Groundhog Day For Law Professors

Why, in a world where many of us challenge hierarchies, do we feel so darned comfortable in the midst of one in legal academia when we’re at the top of it?

Next week is the American Association of Law Schools’ Annual Meeting. By some mandate, the conference is always located in San Francisco, New Orleans, Washington, D.C., or New York City. One year (by accident?) it was in San Diego. Sorry, Midwestern states, you are out of luck.

That is not the only slightly troubling thing about AALS. For years, AALS has been discussing how legal education is in trouble, or as AALS might put it, at a crossroads. There is very little evidence of that translating into a dramatic change in how panels are put together, what they discuss, or how we discuss it. Let’s explore.

This year’s theme is “From Challenge to Innovation.” Last year’s theme was “Legal Education at the Crossroads.” The theme before that was “Looking Forward: Legal Education in the 21st Century.” If AALS were a movie, I would surmise that we were a little late starting our drive in our DeLorean into the 21st Century (in 2014). We drove to a crossroads. I’m not sure which road we took, but I suspect it was the one most traveled by law schools. Then, we faced some challenges, as our legal education car (and metaphor) broke down and we need to innovate. Just not with our themes, our panels, our scholarship, or what we do every year at this meeting.

Once you get beyond the theme, the mainstays will be there.   Every niche of legal education will be represented. If Immigration Law is your fave, you can see a panel. Student services? You have one too. Law librarians? Sorry, you only get one panel.

Every panel will have a good topic title. Depending on your area of interest, your panel will be “incorporating,” “responding,” “updating,” “interpreting,” “fostering,” “preparing,” “reimagining,” “reconciling,” “broadening,” or engaged in some other active verb to show that your panel is wrestling with those tough issues in a mind-blowingly expansive manner. We may even publish these mind-blowingly amazing discussions in innovative places such as mainstream law reviews.

I just took a random sample here, but speakers will come from a diverse number of schools. Speakers will come from up-and-coming schools such as NYU, UCLA, Michigan, Georgetown, etc.   I’m not saying that there aren’t a lot of schools represented in the brochure; I’m just saying that hierarchies still play a role in numbers represented.

I am not saying that the panels or speakers will be boring. Some will be, some won’t.

Sponsored

Some speakers will be downright inspiring, while others I’ll record for the nights I suffer from insomnia. Some will say something new and interesting. Others will say the same things they have said for decades. Like any other conference, it’s hit and miss. Some will have way too many power point slides for their 15-minute allocated speaking time.

But all of this is for the outside world. The real importance of AALS is to allow junior scholars to promote their work. It is a place for junior faculty to shine, and for senior faculty to show why they are at “the top.” It is a place for groupies. It is a place to schmooze and meet people who might one day write tenure letters. Or, if you are at the “arc of your career,” you meet old friends and discuss topics never covered in panels.

If you still remember 8th grade, it is not entirely unlike that.

All of this may make me sound like a curmudgeon, but I’m not spewing sour grapes: I’ve participated on panels at AALS.   I actually enjoy some panels at AALS. And let’s not forget the receptions!

AALS is a guilty pleasure for me. It is fun, but I believe that legal education and scholarship really is in need of innovation, in light of market realities. How do we go about making the greatest scholarly impact? Why do we put so much weight on placement of law review articles (read by the very students we often criticize)? Why, in a world where many of us challenge hierarchies, do we feel so darned comfortable in the midst of one in legal academia when we’re at the top of it? We law profs aren’t going to answer these questions, despite our recognition that there is need for “innovation.” We’re just going to keep on keeping on.

Sponsored

I would write more, but I have to finish downloading the movie “Groundhog Day” for my flight to New York.


LawProfBlawg is an anonymous professor at a top 100 law school. You can see more of his musings here and on Twitter (@lawprofblawg). Email him at lawprofblawg@gmail.com.