This is an archive of the old Stones Cry Out site. For the current site, click here.
« Colson on Martha Stewart and the Purpose of Prison | Main | Bravo President Clinton »
March 06, 2005
Judge Refuses Yale Law Grad Clerks
Federal Judge William M. Acker (Alabama) informed Yale Law School that their graduates need not apply for a clerkship in his office as a result of the school's decision to curb military recruitment efforts at the Ivy League law school. The story is over a week old now, but I still haven't formed a solid opinion about it, so I thought I'd throw it out there.
The article cites Eugene Volokh and the Volokh Conspiracy.
"Collective punishment can sometimes be an effective method of sending a message to an institution, but it's not quite fair to penalize the student for the law school he went to," Volokh said. "Judges ought to try to be extra fair to everyone."Would it have been fairer to students if the Judge announced that he would not accept students entering Fall '05 or later? I doubt this would change any minds about attending Yale, but at least dilligent students would learn that choosing Yale would mean one less clerkship opportunity.
Posted by Rick at March 6, 2005 10:56 AM
Trackback Pings
Comments
Ha! He should have added a "Roll tide"
Posted by: Chase at March 6, 2005 11:57 AM
How about the students penalized by the school's unilateral decision to bar miliary recruiters (for such prestigious programs as JAG)?
Posted by: Richard at March 6, 2005 03:36 PM
Richard, true the students are penalized by Yale's stupid policy. But, I guess the question is, is Judge Acker's response appropriate? Penalize the students twice? I guess I'm still undecided.
Posted by: Rick Brady at March 6, 2005 04:39 PM
First, Acker's logic -- guilt by association -- isn't a very conservative idea. If a student is powerless to change Yale's policy, then holding them responsible for it is no different than holding today's American citizenry responsible for slavery. It seems to me one can't be against affirmative action and reparations and yet favor this policy.
Second, the matter represents pending litigation; one would assume it is relatively unprofessional for a federal judge to run around spouting opinions on it.
Third, Acker's a pretty conservative judge, and unlikely to get many clerkship applications from the YLS students who agree with this policy. On the contrary; any applications he sees from Yale are likely to be from students who disagree with this policy as much as he does, and given the severe leftward tilt of today's modern law schools, to restrict the clerking opportunities of the few elite conservatives produced by the top institutions is counterproductive at best.
Finally, the restrictions created by Acker on hiring are distinct from the restrictions placed by Yale on military recruiters. If you are a YLS grad and want a legal military job, there's no on-campus recruiting; but that doesn't mean you can't apply on your own. The presence of YLS students in the JAG summer programs would seem to confirm this. A morally equivalent policy would be for Acker to review YLS clerkship applications later in his typical process, or to ask all interviewees about their stance on the policy, etc. Acker's actual policy -- to refuse to hire YLS grads outright -- is not merely inconveniencing but substantively detrimental to those students' careers.
It's an ironic policy to be instutited by a man who certainly owes a substantial portion of his initial professional success to his own degree from the Yale Law School.
Posted by: bob at August 3, 2005 03:57 PM