Honors Programs: Law Review, Journal, or Moot Court Forum

[Stupendous_Man]

Hoping to get some opinions on this, I know what I'm interested in personally, but I'm trying to figure out what looks good to employers. My school has Law Review, two honors journals (interdisciplinary law journal, review of law and social justice), and honors moot court. We have to rank them by order of preference, and then whichever one we rank highest that takes us is what we get. Any thoughts on how each of these are viewed by employers?

[leobowski]

Law review >>>>>>>>> secondary journals >> moot court.


Moot court might have some more value if you are interested in DA/ public defender jobs. But law review is always king.

[random5483]

Law review >>>>>>>>> secondary journals >> moot court.


Moot court might have some more value if you are interested in DA/ public defender jobs. But law review is always king.

Law Review > Journals or Moot Court > Journals or Moot Court.

For some career choices, Moot Court makes more sense than secondary journals. However, Law Review is almost always the best school activity you can participate in.

[vamedic03]

Law review >>>>>>>>> secondary journals >> moot court.


Moot court might have some more value if you are interested in DA/ public defender jobs. But law review is always king.

ftfy.

[Geist13]

yeah moot court is the lowest. If you want more practice with oral advocacy type stuff, there are courses and/or clinics you can take.

[Stupendous_Man]

I'm aiming for biglaw. I talked with a lawyer at a big law firm who told me unequivocally "law review", but at the time my question was "law review vs. moot court". She said moot court was not that impressive to her at all, unless you place or won. But that was just one person's opinion, and she had no hiring authority anyway.

I talked to a deputy DA who told me that moot court was what she wanted to see, even over law review, but she liked law review too. And what moot court does is exactly what her department does, appellate work.

I guess my real question is between the other honors journals (is that what a secondary journal is? there are also journals that are not honors journals) vs. moot court.

[Geist13]

I'm aiming for biglaw. I talked with a lawyer at a big law firm who told me unequivocally "law review", but at the time my question was "law review vs. moot court". She said moot court was not that impressive to her at all, unless you place or won. But that was just one person's opinion, and she had no hiring authority anyway.

I talked to a deputy DA who told me that moot court was what she wanted to see, even over law review, but she liked law review too. And what moot court does is exactly what her department does, appellate work.

I guess my real question is between the other honors journals (is that what a secondary journal is? there are also journals that are not honors journals) vs. moot court.

Secondary journals, no doubt. Again there should be courses that involve oral argument skills. I'm taking such a seminar next semester. It's a class just on appellate work. I also can't imagine that a DA would prefer to see moot court over some sort of prosecution clinic. Basically, there are plenty of ways to demonstrate that you've worked on the type of skills that moot court focuses on. The only way to be on a journal is to be on a journal.

[Stupendous_Man]

Thanks that's helpful. But is there the consideration that people regularly seem to ask "Law Review v. Moot Court", but no one is asking "Law Review v. Secondary Journal"? Seems like if someone's grades are decent might choose moot court over law review just because that's what they prefer, but if you're on ILJ, you just plain didn't get on law review. I guess you're saying it's about the skills you pick up on the extracurricular, not just the prestige of getting in.

[vamedic03]

Thanks that's helpful. But is there the consideration that people regularly seem to ask "Law Review v. Moot Court", but no one is asking "Law Review v. Secondary Journal"? Seems like if someone's grades are decent might choose moot court over law review just because that's what they prefer, but if you're on ILJ, you just plain didn't get on law review. I guess you're saying it's about the skills you pick up on the extracurricular, not just the prestige of getting in.

Here's the problem with moot court - while it might be competitive at some schools, at others everyone can enter the competition. Law Review, in contrast, is a competitive selection process at every school. Plus, at many schools, people can do LR and moot court.

Plus, Law Review is a credential that is virtually universally recognized throughout the legal profession that you get to carry with you the rest of your career.

[Geist13]

Thanks that's helpful. But is there the consideration that people regularly seem to ask "Law Review v. Moot Court", but no one is asking "Law Review v. Secondary Journal"? Seems like if someone's grades are decent might choose moot court over law review just because that's what they prefer, but if you're on ILJ, you just plain didn't get on law review. I guess you're saying it's about the skills you pick up on the extracurricular, not just the prestige of getting in.

No. I'm saying that secondary journals (And law review) provide something that you can't pick up anywhere else; being on a journal and the skills and prestige that comes with that (whatever they may be). Moot court on the other hand works on skills that can be picked up in a number of places. Thus, choosing a journal over moot court, but taking a course that emphasizes oral argument or trial skills, allows you to demonstrate BOTH sets of skills and interests. However, since journal experience is unique to journals, if you pick moot court over a secondary journal, you won't be able to show off both sets of skills. One choice allows you to still dabble in both, the other does not.

[JJDancer]

Curious about where clinics fall into this (vs. secondary journals)..


Sorry to butt into your thread SM!

[vamedic03]

Curious about where clinics fall into this (vs. secondary journals)..


Sorry to butt into your thread SM!

Do both.

[Younger Abstention]

What school is this?

[Aqualibrium]

In my own experiences, and from the accounts of those I know on the hiring circuit, Clinics, Trial Advocacy Competitions, and Moot Court go a long way if you're interested in being a DA/PD or working at a lit boutique.

Beyond that, Law Review is king, and secondary journals are just filler.

(btw, I did moot court, trial ad team, and a secondary journal)

[fingersxd]

Law review should always be your goal (even if you are not an editor and only make a relatively limited contribution).

Moot Court rarely seems to impress unless you actually place in a competiton -- who really cares if you practiced w/ and helped "train" the actual competitors at your school? Maybe a DA, but as some previous posters mentioned, there are courses and clinics that will teach you the same "lawyering" skills - take one of those!

That said, I have heard of people doing both -- though I imagine they have exactly 0 social life with that sort of schedule.

[NotMyRealName09]

Law Review, period. Moot court gets the "oh, thats nice," but leaves the interviewer wondering "why not Law Review?" Secondary Journal = didn't make Law Review.

[fingersxd]

Law Review, period. Moot court gets the "oh, thats nice," but leaves the interviewer wondering "why not Law Review?" Secondary Journal = didn't make Law Review.

Let me just caveat this by saying (and this is a combination of my own personal opinion and conversations with attorneys at a number of biglaw firms), but secondary journals can be impressive if you are one of the editors -- (i.e. at least as much as just being a "member" of law review).

Let's be honest, the work you do on law review is BS and most lawyers ahve been there, done that -- it's a status symbol. If you can really show your interest in a secondary journal (or if it's specific to the 'position' you want to work in) or moot court, etc. it can really up the value of thsoe programs in the eyes of the interviewer.

[jkay]

[secondary journals can be impressive if you are one of the editors -- (i.e. at least as much as just being a "member" of law review).

Keep telling yourself that same thing over and over.

[fingersxd]

[secondary journals can be impressive if you are one of the editors -- (i.e. at least as much as just being a "member" of law review).

Keep telling yourself that same thing over and over.

I suspect its on a case by case basis, but I'm just passing along what I've heard from associates as well as partners at a number of top nyc firms.
That said, my initial point was that law review should be the goal, BUT it is not the end all be all. Ppl here make it seem as if secondary journals are somehow shameful but thats far from the truth. I personally have at least 8 friends that are in the top 10-15% of their classes at t20 schools and were or are involved in secondary journals...they are all doing quite well. So I think perspective is important here.

[leobowski]

I suspect its on a case by case basis, but I'm just passing along what I've heard from associates as well as partners at a number of top nyc firms.
That said, my initial point was that law review should be the goal, BUT it is not the end all be all. Ppl here make it seem as if secondary journals are somehow shameful but thats far from the truth. I personally have at least 8 friends that are in the top 10-15% of their classes at t20 schools and were or are involved in secondary journals...they are all doing quite well. So I think perspective is important here.

And then the top few people (not top 15%) in their class are on law review. Perspective is important, you just have a deluded one.

[fingersxd]

I suspect its on a case by case basis, but I'm just passing along what I've heard from associates as well as partners at a number of top nyc firms.
That said, my initial point was that law review should be the goal, BUT it is not the end all be all. Ppl here make it seem as if secondary journals are somehow shameful but thats far from the truth. I personally have at least 8 friends that are in the top 10-15% of their classes at t20 schools and were or are involved in secondary journals...they are all doing quite well. So I think perspective is important here.

And then the top few people (not top 15%) in their class are on law review. Perspective is important, you just have a deluded one.

Deluded - how so? My only point was that you can do quite well in school AND in your job search thereafter without being on law review. Sure, law review helps and looks great on the resume, but the idea that you will be blackballed from jobs b/c you didn't make law review or were on a secondary journal is absurd.

[M.I.T. L. Rev.]

I suspect its on a case by case basis, but I'm just passing along what I've heard from associates as well as partners at a number of top nyc firms.
That said, my initial point was that law review should be the goal, BUT it is not the end all be all. Ppl here make it seem as if secondary journals are somehow shameful but thats far from the truth. I personally have at least 8 friends that are in the top 10-15% of their classes at t20 schools and were or are involved in secondary journals...they are all doing quite well. So I think perspective is important here.

And then the top few people (not top 15%) in their class are on law review. Perspective is important, you just have a deluded one.

Deluded - how so? My only point was that you can do quite well in school AND in your job search thereafter without being on law review. Sure, law review helps and looks great on the resume, but the idea that you will be blackballed from jobs b/c you didn't make law review or were on a secondary journal is absurd.

No one said that. The question is which is better, and LR is clearly better. Yes, being on a secondary is not bad, and if you can get on EB then it's even better, but it's still not LR.

[orm518]

What school is this?

The Google tells me it might be USC based on the two secondary journals he listed.

[fingersxd]

I suspect its on a case by case basis, but I'm just passing along what I've heard from associates as well as partners at a number of top nyc firms.
That said, my initial point was that law review should be the goal, BUT it is not the end all be all. Ppl here make it seem as if secondary journals are somehow shameful but thats far from the truth. I personally have at least 8 friends that are in the top 10-15% of their classes at t20 schools and were or are involved in secondary journals...they are all doing quite well. So I think perspective is important here.

And then the top few people (not top 15%) in their class are on law review. Perspective is important, you just have a deluded one.

Deluded - how so? My only point was that you can do quite well in school AND in your job search thereafter without being on law review. Sure, law review helps and looks great on the resume, but the idea that you will be blackballed from jobs b/c you didn't make law review or were on a secondary journal is absurd.

No one said that. The question is which is better, and LR is clearly better. Yes, being on a secondary is not bad, and if you can get on EB then it's even better, but it's still not LR.

Agreed. That's why my very first post said go for L.R.

My additional comments wre more in response to posts saying things like "secondary journals=filler" and the like. This is just not true.