incredible amount of money.

in re: that guy's question about LR board elections, the answer is:

LR elections are during 2L spring. 2L members can put in for as many board positions as they want, in priority order. Applicants fill paper applications and can take advantage of a peer recommendation process by which they can endorse fellow 2Ls for certain positions (or receive such endorsements). The sitting LR board, in full, conducts in-person interviews of each candidate (so ~20 board members sit in a room together and interview 1 applicant at a time -- intimidating!), and then has a super-long closed-door meeting in which they elect the new board. If someone does not get their first choice, the board considers them for every other position they have applied for. Some years, applicants for the board outnumber board positions by a lot; other years, by only one or two people.

Getting EIC is really hard. Several of the other positions are as well (e.g., EAE), but others definitely are not (e.g., Membership Editor).