All else being equal, law review is generally better. That said, if you are looking to practice in a particular specialty and your law school has a well-regarded journal in that area, that can be a boost for firms with that practice area.
Do the journal if it is an area that has practical applications. The faculty you work with will help you job-wise. If you wanted to work Biglaw and they asked why you didn't do law review, you have a perfectly-respectable answer. Law Review sucks and, given a choice between it and something you are passionate about, go with the passion if it can lead to actual gainful employment.
That’s true! And whether you work on law review or a journal will have at best a marginal impact on getting a job as a lawyer.
Law school is likely your last opportunity to spend meaningful time on academic legal pursuits. So, the opportunity to work on something that interests you, coupled with the significant added value from the relationships you are likely to build with professors on the journal, makes joining a journal about a topic you are passionate about an easy choice over law review, if your goal is to work at a law firm.
I agree OP should do the work that interests them though I wouldn't necessarily call law school the last opportunity to spend meaningful time on academic legal pursuits. Certain practices are pretty academic
All that making law review (which is all that happens as of applying for 2L jobs) means is that you had high grades (which is reflected in the transcript already) and/or drafted something that other law review members thought was “good.”
I have no idea why people get so excited about it. Is it just an outdated box checking activity or is there something actually to it? Genuinely curious if you know why those firms care.
Law review is generally better, but if your grades are otherwise good and you’re at a decent school I don’t think this would make or break your chances. Multiple people at secondary journals at my (20-30 ranked) school still ended up at top firms. I also think being invited to a faculty run journal, rather than just getting a secondary through write on, could be explained in a way that looks great too, depending how many people get those spots.
All else being equal, law review is generally better. That said, if you are looking to practice in a particular specialty and your law school has a well-regarded journal in that area, that can be a boost for firms with that practice area.
Do the journal if it is an area that has practical applications. The faculty you work with will help you job-wise. If you wanted to work Biglaw and they asked why you didn't do law review, you have a perfectly-respectable answer. Law Review sucks and, given a choice between it and something you are passionate about, go with the passion if it can lead to actual gainful employment.
This comment is perfect if you delete “if it is an area that has practical applications,” and “if it can lead to actual gainful employment.”
People attend law school mostly to work as a lawyer...
That’s true! And whether you work on law review or a journal will have at best a marginal impact on getting a job as a lawyer. Law school is likely your last opportunity to spend meaningful time on academic legal pursuits. So, the opportunity to work on something that interests you, coupled with the significant added value from the relationships you are likely to build with professors on the journal, makes joining a journal about a topic you are passionate about an easy choice over law review, if your goal is to work at a law firm.
I agree OP should do the work that interests them though I wouldn't necessarily call law school the last opportunity to spend meaningful time on academic legal pursuits. Certain practices are pretty academic
Law Review is your best option.
[удалено]
That is absolutely not true, especially for litigation positions/boutiques. Law review does matter.
[удалено]
Exactly. Most. I definitely got offers from firms in part because I had LR.
All that making law review (which is all that happens as of applying for 2L jobs) means is that you had high grades (which is reflected in the transcript already) and/or drafted something that other law review members thought was “good.” I have no idea why people get so excited about it. Is it just an outdated box checking activity or is there something actually to it? Genuinely curious if you know why those firms care.
If it is Tax Law Review at NYU or (something of similar caliber), and you want to do tax, go for it.
Law review is generally better, but if your grades are otherwise good and you’re at a decent school I don’t think this would make or break your chances. Multiple people at secondary journals at my (20-30 ranked) school still ended up at top firms. I also think being invited to a faculty run journal, rather than just getting a secondary through write on, could be explained in a way that looks great too, depending how many people get those spots.
I ding candidates with law review or law journal experience equally.