Showing posts with label law school. Show all posts
Showing posts with label law school. Show all posts

Monday, May 07, 2007

Fiasco: The Stanford Law School Graduation Adventure

A few interesting things happened on graduation day (yesterday). Overall, it was quite the pleasant ceremony accompanied by minor SNAFUs. As I approach the requisite sobriety to type, I recall the scenes of interest and invite the gentle reader to judge just how "minor" said SNAFUs may be:

1. Massive feedback in the audio system at Memorial Auditorium gave friends and family a terrible start. Fortunately, the graduating class was occupied elsewhere. Otherwise, we might have shit ourselves thinking that the scary guy may have actually gone and done something unfortunate.

2. In the GSB courtyard, a graduating 3L was forced to submit to a raucous singing of "Happy Birthday" which delayed the processional.

3. The system of insuring that an appropriate number graduates were apportioned to each row of seats while keeping the class in alphabetical order failed so miserably as to leave many empty seats in some rows, while in others there were too few. The result was something that resembled a game of musical chairs each time the graduates sought to move to the stage.

4. A shortage of diploma covers (and accompanying letters instructing students to await their real diplomas) brought the ceremony to an uncomfortable halt that left us alternately amused, perturbed, and finally incredulous as faculty members left their seats and wandered about the stage in search of a box containing extras.

5. Despite the replenished supply of diploma covers, a short time later these too were exhausted. This time there were no extras to be found. Covers were then collected from graduates who had already received them and after some to-and-fro, a stack found its way into the hands of Dean Kramer. He quipped that the recycled covers were "warm."

Oh well, some days earlier a Dean was heard to remark, "It's a sham, of course it's a sham...So there's no reason not to participate." I guess it can't be too big of a deal. As the afternoon wore on, and more and more alcohol was consumed, the following email appeared in student inboxes.

Dear Class of 2007 and Larry,

I want to apolgize to you all for the fiasco today with the diploma covers.
While we can now explain what happened, there is no excuse for it having
happened once, much less twice. I take full responsibility and apologize
to you and your families. I hope that it did not mar too badly a day that
should have been full of celebration. Rest assured that it will never
happen to another class.
...


This warmed the cockles of many a heart. As did a follow up email from another graduate who declared that
Everyone...thought the diploma mix-up added levity to the
event, and was a wonderful opportunity for the generosity of our
class to shine. It was such a warm SLS moment; it certainly did not
"mar" anything!


Apart from the mea culpa and the following kumbaya moment, it should be noted that everyone has been deathly silent on the Dean's "Charge to the Class," which was quite the ramble and included a long-ass quote from Federalist I. Good to know our parents had the privilege of the boredom and confusion that typically accompanies the application of rather ancient political theory to current events. In contrast, my parents loved Professor Fisher's comments, as did I. I will remember those comments with better clarity when I watch the DVD of the ceremony; the above descriptions have taxed my somewhat impaired short-term memory.

...ceterum, I believe that Bush should be, like, impeached.

tags technorati :

Friday, March 30, 2007

A Monica who doesn't suck

I've never been happier to not be somebody else. True, I have a bunch of shit that will have to get done by the end of the semester, but at least I'm not Monica Goodling.

Telling the Senate Judiciary Committee that you won't testify about your work for the Justice Department because doing so could incriminate you is hardly a good way to make the news.

Which really shouldn't worry her as her career has been inexplicably blessed, at least up to this point.

It all started with having to go to Bible College Law School (also known as Regent Law School, founded by a proud member of my ignominia list). If there was ever a law school with its priorities ass-backwards, it's Regent. In Regent's metric of the critical roles for the attorneys it produces, "counselor," "conciliator," and "defenders of the faith" all come well before what really matters: "effective client advocates." All of those other things are well and good but somebody's priorities are a bit off. Let's just say, if you aren't "of the faith," you might want to take your chances with a differently-schooled lawyer.

Given this unfortunate starting block, I can imagine Monica's wonderment at her seemingly miraculous elevation from graduate of Regent Law School to liaison between the Department of Justice and the White House.

Where are our trusty affirmative action critics when we need them? When this incredibly under-qualified (not to be confused with unqualified) lot starts deciding which US Attorneys to fire, things must be pretty bad. But these folks didn’t get a leg-up, or whatever pejorative the over-entitled-yet-still-bitter types are using, they got appointed. Now, from what I know at this point, I can't deduce that Ms. Goodling and her classmates from Regent are bad lawyers or otherwise particularly stupid. What I will say is that Regent, compared to the vast majority of American law schools which are mostly on the same page as the Constitution with respect to the establishment clause, is a strange little outfit of dubious quality and people who choose to go there are also strange, especially if they have other options. Those members of the Federalist Society at real law schools who are so suspicious of any minority who happens to get ahead of them would do well to offer their services to the administration so that it doesn't have to hire from the Bible College Law School barrel.

Not that I realistically expect them to willingly board a sinking ship or anything.

Notwithstanding the foregoing vicious elitism, it's a shame what is being done to this ill-placed woman. Seriously, does anyone doubt for second that a few phone calls went 'round between the important people with the frat connections, the Texas crew that knew each other from that small, small world of fancy graduate programs where nobody is separated by more than 2 degrees, and decided that the outsider who went to the Bible College Law School would be the one to hang? Apparently there is a corollary to "VP-in-charge-of-going-to-jail," a position where you get to carry the messages that will get everyone in trouble if they make it into the public record. We'll call it "sacrificial lamb." I'm sure Monica won't find the whole mutton thing too terrible if she believes she's being sacrificed for the greater glory of the Lord’s Anointed…by whom I mean Bush.

Oh yeah, I nearly forgot
...ceterum, I believe that Bush should be, like, impeached.

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Of Musicals and Drunken Hiss-n-Boos

The Law School Musical was a smashing success this year...gender, ethnic and school-based stereotypes abounded in such quantity that the participation of Justice Kennedy and former-Justice O'Connor may give rise to a Bivens action if someone could show that the Justices were acting "under color of law" when they shot video which was displayed at the opening of Act I. It was that self-indulgent. But at the time, we were all duly fascinated. At length, the variously admired and occasionally ignored dean of the law school took the state to annouce the law prom-coronation of two characters in the narrative. There was hissing and booing from the drunken quarters and applause from those of us sober enough to know that institution would not appreciate audible discord on the DVD version of the production. There are certainly uncomfortable moments in law school but the "unfortunate event" at the musical revealed much of the illustrious assembly as drunken bores. Perhaps there's something to be said for staid, stuffy lawyers with a bit too much decorum.

tags technorati :

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Admitted Student Weekend

There were a lot of "admits" hanging around campus this past weekend. I wasn't on campus. I did some reading at a cafe, went to San Francisco and bought some clothes, had dinner with a disarmingly cool character and mostly minded my own business. Unfortunately, I also slept through a classmate's birthday party. But who starts a wine and cheese party at 6:00 PM on a Saturday? (That's another problem with this whole "small town" scene: people do stuff really early. If I say I'm doing something social at 3:00, I typically mean "3:00 in the morning." But that's a Continental and East Coast thing...I digress...) I did pop into the law library Saturday afternoon and witnessed a bunch of folks wandering around the courtyards. Obviously admits. I didn't talk to any of them.

My advice for those students recently admitted to some of the best law schools in the country and currently trying to decide where to attend:

Are you familiar with the strategy of anti-smoking campaigns in the late 1980s? The pictures of a healthy, pink lung juxtaposed with the brown corroded-looking smoker's lung? Well, think of that lung as your immortal soul. A fellow over at CLS has a blog titled Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil; you should read it. Also, you should have already read a good deal of Milton, Yates and The Bible. We already have enough cultureless bores wandering around here in shitty "California" outfits and visors. (They're all very smart but their tastes and mores reflect poorly on what should, at this level, be a learned profession with members worthy of emulation.)

But quite apart from the cultural issues, I strongly urge you to consider whether there are people in your life whose moral compasses, shall we say, donĂ‚’t spin. You will have to spend a lot of time explaining things to these people. Likewise, do consider that those with "spinning compasses" will wonder what your problem is when you decide that profit optimizing schemes should typically meet with stern sanction when they predictably endanger life, limb or property. If you're a Bush supporter (I don't know whether you're blind, dumb, or just dishonest, yet here you are), you should be prepared to burst into tears at the abuses done to this country or else die suddenly from the cognitive dissonance.

But to directly address your current predicament as to where to matriculate, I suggest you avoid schools that use or plan to use the quarter system (persons with particularly strong work ethics and LSATs over 175 may ignore this), schools with more that 500 students in the entering class, and schools in rural or suburban areas. Beyond that, just attend the highest ranked of the legal dojo that will abide your presence. You'll get to do plenty of punching.


Good luck. I'm off to start the whole exam-prep thing. Right after I take this shot and...

tags technorati :

Saturday, April 01, 2006

Superfluous approbation

Yo Harvard, read and weep.

To Yale, all due respect; hope you're enjoying the winter in New Haven.

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

REVOLT!

As I walked to class this morning, thinking deep thoughts about how a 23 year-old came to skip the "$1000 Wardrobe" spread at page 162 in April's Esquire in favor of the "$5000 Wardrobe" spread 6 pages later, I could not help but detect the drums of discord. Or, with somewhat more precision, the 'pings' of discord; as most of the angry racket has been flowing via Outlook inboxes. Basically, people don't much like the new dean, or his plan to turn this place into the only "holy trinity" law school on the quarter system, or the fucking (adj.) undergrads in our library; or the fact that said dean refuses to dispose of said undergrads. A few tidbits follow:

Right on, [L]. I'd be willing to trade my library use for the ability to use the actual grass at the driving range. those mats are awful, and the lines make alignment impossible.

I'm sure any administrative discussion will be just like the quarters
system: the students are against a situation, therefore it will continue unabated, much like the domestication of the dog
- A charmingly cynical soul


...Let the undergrads go work on the damn second floor, where there are no windows, or on the third floor, which is still stuck in the 1970s. The good chairs are on the first floor, as is the reserve desk, as is our lovely new chess board. When does my opinion count at this school? Didn't count during the quarter system debate, doesn't count now......why did we hire a Dean who cowtows [sic] to the administration when we pay his salary? Why is it that whenever there is an issue that affects students he is against us instead of working for us - which is his job (that and raising money on our behalf)?
- Anon.


Man, with 90-plus-percent of the law school pissed at the undergrads, the undergrads chatting up irritating us on their email lists, offers of what will surely be a terrible drinking event at the enchanted broccoli compound (as opposed to those other rocking undergrad events where grad students are always labeled "sketchy"), and serious discussion going forward about a petition drive to withhold 3L giving until this or the quarters system reflects students' wishes, we really have so much comity here. So much!


Sooner or later someone is going to stop asking questions about the undergrads and the pedagogical benefits of the quarters system and start asking the right questions: How much does Sullivan really want to take the California bar again, and how long is our current leader's contract?
- Anon.

...Thus, the attorneys found themselves preparing for engagement on no less than two fronts

Then the undergrads tossed a bomblet...

My personal retort:
Average SAT: 1400+
Number of "hot dates" in past year: 1
Time spent jacking off in law library in preparation for physics exam: 2 hrs.
Time spent screeching on cell phone in law library in preparation for physics exam: 3 hr.
Time spent showering, brushing teeth, applying deodorant, picking out clothes prior: null
Directions to "Go Fug Yourself" in link list at right: damn near priceless

The learned attorneys mused about a response...
It's very kind of the undergrads to take time off from studying to share fashion tips with us, but I think we might have the formula down already:

ill-covered beer gut (on both guys and girls- charming) + sloppy sweatpants and/or unfortunate miniskirt + distorted sense of one's own physical attractiveness = Stanford undergrad

I'm crushed I'll be missing the 8 pm fugly parade- should make for some decent observational humor...
- Genteel Bane of UGrads


A short time later, hostilities commenced...
Scene: Undergrad grossness gathers around the library tables.


Large Dustin Diamond look alike (very loudly): "Ok, we're going to sing happy birthday to..."


[E, Fearless Insurgent Captain](equally loudly): "No you're not. This is a library and people are trying to study. Shut the f**k up."


Classic stuff. And yes, actually sing happy birthday. The undergrads party that much.


The next day (this afternoon), the dean looked down from his perch and said:
...For the Law School to flourish it cannot conduct its business apart from the rest of the University as an independent operation. We need the support and cooperation of the University in a great many areas...immediately and in the long run, the Law School as a whole, but especially the students, have more to gain by being an integral part of the larger Stanford community than we do from remaining separate. .... It would do us significant harm within the University were we to be the lone department that precludes other members of the University community from using our facilities.


Never mind that the current acrimony has nothing to do with access to the book resources of the library; only access to a very expensive (paid for by law school alumni), and heretofore quiet, reading room on the first floor. Never mind that I use the other libraries to (gasp) check out books and depart. But, alas, my commentary skews officious. The gentle dean continued thusly:


...the law library will address issues of noice [sic] and inappropriate behavior by clearly posting our rules and asking everyone to comply. Incidents like what took place last night will not be tolerated. The library is a space to study, not to protest or socialize, and anyone who interferes or disrupts the proper use of the room will be asked to leave. .... I view restricting access to our current space as a last resort and want first to see if we can address the problems in less drastic ways.


Again, never mind that the "last resort" option of restricting access to the space has been working fine for years. I’d mention some other candidates for dean but I wouldn’t want them disappeared.

Thursday, March 02, 2006

Wherein we plumb the depths of law-student psychosis

I went on a mid-week urban adventure. It was a bad idea; I had a meeting with a professor at 11:00 the next morning. Needless to say, nobody actually plans to go clubbing in San Francisco when they have perfectly good reasons to stay in Palo Alto and attend to very important, very erudite, conversations and tasks.

Anyhow, through an artifice, the details of which I omit to spare the innocent, I found myself in a bar/club in San Francisco accompanied by some very interesting girls with quite divergent personalities who I had never gone out with before. Throughout the evening the character in question remained quiet and subtle, usually signs of the socially competent and conscientious. However, after apparently failing to locate members of our cadre for not more than 15 minutes, she wandered outside in a huff. When we eventually found her, she proceeded to shriek and shove at her girlfriend in a manner very much in keeping with the child-like state in which she entered law school.

Draw whatever conclusions you will from the previous sentence.

As I fled up Castro Street with my friend of many years, desperate to escape the feminine sidewalk carnage in our wake, I wondered: how do people of such emotional fragility survive three years of the most severe mind-fucking devised by the legal academy? What skills could this person possibly have that would convince anyone to both put up with her attitude and pay her US $140,000 per year with virtually guaranteed yearly bonuses and raises? That amount is several times what the typically good-natured American can expect to earn at the apogee of his or her career. Perhaps the typically good-natured American is both pathetic and stupid but that's no excuse for rewarding borderline-psychotics who happen to stumble through a torts outline.

To address the afore-posed questions, perhaps this unfortunate soul, lacking social grace or ability to just suck it up and be an adult, is a victim of the law school. Perhaps the bankruptcy professor yells too much; or the Con-Law guy made too many mean-spirited quips; maybe her partner in negotiations was a hard-ass. Any of these things could explain such bizarre behaviour--and the fact that I find it necessary to write about this. But perhaps I've too much empathy re: the whole law school mind-fucking thing; it's more likely that there's just something fundamentally unreasonable (here I intend a strict legalese usage) about people who start fights with their friends in public and commit other social torts. I suppose that since I can't sue for my evening back, I'll just put it down to a lesson learned and (hopefully) karmic currency for better adventures to grace this space.

As for the ridiculous amount of money this person is going to make, I make no good-faith complaint and only mention it to arouse the gentle reader's outrage. Hell, I've probably got the same package.

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

In praise of self-indulgent law professors

I don't know how they do things at your law school but around here the professors take their time producing grades. If my rather hazy memory serves me, I sat for an exam over one month ago and I still haven't heard any results. Before anyone suggests that the poor overworked professor has 75 other exams to grade, let me point out that my law school is very prestigious and most classes are very small. The only large class saw its professor complete grading quite some time ago. (Prof. [X], you're the greatest. I apologize for my failure to inquire about your health but I hope that evidence of your recovery may soon grace court rooms throughout the Ninth Circuit.)

Heretofore, I fervently believed that "procrastibation" (thanks for the expression, [N]) was the cure for any particularly dull legal task. Nowadays, I'm ever-so-slightly resentful of folks taking their time. After slaving nonstop for 4 months in at least two of the classes which I actually took for a grade, I'd appreciate some feedback that doesn't require me to "explain" myself. There is a bright side to this Dantean limbo: the students get a nice cooling off period during which we reflect on our high-paying jobs, nice suits and pleasant friends before being reminded that we were supposed to have learned something.

Don't get me wrong; we wouldn't be here were we not intellectuals of the highest order with a deep and abiding interest in tackling abstract issues that both put normal people to sleep and form the elementary fibers of the nation's tapestry. I have greater concerns than 1700-pages of disorganization posing as a casebook. So, I'm not going to begrudge the profs taking their time and going on vacating before reading some very dull exams (by which I mean our responses, not the very stimulating questions presented). Frankly, I'm as self-indulgent as any of the professors and since some people are under the impression that knowledge is power, I will simply point out that modern law is open source warfare. That is to say, obsessive instant messaging and web surfing during class makes one a better lawyer. Don't laugh at us; while you're "paying attention," we're practicing.