Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2016 Forum

[Fivedham]

I know the standard is strict scrutiny for content-based regulations of speech. So the standard is compelling gov't interest, yes?

The Themis FRO uses both "compelling gov't interest" and "important gov't interest" w/r/t regulation of speech...

Content-neutral public forum speech gets reviewed under a "intermediate-type" scrutiny, according to the Critical Pass flash cards. Content-neutral non-public forum speech gets rational basis. Content-based regulations all get strict scrutiny.

[Easy-E]

I know the standard is strict scrutiny for content-based regulations of speech. So the standard is compelling gov't interest, yes?

The Themis FRO uses both "compelling gov't interest" and "important gov't interest" w/r/t regulation of speech...

That feature of the Themis program is what's called an "Easter Egg," just a fun little thing for especially attentive people to find.

Nice catch!

Edit: Hey I found another one, though this could just be a stupid rule statement and not directly on Themis

"A restriction on commercial speech is subject to a form of intermediate judicial scrutiny, requiring the government to show that the restriction directly advances an important or substantial government interest and that the restriction is not substantially more extensive than necessary to protect that interest."

Themis has made a a point that substantial < important, right?. So why not just say substantial is the standard?

[Steve2207]

Just curious if anyone would have any suggestions. I have been following the Themis plan, and only fell a little behind after I had to complete a long distance move with my family. Now that I am at about 77% completion, I have realized I am likely going to fail unless something changes.

I have memorized very little over the last 8 weeks because, mainly, I found many of the Themis Lecturers to be terrible and only a couple of them explained things in a way that allowed the concepts to sink in. (Professor Clarke was by far the worst!!) I can barely write anything in the areas of Evidence & Civ Pro without the assistance of an outline, and I frankly do not understand Con Law at all. Incidentally, my scores on the assessment quizzes were usually around 50% on any given subject.

As for the MBE exercises, I have consistently scored between 45% and 50% from the start, but have somehow managed to get a 60% on two of the mixed sets. (One last night, one during the beginning). I scored a mere 113 on the MBE practice exam, and performed miserably on the essays.
My plan was to talk about this with my attorney advisor at some point because I was told that I would be contacted, but I have yet to get a phone call from anyone at Themis, and am wondering why no one has reached out in light of my low scores.

My question is, 1. Do I still even have a chance of turning this around, and 2. If so, what should I do, because obviously the Themis plan isn’t doing it.

Thanks in advance!

[unidentifiable]

Just curious if anyone would have any suggestions. I have been following the Themis plan, and only fell a little behind after I had to complete a long distance move with my family. Now that I am at about 77% completion, I have realized I am likely going to fail unless something changes.

I have memorized very little over the last 8 weeks because, mainly, I found many of the Themis Lecturers to be terrible and only a couple of them explained things in a way that allowed the concepts to sink in. (Professor Clarke was by far the worst!!) I can barely write anything in the areas of Evidence & Civ Pro without the assistance of an outline, and I frankly do not understand Con Law at all. Incidentally, my scores on the assessment quizzes were usually around 50% on any given subject.

As for the MBE exercises, I have consistently scored between 45% and 50% from the start, but have somehow managed to get a 60% on two of the mixed sets. (One last night, one during the beginning). I scored a mere 113 on the MBE practice exam, and performed miserably on the essays.
My plan was to talk about this with my attorney advisor at some point because I was told that I would be contacted, but I have yet to get a phone call from anyone at Themis, and am wondering why no one has reached out in light of my low scores.

My question is, 1. Do I still even have a chance of turning this around, and 2. If so, what should I do, because obviously the Themis plan isn’t doing it.

Thanks in advance!

You got this.

Identify biggest weaknesses in the MBE PQ progress section. Open up the big outline and really drill those topics into memory. Handwrite them, talk to yourself about it. Look up youtube videos. Review every single question you got wrong.

The Emanuel's Strategies & Tactics is pretty good, if you want more MBE help. You probably wont be able to tackle the entire book, but the strategies they have are pretty solid. Pick up the Critical Pass app and implant those flashcards into your brain.

113 on the simulated MBE aint bad. That's right where Themis expects you to be.

This is your life now. Nothing else matters.

[Virindi]

has anyone gotten 70 or higher on a graded exam?

what score did you get and what exam? thx thx

[blach0987]

Just curious if anyone would have any suggestions. I have been following the Themis plan, and only fell a little behind after I had to complete a long distance move with my family. Now that I am at about 77% completion, I have realized I am likely going to fail unless something changes.

I have memorized very little over the last 8 weeks because, mainly, I found many of the Themis Lecturers to be terrible and only a couple of them explained things in a way that allowed the concepts to sink in. (Professor Clarke was by far the worst!!) I can barely write anything in the areas of Evidence & Civ Pro without the assistance of an outline, and I frankly do not understand Con Law at all. Incidentally, my scores on the assessment quizzes were usually around 50% on any given subject.

As for the MBE exercises, I have consistently scored between 45% and 50% from the start, but have somehow managed to get a 60% on two of the mixed sets. (One last night, one during the beginning). I scored a mere 113 on the MBE practice exam, and performed miserably on the essays.
My plan was to talk about this with my attorney advisor at some point because I was told that I would be contacted, but I have yet to get a phone call from anyone at Themis, and am wondering why no one has reached out in light of my low scores.

My question is, 1. Do I still even have a chance of turning this around, and 2. If so, what should I do, because obviously the Themis plan isn’t doing it.

Thanks in advance!

I think everything what the previous poster said but to add that if you are concerned, do not wait for Themis to call. Just call them directly. Either send a message to them through the portal or call directly your state Themis director. The phone number should be somewhere in the earlier emails. They can review your stats and talk to you about how to approach the next weeks.

[Chardee_MacDennis]

has anyone gotten 70 or higher on a graded exam?

what score did you get and what exam? thx thx

You mean, like, a milestone exam?

[unidentifiable]

huge stomach pit.

making a study schedule for the next few days/weekend and realizing that this shit is so close. Like.. Saturday is probably the last day i'll be really studying Conflict of Laws.

Fuck.

[Virindi]

has anyone gotten 70 or higher on a graded exam?

what score did you get and what exam? thx thx

You mean, like, a milestone exam?

anything where themis grades an essay

[1down1togo]

has anyone gotten 70 or higher on a graded exam?

what score did you get and what exam? thx thx

You mean, like, a milestone exam?

anything where themis grades an essay

I've gotten a 70 and 3 80s. All on virginia exams though (they use their own specific exams, not whatever multi-state thing you all seem to be doing).

[Easy-E]

Can someone clarify this con law question from set 6. That's the optional one FYI.

[+] Spoiler

The owner of a milk container manufacturing firm sought to focus public attention on the milk packaging law of his state in order to have it repealed. On a weekday at 12:00 noon, he delivered an excited, animated, and loud harangue on the steps of the State Capitol in front of the main entryway. An audience of 200 onlookers, who gathered on the steps, heckled him and laughed as he delivered his tirade. He repeatedly stated, gesturing expressively and making faces, that "the g-ddamned milk packaging law is stupid," and that "I will strangle every one of those g-ddamned legislators I can get hold of because this law they created proves they are all too dumb to live." After about fifteen minutes, he stopped speaking, and the amused crowd dispersed. A state statute prohibits "all speech-making, picketing, and public gatherings of every sort on the Capitol steps in front of the main entryway between 7:45 a.m.-8:15 a.m., 11:45 a.m.-12:15 p.m., 12:45 p.m.-1:15 p.m., and 4:45 p.m.-5:15 p.m. on Capitol working days."

If the owner is prosecuted under the "Capitol steps" statute and defends on constitutional grounds, which of the following best describes the proper burden of proof?

A He would have to prove that the state did not have a rational basis for enacting this statute.
B He would have to prove that the state did not have a compelling need for this statute or that it had less restrictive means by which it could satisfy that need.
C The state would have to prove that it had a rational basis for enacting this statute.
D The state would have to prove that it had a compelling need for this statute and that there were no less restrictive means by which it could satisfy that need.

Answer choice D is correct. Applicable to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment, the First Amendment generally prohibits the government's ability to restrict speech. However, the government may regulate the time, place, and manner of speech in a public forum (which can be traditional or designated) so long as the law is (i) content neutral, (ii) narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest, and (iii) leaves open alternate channels of communication for the speaker. Answer choice D most closely describes the correct burden of proof.

I thought the gov't had greater discretion to regulate speech in non-public forums, and that you can't disrupt a government function? I think I'm very mixed up on freedom of expression...

[BigZuck]

First one is a public forum right (did that trip you up, I couldn't tell?)

Second one is over broad so it's not constitutional

eta: you edited

[BigZuck]

Basically i didn't think about it too deeply, I just knew it was about infringing freedom of speech so it should be a high burden and the burden is on the government

[Easy-E]

First one is a public forum right (did that trip you up, I couldn't tell?)

Second one is over broad so it's not constitutional

eta: you edited

My bad, I took the second question I had originally posted out. It didn't really help clarify what exactly I was confused about.

But yes, I didn't get that gov't building steps was a public forum. It struck me as interfering with gov't function, but then people are always speaking on the steps.

Basically i didn't think about it too deeply, I just knew it was about infringing freedom of speech so it should be a high burden and the burden is on the government

So what gets rational basis as far as speech? I assume it's pretty narrow, but my outline based on the lecture/FRO doesn't make sense.

[unidentifiable]

has anyone gotten 70 or higher on a graded exam?

what score did you get and what exam? thx thx

You mean, like, a milestone exam?

anything where themis grades an essay

I've gotten a 70 and 3 80s. All on virginia exams though (they use their own specific exams, not whatever multi-state thing you all seem to be doing).

mainly 60s. one 50 (fuckin BS torts shit god damnit), and 2 80s (family and crim).

[iliketurtles123]

Do you guys think the real bar exam questions are going to have the same bullshittery as the Themis MBE questions?

I mean, some of these questions are just straight up bullshit. I'm talking about those questions that a) don't give enough facts in the question and you somehow need to extrapolate and assume certain facts b) have multiple correct answers that are logically correct c) some other bullshit. Basically, any question that a person could reasonably argue would have multiple right answers.

I don't know if Themis just ran out of questions to make or if the bar exam is like this as well. I hope it's not the latter

[1down1togo]

Do you guys think the real bar exam questions are going to have the same bullshittery as the Themis MBE questions?

I mean, some of these questions are just straight up bullshit. I'm talking about those questions that a) don't give enough facts in the question and you somehow need to extrapolate and assume certain facts b) have multiple correct answers that are logically correct c) some other bullshit. Basically, any question that a person could reasonably argue would have multiple right answers.

I don't know if Themis just ran out of questions to make or if the bar exam is like this as well. I hope it's not the latter

I took Kaplan, and then passed the bar, in 2013. I felt like the MBE questions were significantly easier than Kaplan's questions. THat being said, there were definitely bullshitty questions. But the goods news is- its a scaled exam. So if the question is truly bullshitty- well most people got it wrong- and its not a big deal.

I think its important to distinguish between a truly BS answer, and one where we missed a nuance. Whenever I get a question wrong that I thought I nailed, my first reaction to call BS. But a lot of time, if you really look into, you see there was some nuance or twist that you missed. I think its important to be able to indentify the problem, and really try to understand it, rather than just write it off as BS. Most of the time, when you look closer, you see that it wasnt really bs.

That being said, some of the quesitons are straight up baloney

[BigZuck]

First one is a public forum right (did that trip you up, I couldn't tell?)

Second one is over broad so it's not constitutional

eta: you edited

My bad, I took the second question I had originally posted out. It didn't really help clarify what exactly I was confused about.

But yes, I didn't get that gov't building steps was a public forum. It struck me as interfering with gov't function, but then people are always speaking on the steps.

Basically i didn't think about it too deeply, I just knew it was about infringing freedom of speech so it should be a high burden and the burden is on the government

So what gets rational basis as far as speech? I assume it's pretty narrow, but my outline based on the lecture/FRO doesn't make sense.

I dunno

Commercial speech is intermediate scrutiny (I think?) but not sure what's rational basis when it comes to speech

The levels of scrutiny stuff is always silly and dumb and often kind of arbitrary and Themis is silly and dumb and mixes up words like significant/compelling/important/crucial or whatever because why not lets just mess with these people paying thousands of dollars for this garbage and Con Law is the worst so I try not to think about it too hard and just go with what feels right if I don't know the actual answer. Seems like an ok strategy.

When I kind of let go of the notion that I needed to get to the right answer because of my knowledge of "the law" and instead started working within the context and the confines of each individual question and just embraced the Silly Billyness of it all my scores improved dramatically.

[Virindi]

Do you guys think the real bar exam questions are going to have the same bullshittery as the Themis MBE questions?

I mean, some of these questions are just straight up bullshit. I'm talking about those questions that a) don't give enough facts in the question and you somehow need to extrapolate and assume certain facts b) have multiple correct answers that are logically correct c) some other bullshit. Basically, any question that a person could reasonably argue would have multiple right answers.

I don't know if Themis just ran out of questions to make or if the bar exam is like this as well. I hope it's not the latter

i've been doing Adaptibar which has all the old BAR questions on it. I've noticed some of them are on Themis too.

and yea, some of these questions are clearly bullshit. i think it's why the BAR discontinued them and released them to the public.

[barprep1980]

I'm looking for advice on whether and to what extent I should prep for the MEE and MPT.

I've almost entirely focused on the MBE, and I'm averaging about 70% correct. I have completed no MPT's and very few practice MEE essays (for graded: contracts 50%, torts 60%, real property 40%). I have not done any straight-up memorization up until this point.

I have confidence in my standardized test-taking abilities (high LSAT and went to HYS). I'm also confident that I can issue spot, BS, and generally write well on the fly. But I don't have all of the rules at my fingertips. In other words, I can spot something is wrong, but I might not be able to neatly articulate all five parts of a rule in the way that you probably should for the essays.

Do I need to shift gears and start memorizing rules/practicing essays? Or can I just continue honing my MBE score and trust in my abilities for the essays?

ETA: I'm sitting for New York.

[Chardee_MacDennis]

I'm looking for advice on whether and to what extent I should prep for the MEE and MPT.

I've almost entirely focused on the MBE, and I'm averaging about 70% correct. I have completed no MPT's and very few practice MEE essays (for graded: contracts 50%, torts 60%, real property 40%). I have not done any straight-up memorization up until this point.

I have confidence in my standardized test-taking abilities (high LSAT and went to HYS). I'm also confident that I can issue spot, BS, and generally write well on the fly. But I don't have all of the rules at my fingertips. In other words, I can spot something is wrong, but I might not be able to neatly articulate all five parts of a rule in the way that you probably should for the essays.

Do I need to shift gears and start memorizing rules/practicing essays? Or can I just continue honing my MBE score and trust in my abilities for the essays?

How heavily is the MBE weighted in your state?

I would glance at an MPT or two, but I wouldn't stress about that too much, it's pretty self-explanatory and probably the easiest part of the exam.

For the MEE, we'll probably get 2 or 3 MBE topics, so you should be good for those. For the rest of the MEE topics, I would go over the FROs for each once or twice, maybe look at a few practice essays so you understand what the examiners can ask. The MEEs are basically testing major points of law, not nuance like the MBE.

[1down1togo]

I'm looking for advice on whether and to what extent I should prep for the MEE and MPT.

I've almost entirely focused on the MBE, and I'm averaging about 70% correct. I have completed no MPT's and very few practice MEE essays (for graded: contracts 50%, torts 60%, real property 40%). I have not done any straight-up memorization up until this point.

I have confidence in my standardized test-taking abilities (high LSAT and went to HYS). I'm also confident that I can issue spot, BS, and generally write well on the fly. But I don't have all of the rules at my fingertips. In other words, I can spot something is wrong, but I might not be able to neatly articulate all five parts of a rule in the way that you probably should for the essays.

Do I need to shift gears and start memorizing rules/practicing essays? Or can I just continue honing my MBE score and trust in my abilities for the essays?

Sounds like a question for themis

[xfer999]

I'm looking for advice on whether and to what extent I should prep for the MEE and MPT.

I've almost entirely focused on the MBE, and I'm averaging about 70% correct. I have completed no MPT's and very few practice MEE essays (for graded: contracts 50%, torts 60%, real property 40%). I have not done any straight-up memorization up until this point.

I have confidence in my standardized test-taking abilities (high LSAT and went to HYS). I'm also confident that I can issue spot, BS, and generally write well on the fly. But I don't have all of the rules at my fingertips. In other words, I can spot something is wrong, but I might not be able to neatly articulate all five parts of a rule in the way that you probably should for the essays.

Do I need to shift gears and start memorizing rules/practicing essays? Or can I just continue honing my MBE score and trust in my abilities for the essays?

ETA: I'm sitting for New York.

I'd do at least one practice MPT (maybe the graded one) so you at least understand how it goes (what information they give you, how the problem is organized, etc.) and, more importantly, how short is 90 minutes. Also, I found it kind of a shock to switch from rules regurgitation (MEE and basically all of bar prep so far) to analyzing statutes & case law (MPT), so that was, for me, useful to realize. I had mostly ignored MPT until I did the ones for the Simulated Exam.

If my dedicated essay grader is being truthful about the moderately high scores he keeps giving me, you shouldn't need to recite perfectly memorized rule statements for the essays. Just get in the neighborhood and try to rack up points.

[kay2016]

has anyone gotten 70 or higher on a graded exam?

what score did you get and what exam? thx thx

I've gotten 5/6s on Torts, Crim, and Evidence. 3/6 on the other 2 I've gotten back (Ks and Property).

ETA: Just got a 76% on a mixed set and am very happy with it. My previous best was on the first set at 70%.

[bobbypin]

For those of you who are struggling with the essays because of the sheer volume of topics, remember that the MPTs are a place to mine points. In my jurisdiction, the MPTs are worth 25%. If you do well on the MBE and write the shit out of the MPTs, you don't have to write a passing essay and will still pass.