Law Review - How stupid was it not to petition for law review?

[wustl3l]

Don't join a journal if your hearts not in it, its a ton of time consuming mundane work for the most part.

You do know that virtually no one's does the journal because they love it? Virtually all people do it for the resume boost. It's a proxy for having excelled in law school, right or wrong.

[ferbear]

I think it's a big mistake. When employers look at resumes, they know that the only real reason not to try for law review/journals is, "Ehhh. Seems like a lot of work. I don't feel like it." It evidences a certain level of lazyness. They of course do not want those types of people.

that is simply wrong.

pretty much.

Yeah, good lord. So wrong.

[jimmyjohn]

Yes, it was pretty stupid not to even petition to be on law review. 
Are you on moot court/mock trial?  Doing a clinic?  The people you'll be up against in OCI are the people who are at your school.  If you are all roughly equal and some of them have journals or other extracurriculars, who would you call back?

It also may affect where you apply at all.  Some employers don't want to hire anyone who isn't on a journal. 

I would call back the person who I thought had the best interview.  I know that most of the OCI firms are full of lifeless drones and all they care about is whether you can regularly do mind numbing work for 70 hours every week. Thus, ability to carry on a conversation isn't as important as whether you have done similiar mind numbing work (e.g. cite checking) in law school. 

If some employer doesn't want to look at my resume or refuses to consider me for a position because I chose not to be on a journal in law school, then I don't want to work there anyway.  That type of attitude towards prospective associates is pretty much indicative of what is wrong with biglaw in the first place.   

Don't get me wrong, I would do a bit of screening prior to the interview.  But if two candidates have similar grades from similar schools, I'm not going to refuse an interview or refuse to hire because a person who is otherwise qualified was not a member of the law review or the space law journal.  It simply doesn't make one bit of difference in practice and does not make you a more qualified attorney. 

[jacy85]

Yes, it was pretty stupid not to even petition to be on law review. 
Are you on moot court/mock trial?  Doing a clinic?  The people you'll be up against in OCI are the people who are at your school.  If you are all roughly equal and some of them have journals or other extracurriculars, who would you call back?

It also may affect where you apply at all.  Some employers don't want to hire anyone who isn't on a journal. 

I would call back the person who I thought had the best interview.  I know that most of the OCI firms are full of lifeless drones and all they care about is whether you can regularly do mind numbing work for 70 hours every week. Thus, ability to carry on a conversation isn't as important as whether you have done similiar mind numbing work (e.g. cite checking) in law school. 

If some employer doesn't want to look at my resume or refuses to consider me for a position because I chose not to be on a journal in law school, then I don't want to work there anyway.  That type of attitude towards prospective associates is pretty much indicative of what is wrong with biglaw in the first place.   

Don't get me wrong, I would do a bit of screening prior to the interview.  But if two candidates have similar grades from similar schools, I'm not going to refuse an interview or refuse to hire because a person who is otherwise qualified was not a member of the law review or the space law journal.  It simply doesn't make one bit of difference in practice and does not make you a more qualified attorney. 

I agree in principle, but unfortunately many legal employers don't think this way.  Really, what it amounts to is that setting high GPA/rank requirements as well as jettisoning any resume that doesn't have journal listed is an easy (perhaps lazy in some cases?) way to narrow down applicants.

Happens everywhere.  Law schools w/ auto-admit and auto-reject piles based on LSAT/GPA index.  Clerkship applications w/ federal judges where law clerks will toss out a great applicant because there was a missing period in their resume.

[wustl3l]

Don't join a journal if your hearts not in it, its a ton of time consuming mundane work for the most part.

You do know that virtually everyone on the LR does it for the resume boost? Right or wrong, it is a proxy for excelling in law school.

I don't know anyone that did it because they just really loved academic writing although I'm sure there are a handful out there.

[wustl3l]

Don't get me wrong, I would do a bit of screening prior to the interview.  But if two candidates have similar grades from similar schools, I'm not going to refuse an interview or refuse to hire because a person who is otherwise qualified was not a member of the law review or the space law journal.  It simply doesn't make one bit of difference in practice and does not make you a more qualified attorney. 

I wouldn't insta-ding a candidate bc they didn't have LR over someone with similar grades but you would definitely have to do some explaining. If I wasn't convinced that you weren't on LR bc you just didn't want the hassle then I would probably ding you unless there was something ultra-compelling about you.

[Matthies]

Don't join a journal if your hearts not in it, its a ton of time consuming mundane work for the most part.

You do know that virtually everyone on the LR does it for the resume boost? Right or wrong, it is a proxy for excelling in law school.

I don't know anyone that did it because they just really loved academic writing although I'm sure there are a handful out there.

Yea, but if you hate and suck at you can get kicked off, if you can't turn in your cites ontime or right ect. If your not going to put in the effort don't join up. I did it becuase I liked acdemic writing. 

[Sell Out]

Are you interested in clinics, moot court, or mock trial?  These help tremendously.  Also, do you work outside of school?  Smaller firm work during the school year can really help, or so I've heard.  I would rather take someone who's been drafting MSJs or writing briefs for two years over the kid from the International Law of Hot Dog Vending and General Snack-Dog Practices Journal any day of the week.  Possibly they'll know what they are doing when they get there.

I'm going the clinic route.  I had an easy decision in front of me though.  I don't want to do big law and would like to study in Canada for a semester.  Journals at my school are a two year commitment.  Thus, I'm no longer eligible.  So long as you look like you did something, you should be fine.  I wouldn't rule out a successful career just yet.  Employers are going to care about grades more than anything else.  Boost the GPA, but that's standard advice regardless of the circumstances.

[wustl3l]

Are you interested in clinics, moot court, or mock trial?  These help tremendously.  Also, do you work outside of school?  Smaller firm work during the school year can really help, or so I've heard.  I would rather take someone who's been drafting MSJs or writing briefs for two years over the kid from the International Law of Hot Dog Vending and General Snack-Dog Practices Journal any day of the week.  Possibly they'll know what they are doing when they get there.

I'm going the clinic route.  I had an easy decision in front of me though.  I don't want to do big law and would like to study in Canada for a semester.  Journals at my school are a two year commitment.  Thus, I'm no longer eligible.  So long as you look like you did something, you should be fine.  I wouldn't rule out a successful career just yet.  Employers are going to care about grades more than anything else.  Boost the GPA, but that's standard advice regardless of the circumstances.

I should clarify that I don't care about secondary journals, I'm only referring to the primary journal.

[goaliechica]

Don't get me wrong, I would do a bit of screening prior to the interview.  But if two candidates have similar grades from similar schools, I'm not going to refuse an interview or refuse to hire because a person who is otherwise qualified was not a member of the law review or the space law journal.  It simply doesn't make one bit of difference in practice and does not make you a more qualified attorney. 

I wouldn't insta-ding a candidate bc they didn't have LR over someone with similar grades but you would definitely have to do some explaining. If I wasn't convinced that you weren't on LR bc you just didn't want the hassle then I would probably ding you unless there was something ultra-compelling about you.

So what reason for not doing law review beyond "I tried but failed" would you find compelling?