Once you are on law review

[eli250]

I was lucky enough to make law review and I realize it'll be a lot of work.  But my question is whether or not your performance on law review, like how well you cite-check or how good your note is, will ever come into play in the job search.  In other words, is it enough to just be on law review, or is it important to do well at whatever I'm asked to do?

[jacy85]

It depends; if you would like to keep LR on your resume past 2L year, then you should do what you have to in order to stay on LR and not get kicked off for bad cite checking and/or failure to complete your comment.

[JohnnyAwesome]

One thing you're going to want to consider is the fact that people currently on your law review or alumni of your law review will get offers or have jobs at many of the top firms in the area around your school. If you slack on law review and then put it on your resume, I can see an employer contacting you EIC or asking an alumnus/a from that review about you. If you're lazy it's going to be real tough to get by that. Also like Jacy said I'm sure explaining to an employer why you got kicked off LR is no fun. I don't know how your review does it by our out going board 3L's will chose the new board from the staff. If you're lazy you're getting the dubious "senior staff member" title your 3L year instead of a real board position. Why would you write a bad note anyway. I am hoping to get my note published and if it's bad I know that can't happen.

[GA-fan]

Congrats! Not that I have any business answering this post (I just made LR myself), but the quality of work you did to get on law review is probably pretty similar to what's going to be required of you once you're on. I'm sure you didn't get on by doing a bad job bluebooking. so just keep up your current effort level and you'll be fine.

[unlvcrjchick]

One thing you're going to want to consider is the fact that people currently on your law review or alumni of your law review will get offers or have jobs at many of the top firms in the area around your school. If you slack on law review and then put it on your resume, I can see an employer contacting you EIC or asking an alumnus/a from that review about you. If you're lazy it's going to be real tough to get by that. Also like Jacy said I'm sure explaining to an employer why you got kicked off LR is no fun. I don't know how your review does it by our out going board 3L's will chose the new board from the staff. If you're lazy you're getting the dubious "senior staff member" title your 3L year instead of a real board position. Why would you write a bad note anyway. I am hoping to get my note published and if it's bad I know that can't happen.

I'm sorry, but I just had to correct you on something.  Not making editor does not necessarily equate to laziness!  Why do I know this?  Because I myself didn't score any editor positions.  Why, you may ask?  It basically boils down to 2 reasons:  1) I work full time, so the editors (none of whom had full-time jobs) thought I would be unable to make the time commitment, despite the fact that I finished my comment and completed ALL of my assignments ON TIME; and 2) I didn't kiss the editorial staff's collective ass, unlike some of my fellow LR colleagues. 

Plus, since I did not spend any time in the LR office during the day - I got my work done on the weekends, at home, when I wasn't working - none of the editors really knew me.  And we all know that in most professions, including law, it's not what you know, it's WHOM you know.

Another reason, I suspect, I didn't make editor is because of the fact that I on occasion asked the outgoing editorial staff questions regarding why they weren't getting their assignments done on time:  speaking of which, they are 3 months behind on making a decision regarding whose notes get published!  I called them out several times on the fact that they weren't being overly communicative with the junior staff members, and apparently they don't want to make someone an editor if that someone calls them out on their lazy BS.

Bottom line:  if senior staff members' work truly sucked, they wouldn't have received LR credit; we get Pass/Fail credits each semester we're on LR. So don't assume senior staffers are where they are because they are lazy.  There are a limited number of slots, and everyone (well, most everyone) on LR has the ability to do the work, and no matter which way you slice it, some people won't make editor.

[Blunderbuss]

This can be highly school specific, but isn't there a lot more rising 3L on LR than there are editorial position?  In that case someone must become senior staff member.  There is nothing wrong with that. 

[unlvcrjchick]

This can be highly school specific, but isn't there a lot more rising 3L on LR than there are editorial position?  In that case someone must become senior staff member.  There is nothing wrong with that. 

You are correct Blunderbuss!  Of course, some schools have more editor positions than others, but the fact is that there are usually a lot more rising 3L's (or in my case, part-time 4L's) than there are available editor positions. 

[tacojohn]

When they say an editor position, I don't think they mean an executive position, like EIC, whomever is in charge of the article selections, etc.  Just any 3L position.

And to answer the question, the answer is no.  You have to put a minimum of work into the review, no question about it.  If you do really poorly, you will get kicked off, or you'll get some sham job just to avoid having to kick you off.  Otherwise, if you just aren't that good at cite checking, but try hard and get things done on time, nothing will happen.  And unless you have a really overzealous EIC micromanaging everything, it's hard for him or her to know what 2L associates are doing, since their work probably passes through a lot of hands before it gets to the EIC.  Unless you perform so badly that you get consistently poor reviews, and your immediate supervisor is complaining all the time, you're fine.

Just put a good faith effort into everything, and try to improve all your cite checking as the year goes on.

[dorsia]

I think it matters.  If you do well, you should have a better shot at getting a clerkship (if you're interested in one, that is).  And if you are on the editorial board, you may have more options after you graduate as well.  Not all summer associates are enamored of their current firm; being an editor can put you in a position to change firms after you graduate.

And if you put in little to no work, other law-review members will remember.  So work hard.  Plus, Bluebooking is fun!

[KrazyNazi]

Okay, let me explain to you retards how this is. 

Being a mere senior staff is not as advantageous as being an editor on LR, just like going to Chicago is not as advantageous as going to Stanford. 

If you think being on LR is good enough for you, then editorial position is good to have, but not necessary.  If you are eying something ultra competitive, like CoA clerkship, then maybe you will need every edge you can get.  Almost no one gets kick of LR, and most rising 3L do not become editors.