Law reviews are considered the pinnacle of elite academic achievement in law schools, and increasingly the top law schools are instituting affirmative action policies to achieve their diversity goals. However, not everyone is happy about this seemingly unassailable goal. And (get your bullsh*t meter out for this one), there are even a pair of lawsuits alleging that affirmative action policies for law review staffs at some of the best law schools in the country somehow decreases the quality of the law reviews.
The claims about the impact of diversity on the quality of law reviews sparked the academic interest of three University of Chicago Law professors, Adam Chilton, Jonathan Masur, and Kyle Rozema. They’ve written a new article quantifying the impact affirmative action policies have had on the journals. On this week’s episode of The Jabot podcast, I talk with Masur about their research and why, if anything, diversity only increases the quality of law reviews.
The Jabot podcast is an offshoot of the Above the Law brand focused on the challenges women, people of color, LGBTQIA, and other diverse populations face in the legal industry. Our name comes from none other than the Notorious Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the jabot (decorative collar) she wears when delivering dissents from the bench. It’s a reminder that even when we aren’t winning, we’re still a powerful force to be reckoned with.
Happy listening!
Does Diversity Hurt The Quality Of Law Reviews? curated from Above the Law
No comments:
Post a Comment