Law School Discussion

"academic steroids" in law school?

Thistle

  • *****
  • 6324
    • View Profile
Re: "academic steroids" in law school?
« Reply #20 on: May 09, 2007, 09:28:28 PM »
i was an honor justice this year and was asked by a number of students if it were an honor code violation.

since it doesnt fall in the range of "intoxicants" that was a no

H4CS

  • ****
  • 2445
    • View Profile
Re: "academic steroids" in law school?
« Reply #21 on: May 09, 2007, 09:29:01 PM »
If it sounds high-and-mighty to suggest that people follow the law, why are you in law school?   

This is why I shoot jaywalkers on sight.  I've never heard of anyone here using prescription drugs in this manner, nor do I know anyone who I suspect might.  People start to work hard around finals, sure, but nothing this intense.

Re: "academic steroids" in law school?
« Reply #22 on: May 09, 2007, 09:44:18 PM »
If a school or bar examiner were informed that someone might have been using performance enhancing drugs  ;) I'm sure they would at least question the person about it. 

Although I wouldn't be sure that they would deem such an accusation admissable in their investigation (bar examinations do end up in the Supreme Court, after all), I'll concede that it's a possibility.

Re: "academic steroids" in law school?
« Reply #23 on: May 09, 2007, 10:00:45 PM »
Wasn't Rehnquist on all sorts of drugs? :-\

Re: "academic steroids" in law school?
« Reply #24 on: May 10, 2007, 06:16:08 AM »
Either you're a serious gunner already who believes in natural law, or you have no idea how laws are made and the political reasons behind them in the first place. Personally, I don't put the "law" up on a high shelf to not break- not to say that I break the law intentionally- but I live according to my own morals and values. If they conflict with the law, that's a risk I'm willing to take to stand up for what I believe in. Law is politically, socially, and morally motivated, and it's up to each person to determine which laws they choose to break. I'll probably get some interesting responses to this, but if you follow your own conscience, you'll get much further than trying to follow a series of codes- which are subject to interpretation anyway. And my values don't include judging others for their indescretions. Did you know premarital sex is still illegal in many states?

Re: "academic steroids" in law school?
« Reply #25 on: May 10, 2007, 07:51:02 AM »
My question is, if you think it's high and mighty to suggest that it's unethical to take drugs illegally in order to have a chemically-induced advantage over your classmates, why are you studying law in the first place?  If it sounds high-and-mighty to suggest that people follow the law, why are you in law school?   It has nothing to do with drug testing, it has to do with a person informing the law school or the bar examiners of unethical behavior, which I'm sure many people would not hesitate to stoop to, especially if the student is getting high grades and is a potential competitor for jobs etc.  I was just saying that people should be aware of that risk, and take caution to prevent it.  I'm not sure where you go to school, but I'm pretty sure most schools would take the illegal consumption of stimulants as a serious matter that would somewhat question one's character. 

For someone who's questioning people's motivations for attending law school, you sure don't know much. Why are you going to law school if you don't understand the concept of due process? After all, I could call the bar, tell them that you're a goat molester, and without proof, they couldn't act on it. You're a tool


This is an interesting question because although the decisions of bar examinations is ultimately subject to judicial inquiry, I don't believe that they are restricted by due process constraints.

Also, the scenario that Caveman posed was that they would question the applicant regarding a testimony, albeit usolicited, to their character. I would be interested to hear how this violates due process.

You seem to be certain that this would not be permissible, while Caveman is certain that it is permissible. I'm fairly certain that it is a very gray area that would depend on various other factors (the state, other red flags in the application, etc).

ptown

  • ****
  • 659
    • View Profile
Re: "academic steroids" in law school?
« Reply #26 on: May 10, 2007, 08:10:00 AM »
Are there really that many people that have trouble concentrating in law school?  I would have thought that the LSAT would have helped to weed out most of the people with short attention spans.

__


I find the opinoin that each person should live according to his own rules and not the established legal code to be surprising for a future lawyer.  People have the freedom to do as they please, yes, but I don't think anyone should condone breaking a law just because they don't think it is right.  I don't like driving the speed limit sometimes, and I don't always think it is appropriate, but I wouldn't say that people should disregard it because they don't like it.  They may choose to do so, but I think it's wrong to tell them it is ok.

Morally, I don't have an issue with drug use, but my ethics and morals are totally separate from the law and the way I believe it should be applied.  If everyone chooses which laws should be followed and which not, we would have anarchy.  There are a lot of pedophiles out there that think it is ok to molest children, should they be allowed to live like that because it conforms to their morals but not the "arbitrary code" of society?


Re: "academic steroids" in law school?
« Reply #27 on: May 10, 2007, 08:16:09 AM »
Why don't people just get their onw 'scrpts for the drug? 

Re: "academic steroids" in law school?
« Reply #28 on: May 10, 2007, 08:17:57 AM »
For someone who's questioning people's motivations for attending law school, you sure don't know much. Why are you going to law school if you don't understand the concept of due process? After all, I could call the bar, tell them that you're a goat molester, and without proof, they couldn't act on it. You're a tool
[/quote]


This is an interesting question because although the decisions of bar examinations is ultimately subject to judicial inquiry, I don't believe that they are restricted by due process constraints.

Also, the scenario that Caveman posed was that they would question the applicant regarding a testimony, albeit usolicited, to their character. I would be interested to hear how this violates due process.

You seem to be certain that this would not be permissible, while Caveman is certain that it is permissible. I'm fairly certain that it is a very gray area that would depend on various other factors (the state, other red flags in the application, etc).
[/quote]


Actually, the bar, as an administrative committee (and state actor), is subject to the constraints of procedural due process. You'll learn about this in both civ pro and con law next year. If someone "rats you out" you have the right to know 1) who did it, 2)exactly what they allege (the charges brought against you), and 3) you have the right to meaningfully be heard in your own defense or behalf. This applies any time the state (ie, the bar), threatens your life, liberty, or property interests (I'd probably call this property, but it's up for debate). Private school honor committees might not be held to the same rigid standards, but most voluntarily follow this, because well, we're lawyers and believe due process is a good thing.

That said (and not directly related or aimed at the above quote), I wouldn't and don't use ritalin, but if I did, good luck trying to get me in trouble for it-snitching won't get you many brownie points from other attorneys or clients.

Re: "academic steroids" in law school?
« Reply #29 on: May 10, 2007, 08:37:05 AM »
If someone can get diagnoised w/add/hd.  Then the subsequent use is not illegal. There might still be ethics questions on some levels, but nothing that the bar/or law school admin could take issue w/due to the fact that one would now have a diagnosed illness.  That's my advice.