« Another reason to avoid Vista | Main | Domesticating Torture and the John Yoo Affair »
Friday, April 18, 2008
America is the Best Place to be a Law Professor
The best kind of law professor to be is an American law professor.
You may find my saying this to be virtuous (patriotic, dignified, expressing of contentment and mudita) or reproachable (jingoistic, elitist, narcissistic).
But that’s my thesis of the day. So here’s my argument:
First off, the best place to be a law professor has got to be a common-law jurisdiction, as opposed to a civil-law country. Now, it is a completely different inquiry as to whether a civil-law or common-law system is best for a society. But in my mind, there’s no contest that it is a boon to teaching and writing for law professors to be in a common-law jurisdiction. The common law has a richness, depth, and capacity for evolution that is delicious. To effect change, arguments made in court and in law reviews need only find fertile ground in the thoughts of judges. Meritocracy triumphs. Where significant change in the law requires legislative process, politics, and lobbying, hope of making a real contribution becomes much slimmer. The common-law system elevates not only the place of law professors, but all lawyers. So not only is our scholarship more important, but our teaching is as well. And besides, if you want what a civil-law system has to offer, there’s always Louisiana.
Second, of the common-law jurisdictions, the United States has got to be the best. We have more law, for one thing. Count it up: 50 states and a sprawling federal system. That’s a lot to sink your teeth into. And while England has a very rich history and its own fascinating complexities, it will never rival America as a place to be a law professor so long as the regular education for lawyers is an undergraduate degree, the LL.B. In the United States, our system of requiring a bachelor’s degree as pre-requisite to law school, and then granting a doctorate as a general requirement for practice, elevates the place of both lawyers and law professors. Moreover, lawyers in the U.S. seem to enjoy a status that solicitors in the U.K. do not. I’m sure Australia and Canada are great places to be a law professor, but we’ve got them beat by an order of magnitude for sheer weight.
Maybe next week I will explain why the best kind of professor to be is a law professor.
=====
Jump to the follow-up post:
Professor Johnson Responds to the Flames - May 23, 2008
=====
Posted by Eric E. Johnson on April 18, 2008 at 07:35 AM in Life of Law Schools, Teaching Law | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c6a7953ef00e551e3e6b08833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference America is the Best Place to be a Law Professor:
Comments
"income by trying "= "income should be changed by trying"
Posted by: andy | Apr 18, 2008 1:40:33 PM
umm...don't we have a civil-based system? E.g. isn't virtually all federal law civil (except for admiralty)? I was not aware that "Meritocracy triumphs" -- i thought democracy did. when i read judicial opinions, it seems like courts apply congress's rules, not the "best" rules.
"Where significant change in the law requires legislative process, politics, and lobbying, hope of making a real contribution becomes much slimmer."
doesn't Congress make changes in the laws? I cannot imagine e.g. arguing that the limitations on the use of net operating losses to offset taxable income by trying to plant a seed into the "fertile" mind of a judge.
Posted by: andy | Apr 18, 2008 1:38:50 PM
If the thesis of this post is true, I wonder if it is just because "America is the best place to be a lawyer." Therefore, the best place to be a teacher of law. Alternatively, "America is the best place to be a university teacher" (something that is certainly true, for the moment, based on resources and salaries). Therefore, America is the best place to be a university teacher who focuses on law.
Posted by: geoff | Apr 18, 2008 12:59:44 PM
"Moreover, lawyers in the U.S. seem to enjoy a status that solicitors in the U.K. do not."
And yet barristers in Great Britain seem to enjoy a status that lawyers do not. Is there a U.S. equivalent to the silks?
Posted by: Bart | Apr 18, 2008 11:26:40 AM
I hope this is a joke. But just in case it isn't, may I point out that in civil law systems law professors play a very large role in the drafting and interpretation of legislation. The German civil code, for example, was assembled almost entirely by professors. Scholarly treatises are considered official and citable authorities in a way that few (if any) treatises (or, god forbid, law review articles) are considered here in the U.S.
Posted by: anon | Apr 18, 2008 11:11:37 AM
Oops, make that "On the broader point, it is no doubt the case that law professors tend to be enthusiasts for active exercises of judicial power because a focus on judges increases the power and influence of law professors."
Posted by: Orin Kerr | Apr 18, 2008 10:25:47 AM
To effect change, arguments made in court and in law reviews need only find fertile ground in the thoughts of judges. Meritocracy triumphs.
That is a hilarious line, I hope intentionally so.
On the broader point, it is no doubt the case that law professors tend to be enthusiasts for active exercises of judicial power a focus on judges increases the power and influence of law professors.
Posted by: Orin Kerr | Apr 18, 2008 10:23:14 AM
Hate to burst your bubble, but how often do you see a law review article cited by SCOTUS? Civil law courts give way more room to doctrinal pieces, as they are (at least in theory) not bound by precedent but need a workable theory to interpret the codes ...
Having 50+ legal systems has its drawbacks too, if you like doctrine - it makes it harder to get a real grasp of a specific set of rules.
Posted by: Positroll | Apr 18, 2008 10:05:41 AM
I am looking forward to future posts about why "Eric" is the best first name.
Posted by: Anon | Apr 18, 2008 9:04:48 AM
I admit to wanting to see more substantive posts dealing with the profession: for instance, of the sort that falls under the heading of "cause lawyering," or one that attempts to distinguish and compare the "law professor" from the "intellectual," or, the ethical issues and conundrums the profession recognizes, ignores, or misses, or the sorts of issues raised on other law blogs regarding "Boalt Hall's Yoo Problem," for example (although I doubt there's anything new to be said at this point), or how corporate interests and imperatives are increasingly distorting the mission of the university and what this might mean for the legal profession, and so forth and so on. So, yes, I find the flag waving a bit off-putting, but as virtually anything goes with blogging I'm not surprised.
Posted by: Patrick S. O'Donnell | Apr 18, 2008 9:03:35 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.