Every day out of law school is looking better and better...

I left a law school, once. I walked out, and would like to say that I never looked back, except that I constantly look back. They are still providing me with free email service, so I use it. CNN.com sends me important updates on stories that barely affect me, and which I do not affect at all, through it.

I recently discovered emails which may have been sent by some 1Ls (first-year law students, for any civilians in the crowd), but frankly, it would only shock me if these were sent by professors, and even then, only because professors typically aren't on the Law Review.

I never got to see how the whole thing started; evidently with some article written by a student at the law school on the subject of people who get into the Law Review based, not on the merits of a submitted essay, but on the merits of their GPA (I think anyone with a 3.5 or above automatically had a spot for the taking, if they wanted it). My next post will contain a response to the following email.

Email #1 goes a little something like this:
Subject: Sour grapes make an unsatisfying whine
To: LAWSTUDENT@LISTS.WAYNE.EDU


You know how when someone picks on your family, even if there is truth in what they say, you must defend it? Well, after -----'s comments about the Law Review I feel the need to respond.
First, I want to address the "free pass" onto law review. Grading on is not
a free pass. All of us that graded on worked very hard for our grades. While getting good grades does not necessarily prove that we can write, it does indicate that we have a good grasp of legal ideas, preformed well on essay exams, and have the dedication and self-discipline to succeed in the tasks that we choose to undertake. Are there other students that have these same traits? Of course, but like it or not, there is a great deal of tradition within all law schools of selecting Law Review members according to grades. The Law Review may not be made up of the best writers at the school, but hopefully the Law Review helps us improve our writing and editing skills. Plus, to make sure that everyone, regardless of grades, has an opportunity to make it onto the "gold ring" of co-curricular activities, there is a write-on competition.
Secondly, ----'s complaints about the special privileges that come with Law Review are not all based in fact. There is no super secret Law Review I.D. card that guarantees Law Review members good jobs, good grades, scholarship money, or special treatment from the administration. Making the Law Review does not guarantee a person a fabulous dream job. True, some Law Review members have excellent jobs lined up. Some of these jobs are judicial clerkships and some are with big law firms making a ton of money. ---- should not criticize those students that managed to get a prestigious job through their hard work, people skills and well developed resumes. Some
members are pursuing lower paying careers focused more on public service, where their good grades and professional skills will help the community. There are also many smart, hard working, well qualified individuals on the Law Review that do not have jobs lined up after graduation. Those Wayne grads that succeed should not have to apologize to other
embittered Wayne grads. The Wayne grads that enjoy professional accomplishment just make the rest of us look better and elevate the university's reputation. We should be grateful to those success stories, not criticize them for reaching the top levels of the profession. The fact that Law Review allows students to pursue clerkships and top jobs more easily is just a reality of the legal profession. It is not the university's fault. It is not the Law Review's fault. It is simply the way it is.
Thirdly, not all of us on Law Review are snotty. There are a number of us that go through our law school career working to keep the fact that we are on Law Review quiet, just to avoid alienating anyone. The trouble is you do not know who we are. Granted, there are a few snobs here and there, but we
are in law school. Snobs are par for the course. Besides, publicly ridiculing those students that got good grades, made it on Moot Court, wrote on to Law Review, or achieved some other recognition that ---- does not feel is sufficiently important, is his own version of snobbery.
Despite my enthusiastic defense of the Law Review, I have never been impressed with what having "Law Review" on my resume has done for me. The Law Review is just a student organization with members who are working hard to put out a publication and keep up with school work. We secured our spot on Law Review, a traditionally prestigious organization, through a combination of luck and hard work. Occasionally, I have heard Law Review members talking and I am disgusted with how pretentious they sound, but I have had the same experience with other law students that are not on Law Review. This being
said, few things have disgusted me as much as ----'s article ridiculing the Law Review and blaming the organization for hiring criteria used within thelegal profession.
I have tried to be very objective and amiable in my response, but I am not above a little snobbery myself. I just have to point out two things, just for future reference. First, the plural form for curricular is curricula, not "curriculars," and second, maybe ---- should have submitted his article to the Law Review before he published it and we could have caught some of the mistakes.