Top Law Schools

How significant is law review given below median grades versus a secondary journal? I have a significant chance to join a secondary journal, however this would negate any opportunity to write on to law review (legal writing being the one course in law school I have excelled in contrasted to contracts and property).

If you can get on LR, do it. You'll need it.

Odds of you getting on are slim, tho.

KSCO wrote:How significant is law review given below median grades versus a secondary journal? I have a significant chance to join a secondary journal, however this would negate any opportunity to write on to law review (the one course in law school I have excelled in contrasted to contracts and property).

Your post doesn't really make sense, and suggests you might not know what law review is (or else your school has an extremely bizarre system with which I am not at all familiar). Could you elaborate a little more?

In general, being on law review is always a good idea. But I've never heard of a place where choosing do join a secondary journal precludes LR - that sounds a little absurd.

- Thread hijack -

Is it worth giving up an 2L editor (not executive editor/editor in chief/etc) position on a secondary journal for law review (write-on not grade-on) if you feel you cant do both given other 2L commitments that are more important ITE?

tradeoff? to what? a job?

Yes, if u dont want to be employed?

eth3n wrote:- Thread hijack -

Is it worth giving up an 2L editor (not executive editor/editor in chief/etc) position on a secondary journal for law review (write-on not grade-on) if you feel you cant do both given other 2L commitments that are more important ITE?

By "other 2L commitments," what do you mean? If networking or working part-time in a job that could lead to full time employment, then it is definitely worth it to only do LR and not do the secondary journal.

KSCO wrote:How significant is law review given below median grades versus a secondary journal?

Very significant.

You might not be competing for the same jobs as all of your top-10%-law-review classmates, but you will have a leg up competing for the jobs with your median-grades-secondary-journal classmates.

If you ever ask yourself this question about law school activities: "Should I do Law Review, or should I do __________ instead?"

The answer is always Law Review.

Ipsa Dixit wrote:If you ever ask yourself this question about law school activities: "Should I do Law Review, or should I do __________ instead?"

The answer is always Law Review.

Even if it was two chicks at the same time?

--ImageRemoved--

ggocat wrote:

eth3n wrote:- Thread hijack -

Is it worth giving up an 2L editor (not executive editor/editor in chief/etc) position on a secondary journal for law review (write-on not grade-on) if you feel you cant do both given other 2L commitments that are more important ITE?

By "other 2L commitments," what do you mean? If networking or working part-time in a job that could lead to full time employment, then it is definitely worth it to only do LR and not do the secondary journal.

Law Review, Editor of Journal, Moot Court, Trial Practice, Clinical, Tutoring a 1L section, Externship (although as you mentioned the choice here is obvious).

These are all things which I am attempting to do 2L year, with the exception of Journal Editor, I dont really know which im going to get into and which I wont be able to do, but if given the choice, which should I sacrifice for the substantial time commitment of Law Review.

maybe order of importance style (a>b>c>d>e) ?

eth3n wrote:

ggocat wrote:

eth3n wrote:- Thread hijack -

Is it worth giving up an 2L editor (not executive editor/editor in chief/etc) position on a secondary journal for law review (write-on not grade-on) if you feel you cant do both given other 2L commitments that are more important ITE?

By "other 2L commitments," what do you mean? If networking or working part-time in a job that could lead to full time employment, then it is definitely worth it to only do LR and not do the secondary journal.

Law Review, Editor of Journal, Moot Court, Trial Practice, Clinical, Tutoring a 1L section, Externship (although as you mentioned the choice here is obvious).

These are all things which I am attempting to do 2L year, with the exception of Journal Editor, I dont really know which im going to get into and which I wont be able to do, but if given the choice, which should I sacrifice for the substantial time commitment of Law Review.

I think any one of them, standing alone, should be sacrificed to participate in law review.

But I think the relative value of each of those other options (i.e., which ones you should drop first or try to do above all else) will depend on the individual's situation. For example, if you want to teach, then tutoring, an in-house clinic, and editor of a secondary journal seem more valuable. But if the externship could lead to a job you like, then the externship seems more valuable. If you will be litigating early in your career (e.g., joining a DA/PD office, hanging a shingle, or joining a small/mid firm), then moot court and trial practice seem more valuable. Of course, if you want to do transactional work, then moot court and trial practice are not very valuable. The clinic may be valuable, but it would depend on the subject matter and your responsibilities.

So I don't think it's possible to weigh all of these opportunities against each other in the abstract.

ggocat wrote:

eth3n wrote:

ggocat wrote:

eth3n wrote:- Thread hijack -

Is it worth giving up an 2L editor (not executive editor/editor in chief/etc) position on a secondary journal for law review (write-on not grade-on) if you feel you cant do both given other 2L commitments that are more important ITE?

By "other 2L commitments," what do you mean? If networking or working part-time in a job that could lead to full time employment, then it is definitely worth it to only do LR and not do the secondary journal.

Law Review, Editor of Journal, Moot Court, Trial Practice, Clinical, Tutoring a 1L section, Externship (although as you mentioned the choice here is obvious).

These are all things which I am attempting to do 2L year, with the exception of Journal Editor, I dont really know which im going to get into and which I wont be able to do, but if given the choice, which should I sacrifice for the substantial time commitment of Law Review.

I think any one of them, standing alone, should be sacrificed to participate in law review.

But I think the relative value of each of those other options (i.e., which ones you should drop first or try to do above all else) will depend on the individual's situation. For example, if you want to teach, then tutoring, an in-house clinic, and editor of a secondary journal seem more valuable. But if the externship could lead to a job you like, then the externship seems more valuable. If you will be litigating early in your career (e.g., joining a DA/PD office, hanging a shingle, or joining a small/mid firm), then moot court and trial practice seem more valuable. Of course, if you want to do transactional work, then moot court and trial practice are not very valuable. The clinic may be valuable, but it would depend on the subject matter and your responsibilities.

So I don't think it's possible to weigh all of these opportunities against each other in the abstract.

fair enough, I will just have to see what happens

.

Being an editor of a secondary journal is more noteworthy than being a staff member of the law review. Working on a secondary journal directly related to your legal area of interest can be better for employment opportunities in that legal specialty than law review, especially in the areas of intellectual property, environmental & criminal law.

.

I strongly disagree with your disagreement and, before we get to double dog dares, why?

TTT-LS wrote:

CanadianWolf wrote:Being an editor of a secondary journal is more noteworthy than being a staff member of the law review. Working on a secondary journal directly related to your legal area of interest can be better for employment opportunities than law review, especially in the areas of intellectual property, environmental & criminal law.

I strongly disagree.

Also disagree that being an editor of a secondary journal is more noteworthy than staff member on law review.

However, the CWolf's second statement can be true. Though I don't think crim should be on the list because it is so general. One of the secondary journals here is bankruptcy and they have a great niche with fed. bankruptcy courts. But it really has to be what you want to do. 9 times out of 10, LR or bust.

Law review has been somewhat watered down over the past decade or so as many law schools now permit write-ons regardless of class rank.
There are many highly respected secondary law journals, for example, Northwestern University School of Law has a criminal law journal that is the second (I believe) most widely read law journal in the country.
Simple statements of disagreement are meaningless without some type of substantiation or proffered reasoning.
But I do not understand giving up an editorial position to be a staff writer/researcher on law review since editorial duties usually assume a high degree of proficiency of staff duties.
Additionally, many law review staff members never get published & never make editor which greatlt diminishes the law review learning experience whereas an editor of a secondary journal has made editor & is , at the very least, vicariously published.

CanadianWolf wrote:Law review has been somewhat watered down over the past decade or so as many law schools now permit write-ons regardless of class rank.
There are many highly respected secondary law journals, for example, Northwestern University School of Law has a criminal law journal that is the second (I believe) most widely read law journal in the country.
Simple statements of disagreement are meaningless without some type of substantiation or proffered reasoning.

Strongly disagree. Now, LR can be viewed as an additional accomplishment beyond good grades; a student with good grades also has to show strong enough applied writing and editing skills to make LR through the competition. Especially at schools without graded LRW, this is additional signaling that the student can be hired and make an immediate contribution.

Well its all academic since my journal is unlikely that prestigious and def not related to chosen field, although I have to thank them for all the bluebooking experience T_T

@GeePee: I don't see how your post justifies your position, although it is clear that you disagree with my position. Clearly there is room for disagreement & it does depend upon the quality of the secondary journal & upon one's career goals.
P.S. For what it is worth, I was on law review. We were required to be in the top 10-15% to qualify for the law review write-on competition--which was required of all regardless of being in the top 1% or the top 10%.

CanadianWolf wrote:@GeePee: I don't see how your post justifies your position, although it is clear that you disagree with my position. Clearly there is room for disagreement & it does depend upon the quality of the secondary journal & upon one's career goals.

Even if LR now permits writing on which may take away from the prestige of having all the top students in the class, it is an indicator of writing quality. Which may actually be a more beneficial signal than in the past because your rank already signals grades, so you don't need LR to note your grades again.

There is room for disagreement, though it will really come down to the specific secondary journals you are referring to, while LR is never going to be a bad decision.

CanadianWolf, you're full of shit. The effect of LR as a credential VASTLY outweighs that of anything in law school for numerous instances. Being EiC of a well respected secondary journal is going to bump your resume, but it's not even close to the shock and awe of being on law review. Law review is the gold standard - everyone knows what it means, it has a strong effect in your preliminary job search, and it stays with you long after your first job.

The selection method for LR is irrelevant; if you wrote on you'll still be more competitive than your peers at whatever GPA level you wind up at.

That is your opinion. I disagree. The only opinion that really counts is that of employers. I will agree that at most law schools law review membership is more prestigious, but not necessarily in the circumstances which I wrote about above.
It must be nice to enjoy such certainty as a law student, but, I can assure you, the real world is less certain than you think.

There seems to be a lot of mistaken reasoning here about how the write on works for at least some schools. See, for example, how NYU's write on works.

For NYU, students write a personal statement and do a writing sample. Some students write on just by their personal statements and other minimal criteria.

Here's the quote from NYU (quoted):

Exactly 12 students will be selected on the basis of their personal statements, provided that either their grades or writing competition scores place them in the top half of all remaining applicants.

Here is what a personal statement is to contain at NYU (quoted):

Personal Statements
All applicants to the Law Review must submit a personal statement of no more than 500 words. The information contained in these personal statements allows the Law Review to realize its commitment to staff diversity. The Law Review evaluates personal statements in light of various factors, including (but not limited to) race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, socio-economic background, ideological viewpoint, disability, and age. With regard to these and other aspects of diversity, applicants should clearly identify and discuss any personal characteristics, background, unique experiences, or qualifications that the applicant would like to bring to the attention of the Selection Committee.

All applicants should know that the personal statement will be judged as an independent piece of expository writing. Personal statements also will be read for quality and attention to proofreading detail. Applicants are free to shape the content and subject matter of the personal statement. Potential subjects for a personal statement include, but are not limited to, the following: how your personal background impacted your first-year law experience or shaped your future professional goals; your scholarly interests as they may be reflected by your potential Note topic or other academic research; an experience, class, or person that significantly changed or impacted your life; or how your identity or background will contribute to diversity at the Law Review.