tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post6990831307126165735..comments2023-10-30T08:41:06.178-07:00Comments on Inside the Law School Scam: Would you pay $100,000 for a law review article?LawProfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05174586969709793419noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-85992484656718851492011-08-23T14:36:01.102-07:002011-08-23T14:36:01.102-07:00To modify some wisdom of Richard Feynman, "le...To modify some wisdom of Richard Feynman, "legal scholarship (philosophy) is as useful to lawyers (scientists) as ornitholgy is to birds"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-4087695508578537952011-08-12T23:21:57.858-07:002011-08-12T23:21:57.858-07:00Justice Roberts was not a partner at Covington. He...Justice Roberts was not a partner at Covington. He was a partner at Hogan and Hartson.HDLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09114928708740837928noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-38708953705842113772011-08-12T17:04:26.265-07:002011-08-12T17:04:26.265-07:00As a practicing lawyer, an academic's armchair...As a practicing lawyer, an academic's armchair quarterbacking of what I do every day is typically not useful. Many of the law review articles that I see fall into that category - and often don't include anything useful and don't have any new insights to offer (just because no professor has offered an insight in "academic circles" doesn't mean that it is new to practicing lawyers.)<br /><br />However, statistical studies can be quite useful to practitioners. We don't often get a chance to collect and analyze that data.Managing Partnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05130017520583425490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-72660746489047565302011-08-12T17:03:53.585-07:002011-08-12T17:03:53.585-07:00I expect your numbers are right in a per article b...I expect your numbers are right in a per article basis but throw this into the mix. About 250 law reviews, 4 issues a year, 4 articles and issue. This means, very conservatively 4000 articles a year. Virtually all of them are unread except by a few and may no difference in overall social welfare,Jeffrey Harrisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11647017160134065739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-40406153079242149762011-08-12T09:20:27.764-07:002011-08-12T09:20:27.764-07:00There is a lot of empirical criticism of judicial ...There is a lot of empirical criticism of judicial product, especially of U.S. Supreme Court product, in the law reviews. Much, even most, of it, however, is negative to downright scathing. Of course Roberts isn't going to have much use for that. His attitude towards the scholarship on the Court's work is just another variation on epistemic closure.Dannyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10996731827042987974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-36221814866851595722011-08-12T09:10:16.956-07:002011-08-12T09:10:16.956-07:00Three things on this:
1) A lot of academic output...Three things on this:<br /><br />1) A lot of academic output on USSCt case law. Much less commentary on state courts and inferior federal courts. There used to be a lot more of that in the law reviews 50+ years ago, and having the legal academy do that served an important purpose: practitioners can't tell their state supreme court that they've thrown the law of [X] into disarray through their incompetence.<br /><br />2) What doctrinal scholarship there is tends to focus on those issues that can be addressed without any understanding of the practical and procedural context in which they arise, which leaves a lot out.<br /><br />3) Relatedly, in the medical academy, a lot of work is being done now on best practices for patient care (e.g., Atul Gawande and his checklists). I can't think of anything remotely comparable in the legal academy. Do law professors know anything about document review or taking depositions other than that they've managed to avoid those things?alkalihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12706262051389241558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-34229696168640656172011-08-12T08:50:19.765-07:002011-08-12T08:50:19.765-07:00Speaking as a research attorney for a court of app...Speaking as a research attorney for a court of appeal, I have to say that I find law review articles generally irrelevant. A "critique" of contemporary legal doctrine, no matter how "muscular," is useless to me, because a court has to apply the law as it is, not the law as the author (in his or her rarely humble opinion) thinks it should be. That kind of article is pure onanism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-2407166566514143402011-08-12T07:38:06.212-07:002011-08-12T07:38:06.212-07:00You are setting legal education on fire. All over ...You are setting legal education on fire. All over the internet professors are freaking out and coming up with every possible way to attack and undermine you, but their side stepping, long winded, meandering and nuanced defense of law school rings hollow compared to your bitingly simple, well evidenced and honest critiques.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com