Law School Discussion
  1. Law School Discussion
  2. Profile of Groundhog
  3. Show Posts
  4. Messages

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Groundhog

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 329
91
Current Law Students / Re: Help! My Supervising Attorney Wants Me to Write My Own Letter of Recommendation!
« on: November 07, 2014, 04:31:19 PM »
Quote from: jonlevy on November 07, 2014, 04:06:15 PM
I can only imagine their briefs are all copy and paste jobs.

Hey, some of us in a production environment make our living that way...no point in reinventing the wheel if I or another attorney has already written part of a brief addressing that exact issue with citations.

92
Current Law Students / Re: Help! My Supervising Attorney Wants Me to Write My Own Letter of Recommendation!
« on: October 29, 2014, 04:36:09 PM »
My advice is to be specific as possible. That is why your supervisor wants you to write the letter. You say you elevated the practice of the attorneys. How? You can use typical STAR descriptions to show exemplary work as well.

In addition to the major accomplishments, think of the things you want to highlight that are relevant to whatever type of courts to which you are applying. If there's any overlap at all, highlight that in the letter.

When you have an idea about what things you want to discuss, you can search the internet for sample legal letters of recommendation.

93
Minority and Non-Traditional Law Students / Re: Advice on applying to Tier 4 Law Schools or doing an additional year of college
« on: October 26, 2014, 03:40:47 PM »
I agree with the above. All I have to add is that a part-time may program may be the best way to go, as you still have a family to consider. Many law students in full-time programs are straight from undergrad or a year or two out and don't have kids. They will be your competition.

A part-time program, in addition to better suiting a family lifestyle, may understand your situation during undergrad better and allow you to attend a higher-ranked school than if you attend a full-time program. It is well-known that for schools with both full-time and part-time JD programs, the part-time programs have less stringent admissions requirements. Some students that desire to then switch to the full-time program and make up the credits over the summer. I wouldn't recommend this, but if you find that you have extra time as a 1L(!!) then you could consider it.

94
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Good Programs for Law Grads
« on: October 26, 2014, 09:00:18 AM »
I don't think an MPA would be of much use to OP, as he already has a JD. If the sole purpose of the degree is to get student internships and an in somewhere while he applies to general government jobs, then it'd be fine and relevant.

But, IMO, best thing for OP to do would be to pick a more specific skill or field he can study at the Master's level or even Bachelor's that will enhance his overall application. Math, engineering, econ, CS, those fields never go out of style and some would even qualify OP for the patent bar if he decides to practice law.

Also, depends on OP's undergrad.

95
Law School Admissions / Re: Disciplinary action
« on: October 23, 2014, 10:38:33 PM »
You must disclose all incidents of discipline and whatever else is requested of you, both for your application and later for the bar. There is obviously a record of it somewhere if you were placed on any sort of probation. What they probably meant is it does not show up on your transcripts; however most law schools will require conduct certification from your undergrad.

It will likely not be a problem for admissions as long as you disclose, are honest about the circumstances, and briefly acknowledge you were in the wrong.

96
Studying for the LSAT / Re: I took the LSAT December 5th!
« on: October 14, 2014, 05:55:45 PM »
Congratulations! What made your experience unique?

97
Law School Admissions / Re: Please Help!
« on: October 08, 2014, 03:40:01 AM »
Quote from: I.M.D.Law on October 07, 2014, 04:24:17 PM
There are private student loans I think, plus (in theory) scholarships
I would say this is even more reason to aim military though, they pay for it and room and board
One cannot join the U.S. military unless one is already a permanent resident or citizen.

98
Law School Admissions / Re: Please Help!
« on: October 07, 2014, 01:57:27 PM »
A few questions for OP:

Why the US? How will you finance your education, given non-US citizens aren't eligible for financial aid?

Frankly, even assuming admissions were no problem, many law students in the US have trouble financing their education. You'd then be a US JD graduate, but not be eligible to work here. What is your eventual goal?

99
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Scalia on religion
« on: October 06, 2014, 01:46:26 PM »
Quote from: FreshlyMinted on October 06, 2014, 12:22:59 PM
Quote from: Groundhog on October 06, 2014, 01:12:50 AM
I think that if we're using Scalia's "originalism," we'd look at the Founders and realize they were deists, who didn't believe God intervenes at all after setting the world into motion. So, I don't think it would be a huge stretch according to his actual theory that they would be just as happy with agnosticism or atheism or pastafarianism. Pastafarianism would certainly seem to be a good way to "practice" atheism with 1st amendment protection, but I wonder about the MOVE series of cases where they added the sincerely held element to the test.

Realistically, it seems pretty clear that the current Court and some in the past would read the Free Exercise clause as benefitting religion over non-believers/non-practicers.

This is somewhat reflective of a larger tension between the Free Exercise and the Establishment clauses.

Nice comparison of his cushy and powerful job on the Supreme Court to the journey to Mt. Doom.
Had to research the pasta thing, I also looked up MOVE but found something that I doubt is what you were talking about (crazy *&^% though-and started as religious based all the same)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE

Not sure if that's it or I am misremembering case name. It was a somewhat controversial philosophy, like MOVE, that many adherents claimed was a religion. Then there was a decision where the Supreme Court said it had to be sincerely held, equivalent to a religion, but not necessarily exactly a religion...eh, I don't have time to research the case names today but those were the general issues.

100
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Scalia on religion
« on: October 06, 2014, 01:12:50 AM »
I think that if we're using Scalia's "originalism," we'd look at the Founders and realize they were deists, who didn't believe God intervenes at all after setting the world into motion. So, I don't think it would be a huge stretch according to his actual theory that they would be just as happy with agnosticism or atheism or pastafarianism. Pastafarianism would certainly seem to be a good way to "practice" atheism with 1st amendment protection, but I wonder about the MOVE series of cases where they added the sincerely held element to the test.

Realistically, it seems pretty clear that the current Court and some in the past would read the Free Exercise clause as benefitting religion over non-believers/non-practicers.

This is somewhat reflective of a larger tension between the Free Exercise and the Establishment clauses.

Nice comparison of his cushy and powerful job on the Supreme Court to the journey to Mt. Doom.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 329