scholarly journals Affirmative Inaction: A Quantitative Analysis of Progress Toward “Critical Mass” in U.S. Legal Education

2021 ◽  
pp. 987
Author(s):  
Loren Lee
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
United States ◽  
Quantitative Analysis ◽  
Affirmative Action ◽  
Critical Mass ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
The Supreme Court

Since 1978, the Supreme Court has recognized diversity as a compelling government interest to uphold the use of affirmative action in higher education. Yet the constitutionality of the practice has been challenged many times. In Grutter v. Bollinger, for example, the Court denied its use in perpetuity and suggested a twenty-five-year time limit for its application in law school admissions. Almost two decades have passed, so where do we stand? This Note’s quantitative analysis of the matriculation of and degrees awarded to Black and Latinx students at twenty-nine accredited law schools across the United States illuminates a stark lack of progress toward critical mass since Grutter and reveals the continued need for affirmative action in law school admissions.

The Proliferation of Case Method Teaching in American Law Schools: Mr. Langdell's Emblematic “Abomination,” 1890-1915

2006 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce A. Kimball
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Professional Education ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
Case Method ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
American Higher Education ◽  
American Law ◽  
Law Professors

Case method teaching was first introduced into American higher education in 1870 by Christopher C. Langdell (1826-1906) of Harvard Law School (HLS), where it became closely associated with—and emblematic of—a set of academic meritocratic reforms. Though regnant today, “the ultimate triumph of [Langdell's] system was not apparent” for many years. The vast majority of students, alumni, and law professors initially derided it as an “abomination,” and for two decades case method and the associated reforms were largely confined to Harvard. During the subsequent twenty-five years between 1890 and 1915, a national controversy ensued as to whether case method teaching—and the concomitant meritocratic reforms—would predominate in legal education and, ultimately, professional education in the United States.

The Langdell Problem: Historicizing the Century of Historiography, 1906–2000s

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce A. Kimball
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Bachelor's Degree ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Christopher Columbus ◽  
History Of ◽  
Admission Requirement

Christopher Columbus Langdell (1826–1906) is arguably the most influential figure in the history of legal education in the United States, having shaped the modern law school by introducing a number of significant reforms during his tenure as dean of Harvard Law School (HLS) from 1870 to 1895. Langdell's innovations—including the admission requirement of a bachelor's degree, the graded and sequential curriculum, the hurdle of annual examinations for continuation and graduation, the independent career track for professional faculty, the transformation of the professional library from a textbook repository into a scholarly resource, and the inductive pedagogy of teaching from cases—became the characteristics gradually adopted by university law schools after 1890 and, eventually, schools of other professions. Langdell thus transformed legal education from an undemanding, gentlemanly acculturation into an academic meritocracy.

AALS Panel – Global Legal Education – Can American Law Schools Respond to the Opportunities?

2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry Bakken
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Students ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
American Law ◽  
Foreign Governments ◽  
Simultaneous Movement

During the past decade many American law schools have identified and responded to the opportunity and necessity of training law students and lawyers for the challenges created by globalization. Opportunities are certainly available to schools with strong business, international trade and human rights programs. Opportunities are, however, also available to schools with interests and strengths in the newer disciplines such as conflict resolution, intellectual property and environment protection. Law schools which have ventured into global oriented training have recognized that the market is not simply a one-way-street for domestic students but also includes training of foreign law students and lawyers. Private foundations in the United States and abroad, foreign governments and our national government have helped finance foreign lawyer visits and training events throughout America. When international lawyers visit the United States, domestic law schools are involved as hosts, training sites, and sources of professional expertise. There has also been a simultaneous movement of domestic lawyers and law students through foreign law school programs and other study abroad opportunities. When all these international experiences are taken together one realizes the need for law schools to become more involved in the development and implementation of training and development of globally oriented legal education.

Affirmative Action and Aboriginal Government: The Case for Legal Education in Nunavut

1999 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 21-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly Gallagher-Mackay
Keyword(s):  
Justice System ◽  
Critical Mass ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Disadvantaged Communities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Education Gap ◽  
The University ◽  
And Training

AbstractThe Nunavut Land Claim Agreement commits federal and territorial governments to the recruitment and training of Inuit for positions throughout government. In the justice sector, there is currently a major shortage of Inuit lawyers or future judges. However, there also appears to be a fundamental mismatch between what existing law schools offer and what Inuit students are prepared to accept. A northern-based law school might remedy some of these problems. However, support for a law school requires un-thinking certain key tenets of legal education as we know it in Canada. In particular, it may require a step outside the university-based law school system. Universities appear to be accepted as the exclusive guardian of the concept of academic standards. Admission standards, in particular, serve as both a positivist technology of exclusion, and a political rationale for the persistence of majoritarian institutions as the major means of training members of disadvantaged communities. Distinctive institutions – eventually working with university-based law schools – have the potential to help bridge the education gap between Inuit and other Canadians. In so doing, they have the potential to train a critical mass of Inuit to meaningfully adapt the justice system to become a pillar of the public government in the Inuit homeland of Nunavut.

scholarly journals An American Looks at Legal Education in New Zealand

1999 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 419
Author(s):  
Allison Dunham
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
Admission Process ◽  
Office Practice

This article undertakes an informal comparison between legal education in the United States and in New Zealand. Dunham compares the admission process, the content taught at law school, the methods of instruction, law office practice for students, and the student makeup. The author concludes that no system of legal education is best, and that it is important to continue to ask how legal education can be improved. 

Possible Reform for Legal Education in Taiwan: A Refined “J.D. System”?

2006 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Chang-fa Lo
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Undergraduate Education ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
Graduate Degree ◽  
Current Discussion

AbstractThis focus of this brief paper is on the current discussion in Taiwan concerning the introduction of the United States “J.D. System” where law is studied as a graduate degree. The author sees the advantages of such a programme over the existing primarily undergraduate legal education, but argues that, in addition to a full fledged J.D. system, another “track” of undergraduate students transferring to law school after 2 years of undergraduate education would be a more suitable compromise for Taiwan.

The Disastrous First Fund-Raising Campaign in Legal Education: The Harvard Law School Centennial, 1914–1920

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-578
Author(s):  
Bruce A. Kimball
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fund Raising ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Students ◽  
New Venture ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
The Law ◽  
The University

Between 1915 and 1925, Harvard University conducted the first national public fund-raising campaign in higher education in the United States. At the same time, Harvard Law School attempted the first such effort in legal education. The law school organized its effort independently, in conjunction with its centennial in 1917. The university campaign succeeded magnificently by all accounts; the law school failed miserably. Though perfectly positioned for this new venture, Harvard Law School raised scarcely a quarter of its goal from merely 2 percent of its alumni. This essay presents the first account of this campaign and argues that its failure was rooted in longstanding cultural and professional objections that many of the school's alumni shared: law students and law schools neither need nor deserve benefactions, and such gifts worsen the overcrowding of the bar. Due to these objections, lethargy, apathy, and pessimism suffused the campaign. These factors weakened the leadership of the alumni association, the dean, and the president, leading to inept management, wasted time, and an unlikely strategy that was pursued ineffectively. All this doomed the campaign, particularly given the tragic interruptions of the dean's suicide and World War I, along with competition from the well-run campaigns for the University and for disaster relief due to the war.

Many Laws, Many Legalities

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 621-622 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce Kercher
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law Students ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
English Law ◽  
Made In

Peter Karsten asks why there might be a greater comparative propensity among CANZ historians than among those of the United States. Part of the reason may lie in the legal education many of us in Australia received, and in the formal legal status of many commonwealth countries until recently. As recently as the early 1970s, Australian law students were taught that English law was as significant as that made in the Australian courts. Appeals from the Australian Supreme Courts to the Privy Council were finally abolished only in 1986. From that time onward, there was a drive within the law schools to find differences from England, to look toward comparisons with other places than England.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document