Sunday, November 20, 2011

Today's NY Times Article on Legal Education

I'll have more to say about this piece later today (or tomorrow), but this mistake is surely revealing about the intentions of the author:

But citable law review articles are vastly outnumbered, it appears, by head-scratchers. “There is evidence that law review articles have left terra firma to soar into outer space,” said the Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer in a 2008 speech.

Some articles are intra-academy tiffs that could interest only the combatants (like “What Is Wrong With Kamm’s and Scanlon’s Arguments Against Taurek” from The Journal of Ethics & Social Philosophy).

The Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy is not a law review, it's a peer-reviewed philosophy journal.  And the article in question is written by a philosophy professor at the University of Vermont.  And it concerns arguments by three philosophers:  Kamm, Scanlon, and Taurek.  So what in the world does this have to do with what's in law review articles?  Nothing.

UPDATE:  Some colleagues have already written about the article, including Matt Bodie (St. Louis) and Larry Ribstein (Illinois).

ANOTHER:  More thoughts on the article here.

Legal Profession, Of Academic Interest | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Today's NY Times Article on Legal Education: