October 28, 2022
A new "Creative Commons" license that permits users to "remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially"
October 25, 2022
I know this question will make readers of this blog laugh, even as they recognize the pernicious influence the USNews.com rankings have on legal education and the decisions of applicants. But I was struck when having lunch this past Spring with some talented LLM students from Japan and China that they seemed to assume the answer to the question was "yes." In a way, that sums up the problem confronted by American legal education. USNews.com is undoubtedly perceived as authoritative by many students, who lack the knowledge and resources to assess the nonsensical ranking stew (reputation, library resources, expenditures per capita, self-reported employment data and on and on) used by USNews.com.
October 24, 2022
October 13, 2022
UPDATE: Correspondence with a colleague at Yale makes me realize an ambiguity in the preceding: what I thought was a "victory" for Judge Ho's proposed boycott was that Dean Gerken shared this message in public. Past criticisms from prominent YLS alumni make it clear why the Dean would have been concerned with these issues and would have written to alumni prior to the current brouhaha.
October 11, 2022
A couple of readers have asked whether there is a list of the boycotters. The only two that appear to be public are Judge Ho of the 5th Circuit and Judge Branch of the 11th Circuit. One law professor who inquried about this explained:
Since your blog is read by many law profs, I think you should publish the names of judges who have publicly stated they will not hire Yale clerks so that faculty at other places can decide whether they will recommend students to those judges. One of the advantages of a clerkship is exposure to someone of experience who can model good decision-making and convey an appropriate sense of how a judge comports him/herself and takes on hard questions in our system. A faculty member could well come to the view that a particular judge would not provide a good life-learning experience for a would-be clerk and a boycotting announcement could well figure in such a determination.
I guess I would be disinclined to encourage a boycott of the boycotting judges, as it were. Still, it ought to be a matter of public record (if only for the benefit of Yale students) which federal judges are joining this boycott. If anyone knows of a list of the other judges participating in this boycott, please post a link in the comments. Submit the comment only once, it may take awhile to appear.
October 10, 2022
The Blog Emperor has details. I think Professor Kerr is correct that this is not appropriate, and I might add that it smacks of unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination, insofar as the judges are promising to punish students who choose Yale because they reject these judges' view of the free speech issues.
The irony, of course, is that there are federal judges who don't hire Yale Law graduates because of the perception that Yale doesn't do a good job teaching the students law. Judge Posner, who did hire Yale (and Chicago and Harvard) graduates, once recommended one of his former clerks to me as follows: "He was a very good clerk despite going to Yale." That was funny, but the implication was obvious, and I've talked to other judges over the years whose skepticism goes farther. Not hiringg Yale Law grads for this reason is, of course, permissible.
October 06, 2022
Descendants of Judge Hastings and alumni sue over proposed plan to drop "Hastings" name from the University of California College of Law in San Francisco
Story here. The primary cause of action appears to be breach of contract. If that's correct, then it's not clear why it is even relevant whether the allegations about the involvement of Judge Hastings in the murder of Native Americans is relevant (but I have not read the complaint).
October 05, 2022
To read this, one might think it was that the latter, unlike the former, pursues partisan political objectives. By contrast, I would have thought the difference is that the former pursued worthy and valuable moral and political objectives, while the latter generally does not. See generally.
It's often said "we're all realists now," but it's not clear that's true of the constitutional law professors quoted in that article.