Membership Selection

July 17th, 2012 by Brent

Each year the Review selects approximately 45 members from the rising Columbia 2L and Transfer Student class. The application for the Columbia Law Review includes four elements: (1) the writing component, (2) a personal statement, (3) basic personal information, and (4) grades. All students interested in applying to the Columbia Law Review must submit their application materials, including a grade release, during the response period. This year, the response period takes place from Friday, May 17 to Friday, May 24, 2013.

The Review’s membership selection process is administered through the computerized match system used by all CLS journals. A PDF of the complete writing packet—which includes (1) general information regarding journal applications; (2) the application for the Columbia Law Review; and (3) the writing component prompt and materials—will be available starting on May 17.

Writing Component

The writing component consists of (1) a prompt that asks you to analyze a legal question and fact pattern presented in the packet, and (2) a Bluebook exercise. Writing component topics vary from year to year—in the past students have been asked to write an essay justifying a position recently taken by a judge on a cutting-edge legal issue, write a bench memorandum, or complete a classic law school issue spotter. In a departure from last year’s component, this year the Bluebook exercise will be incorporated into the writing assignment.

All the information you will need to complete the writing component (including relevant Bluebook rules) will be included in the packet available on May 17; in the past, the amount of component material has ranged from forty to eighty pages. As such, it is not possible to prepare for the component before you receive the packet. You will not be permitted to consult with anyone else or to use any outside sources (exceptions are outlined in the writing packet). It is absolutely not necessary to “practice” using the Bluebook; the Bluebook exercise will be structured to test general reference ability and should not seriously advantage those with more Bluebook experience. The Bluebook exercise will be weighted far less heavily than the rest of the exercise. Please note that you will not need your own copy of the Bluebook for the purposes of the exercise.

The time allotted affords an opportunity to produce a well-organized and sophisticated piece. Some successful candidates felt they needed all seven days; others took the weekend off to recover from finals; others completed it in just a few days. Time spent on the writing component varies from person to person, and it may be hard for you to predict how much time you will need until you read the materials. While we encourage those with flexibility to plan their summer employment start dates around the dates of the writing component, we acknowledge that thinking and writing styles and summer plans vary from person to person. Some of you may be preparing to work abroad; some of you may be free of work obligations, but need time to process the materials in the packet. The component was designed to accommodate these varied circumstances.

Personal Statement

In addition to the Writing Component, the Review requires each applicant to submit a personal statement. This statement is intended to offer applicants an opportunity to share information about their background, experiences, or other relevant information that will help them contribute to the work and the community of the Review. More information about the personal statement will be available in the application packet.

Journal Selection Computerized Match

The Law School uses a computerized match system to match 1Ls with CLS journals. All 1Ls applying to journals will rank the journals to which they are applying. This means that each 1L will receive no more than one offer from a journal; each 1L will be matched with the journal they ranked the highest that also ranked them highly enough to fit within the journal’s desired number of 2L staffers. Because of the way the system works, it is essential that all 1Ls applying to the Review rank it first. If you do not rank us first, then the system may match you with another journal, and we will not be able to offer you a spot.

Learn More about the Columbia Law Review

There are several ways to learn more about applying to and working on the Review. Journal Day will take place during lunch on Tuesday, April 16, 2013 in JG 104. Also, we will be hosting an information session specifically about the Columbia Law Review during the lunch hour on Wednesday, April 17, 2013 in JG 106.

Page 1 of 2 | Next page

Posted in | No comments

Previous post: History
Next post: Publishable Notes Program

User Links
Sidebar
- Coordination Reconsidered
  2 May 2013
  
  By: Richard Briffault
  The explosion of independent spending funded by Super PACs and other organizations in the last two election cycles raises new questions about the effectiveness of contribution limits and, perhaps, about the value of maintaining them. But if the law is to continue to limit contributions because of the dangers of corruption and the appearance of corruption they pose, and to maintain the integrity of the contribution/expenditure distinction that has been a foundational part of our campaign finance law for nearly four decades, it is essential to redefine coordination to address the emergence of single-candidate Super PACs. The proposal in this Essay is intended as a contribution to that process.
- Lessons on Terrorism and “Mistaken Identity” from Oak Creek, with a Coda on the Boston Marathon Bombings
  1 May 2013
  
  By: Dawinder S. Sidhu
  The tragic events in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, thrust upon an obscure religious community, and more broadly upon our laws and society, provide us with an opportunity to assess the efficacy of the law and conceptual explanations, not only as they apply to this incident, but also to those that may occur in the future. As discussed here, Oak Creek indicates why the definition of “terrorism” should be amended to not rely on the subjective motivation underlying the random killing of innocents, and how the disability-rights context may facilitate understanding and undermine criticisms of the media that are premised on notions of offensiveness or political value judgments. Oak Creek offers at least these lessons.
- South Carolina’s “Evolutionary Process”
  29 Mar 2013
  
  By: Ellen D. Katz
  There is an additional narrative the Justices should consider when they evaluate how far places subject to the VRA’s regional provisions have evolved. This narrative posits that section 5 is far from obsolete and operates not only as a restraint on the ill-intentioned, but also as an affirmative tool of governance. On this account, one of the VRA’s most critical, albeit least appreciated, functions is the way in which it helps public officials navigate complex contemporary questions concerning equality of opportunity in the political process.
- Beyond “Perfection”: Can the Insights of Perfecting Criminal Markets Be Put to Practical Use?
  27 Mar 2013
  
  By: Caren Myers Morrison
  David Jaros’s thought-provoking new Article, Perfecting Criminal Markets, sheds light on a heretofore unappreciated effect of our obsession with criminalization: that merely by creating new crimes, lawmakers may inadvertently strengthen existing criminal markets.
Quick Contact

435 West 116th Street
New York, NY 10027

tel: (212) 854-4398
telefax: (212) 854-3569
Email Contact
Links
Newsletter Sign Up:
E-mail:

Membership Selection

User Links

Sidebar

Quick Contact

Email Contact

Links

Newsletter Sign Up: