Would taking a single fluffy "law and"-type seminar hurt my chances at a clerkship? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I'm top 10% at a T14 and am on law review. Thus far my schedule has been heavy doctrinals (Fed Courts, Admin, Evidence, etc). I am currently enrolled in a "fluffy" "law and"-type seminar for the upcoming semester. The topic looks interesting, and it is taught by a professor I admire. But also, I am familiar with the stigma surrounding such courses. Would any judge disqualify me outright for having one such seminar on my transcript? Should I play it safe and drop it? Or am I overthinking this?

[lavarman84]

I can't speak to whether "any judge" would drop you. But I can say with confidence it wouldn't hurt you with the judges I worked for. When people warn about classes, they're usually warning about taking a bunch of high-curve (or no-curve) seminars and few doctrinals. Taking one shouldn't be a big deal imo.

[Anonymous User]

I'm top 10% at a T14 and am on law review. Thus far my schedule has been heavy doctrinals (Fed Courts, Admin, Evidence, etc). I am currently enrolled in a "fluffy" "law and"-type seminar for the upcoming semester. The topic looks interesting, and it is taught by a professor I admire. But also, I am familiar with the stigma surrounding such courses. Would any judge disqualify me outright for having one such seminar on my transcript? Should I play it safe and drop it? Or am I overthinking this?

the advice i always heard at my t14 (which worked fine for me) was to take at least 2 doctrinals a semester. i didn't take anything quite that fluffy, but took classes that were very obviously not serious doctrinals and did fine

[Anonymous User]

You're allowed to take those bs classes, you just need to also take sizable real classes, which it sounds like you are.

[Anonymous User]

I'm top 10% at a T14 and am on law review. Thus far my schedule has been heavy doctrinals (Fed Courts, Admin, Evidence, etc). I am currently enrolled in a "fluffy" "law and"-type seminar for the upcoming semester. The topic looks interesting, and it is taught by a professor I admire. But also, I am familiar with the stigma surrounding such courses. Would any judge disqualify me outright for having one such seminar on my transcript? Should I play it safe and drop it? Or am I overthinking this?

the advice i always heard at my t14 (which worked fine for me) was to take at least 2 doctrinals a semester. i didn't take anything quite that fluffy, but took classes that were very obviously not serious doctrinals and did fine

It is a little difficult to tell what is a doctrinal and what isn't, especially for classes with a more transactional bent. Like Trusts and Estates is clearly a doctrinal. What about a class called "Venture Capital" or "Water Law"? I happen to know some schools have traditional issue-spotting exams for both of those, but I wouldn't be able to tell at a glance if they were bs or not from a school I didn't know well. SLS I know has a class called "Deals", which I gather is rigorous but not a doctrinal--how judges rate that, I have no idea.

That said, my guess is most give the benefit of the doubt and only penalize you if you're obviously taking a lot of non-doctrinal classes with truly bullshit names ("Law and the Rhetorical Tradition" comes to mind from a transcript I recently reviewed).

[posadistoutcast]

I'm top 10% at a T14 and am on law review. Thus far my schedule has been heavy doctrinals (Fed Courts, Admin, Evidence, etc). I am currently enrolled in a "fluffy" "law and"-type seminar for the upcoming semester. The topic looks interesting, and it is taught by a professor I admire. But also, I am familiar with the stigma surrounding such courses. Would any judge disqualify me outright for having one such seminar on my transcript? Should I play it safe and drop it? Or am I overthinking this?

the advice i always heard at my t14 (which worked fine for me) was to take at least 2 doctrinals a semester. i didn't take anything quite that fluffy, but took classes that were very obviously not serious doctrinals and did fine

It is a little difficult to tell what is a doctrinal and what isn't, especially for classes with a more transactional bent. Like Trusts and Estates is clearly a doctrinal. What about a class called "Venture Capital" or "Water Law"? I happen to know some schools have traditional issue-spotting exams for both of those, but I wouldn't be able to tell at a glance if they were bs or not from a school I didn't know well. SLS I know has a class called "Deals", which I gather is rigorous but not a doctrinal--how judges rate that, I have no idea.

That said, my guess is most give the benefit of the doubt and only penalize you if you're obviously taking a lot of non-doctrinal classes with truly bullshit names ("Law and the Rhetorical Tradition" comes to mind from a transcript I recently reviewed).

OP here. The class is very obviously bullshit. It's called "Religion, Morality, and Justice."

But because it would be the only bullshit class on my transcript -- full of doctrinals and otherwise respectable-looking classes -- I'm inclined to keep it

[Anonymous User]

OP here. The class is very obviously bullshit. It's called "Religion, Morality, and Justice."

But because it would be the only bullshit class on my transcript -- full of doctrinals and otherwise respectable-looking classes -- I'm inclined to keep it

I'm clerking for a COA judge who's pretty grade-sensitive, and I don't think I'd even bat an eye at this. Some clerks/judges might even read it positively (consciously or not). There are more-obviously bullshit classes out there, people don't always get to have the schedule they want, and as long as there's only a few non-doctrinals on your transcript, it's no big deal.