BDE Rises to the Top

---

Phil Tonseth ‘23
Editor-in-Chief

Led by the star guest appearance of Ian Hurst ‘22 in the championship game, with Tom Langstaff ’22 rolling up on his bicycle just in time for first pitch, a ragtag group of kiddos from UVA Law’s class of 2022’s sections D and G, aptly named BDE, won the 38th annual spring softball invitation hosted by the North Grounds Softball League (NGSL) this past May. BDE managed to navigate and overcome a field of 18 different teams made up of more than 130 law students over the two-day event. While the traditional national audience of law schools was unable to attend due to the COVID-19 pandemic, BDE’s efforts were nonetheless noteworthy for their ability to win 9 of the 10 games they played with nary a sober soul on the team. Doubling as the resident pretty boy of the team and speedy centerfielder, Ian Jones ’22 reminisced on BDE’s journey,stating: “it will probably go down in history with Michael Jordan’s threepeats and Tom Brady’s seven championships as one of the greatest stretches in the history of sports. Maybe greater because Jordan and Brady had the advantage of competing while completely sober. I mean, what’s more iconic: Jordan’s flu game or the BDE hangover game?”

            Beginning the Friday afternoon following finals, the 18 team field played a three game round robin. The seeding was determined through team record and score differentials for the single elimination tournament that lasted all of Saturday. In true ceremonial fashion, Dean Risa Goluboff ‘00 threw out the first pitch to begin the tournament. Immediately following, NGSL presented ReadyKids with the $15,000 donation to show the true focus of the tournament. Then, the kiddos got down to business. With games occurring across both fields at The Park and at Copeley, softball was in full swing on Friday. Whether it was 1L section teams that wanted to celebrate finishing their hardest year, the NGSL all-star teams who finally got a chance to show off why they decided to come to UVA Law, or 2Ls and 3Ls who banded together to create teams just to participate in the fun, Friday’s action was jampacked and intense.

Pictured: Dean Goluboff throws out the first pitch to start the tournament. Photo Courtesy of virginia.edu

            BDE did not start out as the tournament favorites. The NGSL Blue Team, led by Will Hinton ’21 and Brian Patterson ’21, pummeled their opponents into submission on their way to the #1 seed. For their efforts, and despite losing one of their three round robin games, BDE was seeded 7th overall for elimination Saturday. NGSL Blue could not translate their round robin success into the finals, as Clawschool Clubbers, the 2L team led by SBA President Niko Orfanedes ’22 and Christina Kelly ’22, upset NGSL Blue in the quarterfinals. Not to be outdone, BDE faced their stiffest test of the tournament in the semifinals, barely edging out class of 2022’s section A, led by Nate Wunderli ’22. NGSL did not want to be outdone, and thus NGSL Gold defeated Clawschool Clubbers in the semifinals, setting up the ultimate showdown between the all-star team and the ragtag kiddos.

            The much-anticipated matchup quickly turned into a rout, as BDE put up 11 runs in the first inning behind the skills of Fred Quesada ’22 and Lizzie Pate ’22. Following the first, the outcome was never in doubt, as Libby Murray ’22, Kelli Finnegan ’22, and Ellen Page ’22 repeatedly broke the back of NGSL Gold with their wizardry, both at the plate and on the field. In the end, BDE won by a run-rule disqualification after five innings by a score of 32-17. Looking back on BDE’s efforts, Alyssa Metcalf ’22, one half of UVA Law’s softball power couple with Ray Roesler ’22, said “I’m surprised Phil has enough of a memory of this weekend to even be writing this article, but I think we can all agree it was one for the books.”[1]

Pictured: After a long day of softball, victory was sweet for this crew. Photo Courtesy of the Victors.

            Most importantly, the tournament succeeded at its base goal, raising over $15,000 for ReadyKids, a local nonprofit that provides services and learning programs for disadvantaged children in the area. This fundraising, spearheaded by tournament directors Sam McCarthy ’21 and Nicole Pidala ’21, was drawn from multiple law firms[2] and different events coordinated by Ethan Silverman ’20 and his company, Fantasy4. NGSL is very much looking forward to hopefully returning to a normal tournament this upcoming year, and I hope to see all of our lovely readers out on Copeley very soon.

 ---

pjt5hm@virginia.edu

---

[1] For reference, this article did a lot of heavy lifting for my memory: https://www.law.virginia.edu/news/202105/north-grounds-softball-league-raises-15000-charity. Also, I hydrated with Bud Light, sorry mom.

[2] S/O to Hogan Lovells, Bradley, Simpson Thatcher, King & Spalding, Skadden, K&L Gates, Davis Polk, Norton Rose Fulbright and Proskauer.

Where You Study in the Law School and What It Says About You

---

Sai Kulkarni ‘23
Culture Editor

Where you study is a reflection of who you are as a person. It has deep consequences for your life and could potentially be the difference between a good OGI and a bad one . . . . I’m just joking, but it got the attention of all you gunners, didn’t it? Anyways, there are three types of spaces to study in the law school and two outside. In this late-night writing session I’m going to explain each of them.

The Library

This is the most common study spot: it’s literally built for this purpose. But let’s be real, each region has its own purpose. The most normal spot is on the second floor. It provides both study rooms and a nice space to study alone or with friends. With great views and sweet lamps, studying here means you like to get work done, enjoy good vibes, and leave once you are done. People who study there have good energy; they will get good placements and live their best lives.

The next spot is the infamous Gunner Pit. One would think that this is where the most focused of the aforementioned gunners study. But that’s just not true. A big draw for the folks that study here is the reputation that comes from studying on those tables. They strive to be seen as the most gunnery of students and that is precisely why they are not the biggest gunners. They waste energy that could be spent studying on looking like gunners. But at the end of the day, these folks are hard workers who also integrate social perceptions. The people that study here are going to run for political office one day. As a corollary, the quiet room in Scott Commons is a similarly situated location.

Pictured: Study in the Gunner Pit at your own discretion. Photo Courtesy of library.law.virginia.edu

The last major spot in the library is the third floor. I am going to be honest; I’ve never even been up there. I’ve only heard about people studying on that floor last weekend from two people I know. Those two people are some of the highest achieving students in the class of 2023. Thus, it is clear that based on only two examples, I can conclude that the third floor is the real gunner study spot. Silent, unknown, and focused. These are the best descriptions of the people there. These actual gunners will get what they want because they refuse to let their hard work go to anything other than their precise life goals.

Lounges and Other Study Spaces

These people like to study with their friends. They get work done, but on their own time. Sometimes they run up against deadlines. Sometimes they get work done early and go relax with a drink. Median is a way of life for these folks and they are dedicated to it. They fill the ranks of the stats that OPP disseminates; good firm jobs in good markets. Just great people all around. 

Scott Commons/Spies Garden

The folks that study in Spies are the easiest to tackle. They work hard and play hard. From 30-minute marathon study sessions to 1-hour spikeball sessions, they make sure to get it done. They are gonna get good jobs regardless of how they do on exams. Their networking skills alone are enough to get them what they want.

Now for the big hitter. Everyone is reading this article for one reason and one reason alone. They are all thinking: “Is Sai self-aware enough to make objective commentary about people that study there?” Well, the joke is on you, dear readers, I am self-aware but I no longer study on campus. I have a whole section dedicated to me below. Back to journalism: the people that study in the interior of Scott Commons are a diverse group. From 2Ls who study once a month to quiet people who just want a change of scenery from the library to people who have just carried over their habit of studying in ScoCo from last semester, the group is full of variety. Unfortunately, I can’t make conclusions because the scatterplot has a low r-squared value.

Outside of the Law School

There are two types of locations: home and not home. The not-home, off-campus studiers take the vibe of “I need a new location” to a whole new level. Some prefer coffee shops and place themselves in the company of the “Lounges and Other Study Spaces” crew. Some people prefer other locations like a golf course or Kardinal Hall. These people can be described with the moniker of “2Ls and 3Ls.” These people had it together when it was important and don’t see a reason to keep it together still. Why should they? They are experiencing law school exactly as our predecessors at this great institution intended.

The final, most important group, is those students who study at home. These students are focused people who know how to shut out distractions and be the good law students that their parents, and more importantly the administration, want them to be. They work hard and do well on exams. The people who follow this plan may even have one of their outlines done. They keep their professional lives and all their schoolwork in one room. It allows for them to socialize when appropriate and keep their lives bifurcated. They have the ability to be on the staff of the Law Weekly, play softball, and keep a long-term relationship. These people are heroes and they inspired me to take up this lifestyle myself. Two weeks in and all I am missing is a long-term relationship before I have all of the infinity stones of an at-home studier.

But good luck to all of you great students. No matter where you study, I promise you will find success this exam season. Don’t take this article seriously; those outlines will get done regardless of where you choose.

---

omk6cg@virginia.edu

Actually Helpful Tips for 1Ls

---

1.     Pay for a parking pass. You will be given a ticket starting August 30th.

2.     Don’t judge a class or professor based on the first week. Things will get better.

3.     Don’t get wrapped up in the shallow bonding forged by the first week hysteria. Some of your best friends will be people you don’t talk to until halfway through the semester.

4.     Befriend the librarians and bookstore workers, and Mandy.

5.     Don’t talk about your LSAT scores. Nobody cares.

6.     Nobody cares who wins at softball. Just have fun.

7.     Have one hobby that takes you out of law school; don’t live your whole life in the gunner pit.

8.     Odds are no one will remember your cold calls (unless the Law Weekly finds out about it).

9.     “Outlines” are simply organized summaries of the material you have covered. Sometimes professors let you use them on the final, and the act of building them can help you learn the material.  There are other options (e.g. flashcards), so do what works for you.

10.  Make sure you plan ahead on your job search and prep work. It is easy to put it off, but your later self (and OPP) will thank you.

11.  Take care of yourself.  Try to sleep eight hours every night, eat reasonably healthy, exercise at least a few times a week, and maybe try meditation or yoga.  These things will not only make you happier and less stressed, they will make you more efficient and effective at law school in the long run.  Especially sleep.

Things I Learned During Law School

---

Will Palmer ‘21
Ousted Special Projects Editor

 I learned a lot during law school. Notice that I said during, not in. This isn’t to say that I didn’t get a good legal education, just that no one would read an article recapping it. At least I hope no one would read it. That sounds boring as hell—and there are better ways to spend your time, like writing fanfiction about Jimmy Carter. So here’s a non-exhaustive list of things my brain decided to retain in the years that I was also studying here.

Practical Lessons

            If you return from a trip and find that your sink has transformed into a portal to a dimension in which there are only ants, and you wish to deal with the swarms of bugs posthaste, you can utilize what I like to refer to as “Formula Three”: a concoction of Drano, vinegar, and baking soda that smells bad and looks worse but is, to say the least, extremely effective. Pour it upon the ants and smite their ruin across the breadth of your plumbing like an avenging god of household maintenance. If you find yourself cackling maniacally, just roll with it.

            On the topic of housekeeping, I learned that a touch of greenery really ties a room together. I first considered getting into bonsai but didn’t want to deal with the requisite fight with Cobra Kai at the All-Valley Tournament (my skills have gotten rusty ever since I was barred from the dojo for practicing forbidden techniques).[1]  After that, I tried growing a cactus, but it died of thirst (which was a downer). That’s how I ended up with my fake tree, Carlos. He’s quiet, but a good listener. And we’ve got similar tastes in film.

            I learned that it’s not necessarily the best idea to engage in cryptocurrency trading while drunk. You might blunder around and break even, sure. Or you could become a billionaire. There’s literally no way anything could go wrong.[2] Still, there are better things to do while drunk, like getting into petty disagreements about what level of eroticism is appropriate in Jimmy Carter fan fiction.  

            It’s only half as hard to be fashionable when no one is wearing pants for a year and a half’s worth of Zoom calls. I’ve gotten really into robes, personally. The robe is a versatile garment. Not as versatile as, say, a full suit of plate mail, but still.

Interactions with Others

            My ever-present partner in crime, Brutus (a conniving chinchilla from New Jersey who may or may not be the reincarnation of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon), rode out a lot of strange times with me over the past few years. That’s saying something, given that most of his formative experiences occurred in the assorted hives of scum and villainy that served as our places of residence during undergrad. I was pleased, then, to observe the continuance of our uneasy détente, despite the need for regular travel. This may be—at least in part—a result of an increased level of nuance in our communications with one another: he chirps to tell me when he’s hungry, squawks to tell me that the food I bought him isn’t good enough, and fires a series of poison-tipped blow darts into my face to let me know when he wants to sleep. I also discovered that he enjoys Bond movies, and occasionally get the feeling that he regards me as something of a disposable henchperson along the lines of Oddjob, or Jaws.

            I’ve found that discussions of pop culture go much more smoothly when the parties involved don’t insist that everyone else share their exact opinion. Relatedly, it’s generally good to avoid lecturing people about the details of a movie that you think is an essential component of the zeitgeist if they haven’t seen it. That’s how I pissed off the blind community.

            Speaking of folks with bad vision, I learned that people above the age of 65 who are also my parents possess personal electromagnetic fields that short-circuit or otherwise screw up electronic devices at inopportune moments. This is a problem. Have you ever tried to explain to a baby boomer how to host a Zoom call? It’s a Kafkaesque descent into madness. My parents are great, but I do occasionally wish that they would adopt a more Amish lifestyle. You don’t need to download systems updates for a butter churn.[3]

…And Finally, Some Preachy S**t

            I’ve begun to think societal problems are better thought of in terms of institutions rather than people. I don’t really have a joke for this one. I just believe it’s better to go into discussions with the objective of fixing institutional wrongs and shortcomings instead of going after individuals who we see as representative of those shortcomings. While the latter method may be helpful in the short term, I don’t think that being animated by a desire to triumph over perceived enemies—as opposed to honestly attempting to address broader, structural issues—is a recipe for long-term success. Here’s a super obvious example: the Chinese government is horrid, but that doesn’t mean the people of China are. I assume their ratio of regular folks to a**holes is the same as it is anywhere else.[4]

            I also learned that being a mildly venomous cynic isn’t the best way to go through life. This may appear obvious, but to me it was a bit of a revelation. There’s a difference, I think, between being a wince-inducing “nice guy” (you know what I mean) and endeavoring to be a kind person, and I missed that for a while. That’s what I get for spending too much time on the internet (well, that and the eye strain).

            Finally, these last couple of years really made me appreciate a tidbit of wisdom I picked some time ago: that even when we can’t see a good path to walk, it doesn’t mean we should stop walking.[5] New responsibilities can really knock someone (like me, for example) for a loop, and make a person second-guess themselves at every conceivable opportunity. Sometimes second-guessing can’t be helped, I suppose—but we can’t allow ourselves to be paralyzed by doubt. At the end of the day, there’s no shame in needing help every now and then, and there’s no shame in giving it, even if you’re working things out as you go.

            Until next time—stay golden, Ponyboy. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have some fan fiction to write…

---

wtp7bq@virginia.edu

---

[1] None of this is even remotely true.

[2] There are several ways in which this could go wrong.

[3] Does Apple or another company produce smart butter churns? They could call it an “iChurn.” It would tell you the weather and send tweets and it would sell like hotcakes.

[4] At the risk of being called out by LeBron James for talking about things I don’t understand, I’d like to say that Chairman Xi should take a long walk off a short pier.

[5] From Brian Staveley’s The Providence of Fire. If you want the page number, read it yourself. It’s a good book.

Sad 3L Rationalizes Away Nostalgia

---

Sam Pickett ‘21
Ousted News Editor

As my time at UVA Law comes to an end, I’m beginning to get nostalgic. These days, I’ll stop for a moment to watch law students playing softball at Copley and reminisce on my softball glories.[1] I’ll pause across from the Law School, admiring the building and reflecting on how lucky I am to have been part of the Law School community, to have met the wonderful people I’ve met. I am aware, of course, that this is incredibly cringey and embarrassing. I mean, I even got emotional thinking about how this will be my last ever Law Weekly article. But I’m a 3L—I’m supposed to be embittered by three years of dealing with another bureaucratic institution! And with that in mind, I decided to embrace my inner type-A law student and to ease my nostalgia by coming up with a list of things I will and won’t miss about law school. These thoughts represent my attempt to use humor to cope with my sadness as I enter the professional workforce for the first time.

I will miss: The bond that only last-minute panic studying can create between people.

There comes a time whilst outlining when every student comes to a sudden realization: I don’t know what’s going on. I thought I understood *insert topic here*, but it turns out I don’t. And that is when you beg your much smarter friend to teach you something and when they do, you feel such a sense of relief that you are forever bonded to them. I mean, that sounds healthy, right?

I will NOT miss: Pretending like I know what’s going on. Too often in law school, I am expected to be aware of what is going on. I’m supposed to know what the reading was about, what the professor is saying, and what my classmates are opining on. I’ve had enough of it, and I cannot wait to embrace a life where ignorance is bliss.[2]

I will miss: Bar reviews at Bilt. Is there anything better than running into random acquaintances and yelling over the music into their ear in an attempt to have a conversation? God, I miss it and would do anything to be back there right now.

I will NOT miss: Only being able to afford bar reviews at Bilt. As much as I love my $4 doubles, I am excited to have standards on where and what I drink once I enter the workforce.

I will miss: Having wonderful, qualified professors who understand the material and teach it brilliantly. Shoutout to all the professors who have taught me well and especially those who have given me good grades.[3]

I will NOT miss: Having professors attempt to sabotage the administrative state from the inside.

I will miss: Long weekends and vacations. This semester, my week ends at 12:30 on Wednesday. I mean, THAT is the life. And I’ll never have it again ☹.

I will NOT miss: Having my spring break broken up into little pieces and scattered throughout the Spring semester in an attempt to break me mentally, emotionally, physically, and spiritually. I can’t wait to decide when I want to take vacation.[4]

I will miss: Hearing and learning from my peers in the classroom.

I will NOT miss: Hearing from my peers in the classroom.

I will miss: Law IT. I don’t really know them, but they’re very kind and seem very sweet. I wish them the best.

I will NOT miss: Receiving emails from the Law School about what to do if I have a mental breakdown/anxiety attack during an exam. It’s like they’re so close to understanding that law school exams are not a healthy way of testing people but just can’t quite get there.

I will miss: The collegiality of students sharing their outlines. God bless all those who have given me outlines and consequently saved me more times in law school than hidden immunity idols have saved Survivor contestants.[5]

I will NOT miss: Someone asking me if I have started outlining to make themselves feel better because they know I have not started outlining and they have. I recognize that this means I should have started earlier, but I refuse to do anything about it.

I will miss: The people. Yes, this is cringey, but also so true. I met so many incredible people at UVA, including the love of my life. Many students will be joining me in D.C., but some will be going elsewhere and for me that is very sad.

And it is with that list that I conclude my Law Weekly career. It has been an immense pleasure and I can only hope that I have brought someone out there some bit of joy. Oh god, here come the tears.

---

shp8dz@virginia.edu

---

[1] Fall 2019 Softball Champion.

[2] This is, of course, completely untrue, as I imagine I will have to pretend even harder in professional life. But roll with me.

[3] This is a joke.

[4] Assuming the partners at my firm let me.

[5] I have watched a lot of Survivor during quarantine. HMU to discuss which seasons are the best.

Parking and the Student-Centered Law School

---

Michael Berdan ‘22
Opinions Editor

This past December, during the final exam period, I was issued a fifty-five dollar parking citation for parking my beloved Volkswagen Beetle in the lot outside Slaughter Hall. I was surprised by this, since I had been told by my Peer Advisors and other classmates that parking was not enforced once classes ended, as demand for parking drops dramatically. This meshed with my experience on that day, since my car was one of only a handful in a lot that boasts well over 100 spaces.

            So, like any enterprising millennial, I took to the Class of ’22 GroupMe. I found that several other students had been similarly ticketed, having relied on the same information. A poll I submitted found that nearly seventy percent of the respondents were  under the same impression as I was: namely, that there was open parking once classes ended. I shared this information with UVA’s Department of Parking and Transportation (DP&T), and they simply said that because the faulty information was not supplied by their office, but rather word of mouth, it wasn’t grounds for appeal. A 2L in the GroupMe who had been ticketed then proposed that we talk to Dean Davies, noting that “if anyone will go to bat for us, it’s her.”

            Unfortunately, Dean Davies echoed the position of DP&T, seeming surprised that I or anyone else would have such an idea, and suggested that I “purchase daily parking” and “pass on to people who have not reviewed the parking rules that their understanding of the rules [is] incorrect.”  I suggested that since this misconception appeared to have been held by a strong majority of the student body and was passed on to many of us by our Law-School-assigned Peer Advisors, perhaps the Law School could ask DP&T to waive these tickets as a professional courtesy, allowing admin to correct the misinformation. Dean Davies declined to do so.

            I eventually won the appeal of my parking ticket because my wonderful peer advisor, Sam Thoma ’21, wrote to DP&T, telling them that she and many other PAs passed this information on to me, as well as many, many other students. I asked DP&T to similarly overturn the fines imposed on all my peers who were ticketed during finals season because of this widespread misinformation from a fairly official source. They declined to do so.

            This got me wondering about parking enforcement at UVA Law. How much money does the university generate by ticketing its students? When are we most often ticketed? Are more or fewer tickets issued during finals periods? Many students report parking in the lots during previous semesters without a problem. Do the numbers bear that out? So I used the Freedom of Information Act to get that information.

            In response to my FOIA request, I received a breakdown of every citation issued in the lots surrounding the Law School during 2018, 2019, and 2020. Here is some of what I’ve learned. Anyone who wants the raw data can email me for it.

-       Each license plate gets a warning first, then a $55 ticket for the second infraction, and, it appears, a $250 ticket for the third infraction. Seven $250 tickets were issued during the 2018-2020 period.

-       A total of 1,508 citations were issued, totalling $34,140.00 in fines.

-       This equates to roughly $60 a day for the Law School.

-       Roughly 2.4 citations were issued per school day, on average.

-       There were no citations issued during the finals periods of Spring 2018 or Spring 2020.

-       Roughly 3.8 citations were issued per day during the finals periods in which they did enforce parking. In Fall 2020’s finals period, five citations per day were issued.

-       Citations were issued on the first day of school, the last day of school, Halloween, Valentine’s Day, and during Thanksgiving week.

-       Several citations were issued after the posted end of enforcement at 5 p.m., including some in October and December of this year, and six citations in a row after 5 p.m. on May 9, 2019.

            I do not claim this is a “smoking gun.” It doesn’t show malfeasance or corruption, or that DP&T is deliberately creating ambiguity in order to target us during finals weeks (though the very irregular enforcement during finals has created an atmosphere that is fecund for misinformation). However, the data does provoke a question I’ve been struggling with for some time, and that is “What would it look like for the Law School to be truly, fully devoted to its students?”

            It certainly would not look like issuing expensive citations to students for parking in nearly-empty parking lots outside the school they are paying $70,000 per year to attend. It may look like issuing a parking-days allotment, as is done with printing. It may look like allowing students to purchase a reserved spot, and to share it with their classmates as they wish. But these solutions—or any others—are unlikely to happen without a shift in mindset to what I call the Student-Centered Law School, one in which student success and wellbeing are the ultimate ends sought by every single decision.

            The Student-Centered Law School would see when policy will result in an untenable result, and refuse to let that happen. It would not, for example, force the withdrawal of a student called up by the National Guard. It would present students with options and autonomy for how they want to attend and engage in class, how they want to demonstrate their mastery of the material, and how they want to be evaluated. It would allow students to withdraw from courses or take leave for personal reasons without having to plead their case before administrative strangers. It would unceasingly seek opportunities to serve and support and stand with students, first and above all. It would allow students a space—in the parking lot, in the classroom, and in the community—where they can thrive.

---

mwb4pk@virginia.edu

What is a Chicken?

---

Christina Luk ‘21
Ousted Editor-in-Chief

From Frigaliment Importing Co. v. B.N.S. International Sales Corp, 190 F. Supp. 116 (S.D.N.Y. 1960)

what is a chicken?

any bird

that meets contract specifications

“chicken” standing alone

is ambiguous,

I turn to see

the contract called

“US Fresh Frozen Chicken, Grade A”

“chicken” meant

young chicken

broilers

stewing chicken

any kind of chickens,

and

in German

“Huhn”

the threat of contradiction; however,

does not convince

the Law 

Plaintiff’s reliance on “chicken”

was only the beginning

his acceptance of the standard

generally known

was no proof

of the alleged usage; indeed,

to the contrary,

the law of New York demands

usage

so notorious,

that the presumption is violent agreement

no credit goes too far,

a witness’ consistent failure

meant that

a Chicken is everything.

Everything is a chicken.

“Young chickens”

“Mature chickens,”

“Total chickens.”

“chicken” without specification

Defendant argues

the Government definition of “chicken,”

is ignored in the trade.

the market is scarcely an answer

33 cents was closer to the prevailing price

certainly

deliberately

a loss,

plaintiff replied

your contract chickens shall make it clear

that the measure of damages

did coincide with the dictionary meaning

the burden of “chicken” was not sustained.

 ---

cl4eh@virginia.edu

What Your Journal Says About You

---

Will Holt ‘23
Reviews Editor'

What you are about to consume is a playful work. Please understand that no offense is intended by anything that follows. Every journal below is a serious publication, and you should be proud to be a part of any of them. However, we can still have a bit of fun at their expense.

Virginia Law Review:

Well, if I’m gonna do this, I might as well start with the big boy on the block. Being on VLR is akin to being well-endowed. When people hear about it through the grapevine, they can’t help but feel both impressed and a bit self-conscious. But, if you go so far as to stick it in their faces, they will think you're a bit of a jerk. As a result, you’ve probably learned to be discreet when talking to folks, except during OGI when you practically tattoo it on your forehead. None of us can blame you of course, but that doesn’t mean we aren’t a wee bit jealous.

Journal of Law & Politics:

Okay, we get it, we get it. You want to live in D.C. No one can quite tell whether or not you actually want to work on Capitol Hill after graduating, but you’ve made it abundantly clear that if you aren’t doing politics, you at least want to be around it. Being a D.C. native, I can tell you that the whole affair gets old pretty quick, but props to you for sticking by your guns. I’d wager that you were a part of a debate club or model U.N. at some point in your past, and likely acquitted yourself well. It was probably a big reason why you came to law school. As a result, I imagine you see yourself, wherever you go, doing some type of litigation.

Virginia Environmental Law Journal:

You know what, good for you. You’re the kind of person who’s willing to make sacrifices to do what’s right. I’d bet you're fairly politically active, not unlike your JLP and VJSPL counterparts, but with a more idealistic streak. You're probably going to end up working for the EPA—or an oil company. I don’t know why, but I get the impression that there isn’t really a middle ground (see the Duel on Mustafar, Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith). You almost assuredly like hiking or biking, and are probably a bit of a health nut. That’s all well and good, but there is a white Prius with a bike rack parked in my spot at Pav, and I know it belongs to one of you. Please remove it, or I swear I will start cutting down one tree a week until it’s gone.

Virginia Journal of Criminal Law:

Maybe it was different in the past, but after all the challenges to the criminal law orthodoxy we have seen recently, you and your fellow members aren’t afraid to share your opinion on anything. For you, there is a right and a wrong, and nothing will stop you from calling out the latter. As far as career aspirations go, there is a good chance that you want to be a public defender. That is great, but the rummaging through Professor Frampton’s trash has to stop. For the love of Pete, he is an alive human like the rest of us. I’m sure he would be happy to talk to you if you just ask him like a normal person.

Virginia Journal of International Law:

While researching this article I saw that VJIL is apparently number one in its field. Congratulations! I’m not entirely sure what international lawyers do, but you seem to have your stuff figured out. You are probably pretty outgoing, and may speak more than one language. At parties, you are always the fella who has just come back from abroad with some new fad, and pronounces every country or city name in its native accent. But, as annoying as your insistence on pronouncing Paris as “Pair-ee” is, you are well meaning and always have a crazy story about almost dying in some Third World country to cheer me up.

Virginia Journal of Law and Technology:

I went to a school known for its computer science program for my first year of college, so I know a computer nerd when I see one. You guys are like semi-nerds. You have all of the trendy gadgets and outlandish predictions, but are still as terrified of a calculator as the rest of us. You will probably still end up doing BigLaw, but I could totally see you going in-house at some tech company in California. While out there, you’ll probably get really into yoga and reefer. Anyways, you seem pretty chill. Keep things groovy.

Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law:

It kinda goes without saying that you are politically active. You’re the kind of person who will drive halfway across the country to go to some protest in D.C. or New York. I’ll be real, that takes some serious dedication and I don’t know how you do it. I’d also bet you are really into indie -music and know how to tie-dye your own shirts. You also really like ramen. Joking aside, you have a strong sense of justice. You are willing to throw down with anyone at any time over the causes you believe to be just. I know I don’t want to get in your way.

Virginia Law & Business Review:

Work hard, play hard. That’s your motto. You want to mint some coin and have some fun on the way. I imagine you are hoping to get a BigLaw job in New York and probably came to law school with a sycophantic love for the show Suits. You’re charismatic and know how to network with all the top firms. You lead the softball league in runs, even though I’m pretty sure you’ve never been sober for a single practice.

Unfortunately, I do have one complaint, and I think I speak for everyone when I say this. Please stop wearing a coat and tie when event invitations say “business casual.” It’s really annoying. Other than that, you seem to be pretty cool. Cheers.

Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law:

I know your secret. You never thought anyone would find out, but now I am going to expose you. The only reason you came to law school was because that’s what Tom Cruise did in Jerry Maguire before he became a sports agent. You also cry whenever you hear “Tangled up in Blue,” by Bob Dylan. I’m not going to say anymore because I know my VaSE friends have to reassess their lives at this point. For those among my readership who have no idea what I’m talking about, just go watch Jerry Maguire. It will make sense. Trust me.

Virginia Tax Review

Okay, tell me that you want to do transactional law, without actually telling me that you want to do transactional law. You share a lot in common with the folks over at VLRBR, but are probably a bit more reserved, and somewhat less in love with Suits. VTR folks are a pretty practical bunch, so it wouldn’t surprise me if you have already started saving for retirement and love collecting coupons. I’m getting a pretty strong Robert Duvall, circa 1969, vibe coming from you as well. He’s not the most memorable character from The Godfather, but he’s pretty good nonetheless. It’s not like you people are stuck with Fredo like VaSE (I don’t know why I’m ripping them so hard, but Fredo literally ran a casino, so don’t tell me it isn’t true). All in all, you seem pretty solid, just learn to accept the fact that you’ll never be the Don.

---

wjh4ew@virginia.edu

3L Talks Shop: Innovation, Non-Profits, and a Brighter Tomorrow for Students of African Descent

---

Doriane Nguenang' ‘21
Guest Editor

1. What is Pembe?

Pembe is a non-profit organization focused on mentoring aspiring law students of African descent throughout the law school application process. Our executive board consists of current law students at top U.S. law schools and recent graduates working across the private sector, including law firms and investment banks, as well as the United Nations. Our mission is to increase the representation of people of African descent in the U.S. legal profession by providing free mentorship and law school admissions counseling to prospective law school applicants.

2. What inspired you to join Pembe?

I was inspired to join Pembe by my own law school journey. I moved to the United States when I was sixteen years old. I knew early on I wanted to study law. However, my initial roadmap to get there was quite different from my ultimate path. Initially, my goal was to go to law school in France after graduating from the French International School in Bethesda, Maryland. However, my parents encouraged me to stay in the United States for the better educational opportunities. I decided to stay, and obtained a degree in economics from the University of Maryland, College Park. From there, I embarked on my law school journey.

As someone with a Franco-Cameroonian background, the law school application process was very challenging. When I started the process, I knew nothing about the law school application process in the United States, nor did I know any lawyers who could provide me with critical advice on how to be successful with my law school applications. I did a lot of research online to learn what I needed to do to apply and be a successful candidate. Later on, while interning at a solo law firm in D.C., the lawyer I interned for provided me with great insight into the law school application process and valuable feedback on my personal statement. Following my applications, I was fortunate enough to be accepted at several law schools, including UVA Law.

When a friend at Harvard Law School (Brice Ngameni, Pembe’s President and Co-Founder) invited me to join Pembe, I immediately knew that I wanted to join the organization. I want to help students who look like me in their law school application process. I do not want them to go into the application process blind as I did. There are various barriers, including a lack of access to knowledge and connections, and financial difficulties, that prevent many students of African descent from applying to and attending U.S. law schools. If I can help in any way in minimizing these barriers, I want to know that I have done my part. 

3. What is your role within Pembe?

I am Pembe’s Content Director. As Content Director, I am responsible for overseeing Pembe’s content efforts, including compiling resources on the law school application process for mentors and mentees, and developing training presentations for mentors. I recently completed detailed modules on LSAT preparation, resources for scholarships, and writing personal statements, which we hope to share with our mentors and mentees. The LSAT modules include information on best practices for LSAT success, structured study plans, and resources for scholarships and grants to cover LSAT expenses. I also created a “Road to Success” series to provide pre-law students with first-hand LSAT preparation and other admissions-related information from current or past law students who have taken the LSAT in the last couple of years.

4. How can others get involved with Pembe? 

We have recently started our recruiting campaign for mentees and mentors. More information about applying to become a mentor or mentee can be found on Pembe’s website at www.pembeorg.com.

---

dn6ra@virginia.edu

The Mental Edge

---

Nate Wunderli ‘22
Sports Editor

Training the mind, in today’s age, is what working out was for athletes thirty years ago. Believe it or not, it wasn’t too long ago that athletes didn’t feel it was necessary to lift weights or exercise outside of playing their sport. Athletes like Bo Jackson, the multi-sport freak athlete in the ’80s and ’90s, who was both a running back for the Raiders and an outfielder for the White Sox, used to work out by going hunting, throwing the deer over his shoulders, and carrying it home. Nowadays, it would be absolutely insane for an elite athlete not to work out. Mental training is now undergoing the same shift from obscurity to a necessary part of an elite athlete’s training. It is no surprise that many of the greatest athletes also have the greatest minds. For instance, a test on the greatest home run hitter of all time, Babe Ruth, showed he was able to process visual information 12% faster than normal men, and that his visual perception occurred 150% faster. [1]

            Stephen Curry, the greatest shooter in basketball history, not coincidentally has perhaps the best mental game of any basketball player of all time. As part of his training, he performs drills with FitLight and strobe goggles that overload his mind with information and test how quickly he can react. He spends time in sensory deprivation chambers, achieving an effect similar to deep meditation. Curry also has an exact pregame ritual to activate his mind, which includes physical drills as well as visualization techniques. During timeouts, he focuses on his breathing, and he has the ability to lower his heart rate below eighty beats per minute during a single ninety-second timeout.[2] This can be achieved simply through deep breaths, but Curry also trains by lying on his back and placing sandbags on his ribs after a tough workout to overload his diaphragm.

            Tiger Woods, the greatest golfer of all time, credits much of his own success to his mental training. As a kid, his dad would often drop clubs or jingle coins during his swing to help him overcome distractions. Tiger also utilized meditation taught to him by his Buddhist mother, hypnosis, and various mental imagery techniques. If you look at Tiger on the course, everything from the way he walks to the look on his face epitomizes relaxed focus.

            Tom Brady is another example of the power of the mind. Clearly not the most gifted quarterback of all time, Brady nevertheless has seven Super Bowl rings and is the undisputed GOAT of the NFL. Brady meets regularly with a neuropsychologist, and based on a scan of neurological functions, developed a brain-strengthening program he follows religiously.[3] Everything from Brady’s diet to his sleep habits, brain training, and spirituality all contribute to his ability to play at a consistently high level.

           I have learned a lot about the mental aspects of sports from personal experience. While I do not compete collegiately anymore, the things I learned playing golf have helped me in everything from law school exams to dominating pickup basketball at the ACAC. Much of what I’ve learned I wish I had known earlier and had worked on starting in my youth. The following three things helped me achieve greater performance and are things anyone can implement without fancy equipment or trainers.

Pictured: Law Weekly’s own Nate Wunderli ’22 taking home the hardware.

           First, perform a self-assessment. Each one of us is wired differently, and reacts differently under different stresses and stimulation. A good self-assessment doesn’t require brain scans like Tom Brady’s, but it does require honesty and sometimes humility. It took me a long time to understand that I naturally get more anxious than my peers in sports. I had to suffer through a lot of competitions where I knew what I was capable but fell short because I wasn’t able to let my natural ability take over. As a proud athlete and young teenager, admitting this was a problem was difficult--but once I did, I was able to figure out ways to manage it. I found it helped to go into a competition and just focus on observing myself, almost like I was a third-party onlooker. This helped me compartmentalize what I was feeling and thinking, so that afterward I was able to understand what triggered anxious thoughts and why they were occurring.

           Next, have a mental game plan. It’s perfectly okay for the plan to be a simple one like to relax and have fun, let it fly, or something to get you focused. Oftentimes simple plans like this are the most effective, because the mind can easily latch onto it when a stressful situation emerges. Choose something that goes along with your self-assessment, and it will help you feel comfortable and able to be yourself. Don’t be afraid to experiment a little bit and be creative.

           Finally, after you find something that seems to work and feels like you, stay consistent with it. You’re not going to have good days or performances all the time. Not even the best achieve that. Just because you have one bad day, however, doesn’t necessarily mean your plan sucked. It may just mean you have to stick with it longer, and over time the consistency will breed familiarity, which will in turn produce better results. Constantly changing your game plan in response to a single bad outcome may be the very reason none of them are working.

           These three simple things--self-assessment, game planning, and staying consistent through good and bad--can help anyone achieve better performance on the field of play, or in other endeavors where there is pressure to perform. The best athletes go even further with various neuroscience-related training techniques. As the field continues to grow and to be embraced by athletes and the public in general, it will be interesting to see what people come up with to train their biggest weapon: the mind.

---

nw7cz@virginia.edu

---

[1] https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2693694-steph-currys-secrets-to-success-brain-training-float-tanks-and-strobe-goggles

[2] https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/warriors/how-steph-curry-can-intentionally-slow-heart-rate-during-warriors-games

[3] https://www.feelguide.com/2017/01/15/the-tao-of-tom-how-tom-brady-uses-an-80-20-diet-meditation-yoga-one-book-to-age-backwards/

In the Zoom Where it Happens: Students Attend Faculty Workshop

---

Jacob Smith ‘23
Professor Liaison Editor

Christina Luk ‘21
Former Editor-in-Chief

Anyone familiar with the UVA Law Docket will recognize the label “Faculty Workshop.” It denotes a special event just for faculty where our esteemed professors get together to talk about secret professor things.[1] These secrets eventually get published in some form, such as a journal article or a book, and then that publication goes on to change the world. But what exactly happens in these secret professor meetings? How do we get from point A, a really cool idea, to point B, a ground-breaking piece of legal scholarship? On Tuesday, March 2, students were invited to find out.

            Tuesday’s event was the first of its kind and was hosted by the Academic Placement Committee, which assists folks who are interested in going on the academic teaching market. The event opened, as all events open nowadays, on Zoom. Noon rolled around and students began to populate onto a black screen, eager to discuss Professor Michael Livermore’s upcoming article, “Where Nature’s Rights Go Wrong,” which discusses what is at stake when legal scholars generalize environmental rights too broadly. Professor Livermore welcomed everyone to the workshop and he explained that workshopping is an important part of the scholarly process.

            The workshop took place in three big chunks. First, there was the introduction where Professor Livermore discussed how the project came to be. Then, there was his presentation about his article. The event concluded with a Q&A, where students got to participate in the peer review process by asking questions and making suggestions. While this editor hopes that Professor Livermore got something out of speaking with us, it was clear from the posture of the event that this was largely for the benefit of students and to give students a better understanding of what scholarship looks like in the academy.

            Professor Livermore introduced his project by framing its stakes. Different countries around the world have tackled environmental rights in different ways. In 2008, Ecuador amended its constitution to give legal rights to Nature itself, recognizing it as an entity with “the right to integral respect for its existence and for the maintenance and regeneration of its life cycles, structure, functions and evolutionary processes.”[2] Professor Livermore’s article, co-written with a previous student of his, takes a deep dive into why Ecuador’s constitutional amendment has not been as successful as commentators hoped back in 2008.

            For one thing, policies and laws that tackle environmental protection have often come at it from the perspective of individual human interests, such as the right to clean air or water. Nature’s rights, by contrast, are the rights of a group – what Professor Livermore calls a “biological aggregate.” But how do we define such a group? And, is there a way to persuasively articulate and defend this group’s interests? These are the twin dilemmas at the theoretical heart of “nature’s rights.”

            Professor Livermore gave a great presentation unpacking these dilemmas. If we want to give nature rights, it’s tempting to start with the sentient experience of individual animals. During the discussion portion that followed Professor Livermore’s presentation, one participant wondered why that wasn’t enough. Intuitively, it does make sense that animals would have an interest in surviving and feeling pain, and individual human experience is foundational to our regime of human rights. 

            The problem is that biological aggregates also seem to deserve protection for their own sakes. Professor Livermore proposed a thought experiment: Is it worse to kill a hundred pigeons in New York City or the last hundred of a rare species of bird in Brazil? We would say the Brazilian birds deserve much more protection, because we see something especially heinous in the eradication of an entire species. But why are “rare” birds worthy of more concern? If we are looking exclusively at individual experience, the interests of all birds are equally important. To recognize the importance of rare birds, we need to protect the interests of a species, apart from the interests of that species’ members.

            While we are comfortable comparing the interests of human groups, say for example a corporation, biological aggregates are different in important ways. Human groups can express preferences and litigate to protect their rights. We can compare the interests of human groups by thinking about what would happen if they could bargain or if they were forced to deliberate behind a Rawlsian veil of ignorance. Biological aggregates lack the kind of subjective preferences we attribute to people, which makes it difficult to apply a bargaining framework. A Rawlsian framework is hard to implement, precisely because it requires the thinker to conceptualize the relative likelihood of being a biological aggregate, as opposed to an individual biological entity. It is not obvious how to calculate that probability.

            As we moved into the discussion portion of the event, alternative approaches were examined. We could, for example, ask what is good or bad for the biotic community as a whole. But the biotic community is difficult to separate from human activity, and it is still appropriate to acknowledge the interests of smaller entities like species. Protecting biodiversity was another idea suggested during the discussion. Professor Livermore responded that we need a normative justification for the significance of biodiversity, why biodiversity is more than “just strands of DNA.” If we are going to make humans worse off for the sake of biodiversity, we should be able to justify our decision.

            All in all, this event was eye-opening. Not only was it a great opportunity to learn about an interesting and important field of law, but it was also a great experience in academic dialogue. For students who are interested in future events from the Academic Placement Committee, Professors Cathy Hwang and Richard Schragger will be hosting an informational “So You Want to be a Law Professor” event next Wednesday, March 17 at noon, when they will discuss their careers and introduce students to the process of becoming a law professor.

---

js3hp@virginia.edu
cl3eh@virginia.edu

---

[1] Just your run of the mill cutting-edge theories that will go on to redefine an area of law, no big.

[2] Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador Oct. 20, 2008, ch. 7, art. 71.

Practice Makes Perfect

---

Sam Pickett ‘21
Columns Editor

One problem with being a law student (and there are many) is that you’re probably a perfectionist. Being a perfectionist has its advantages, sure. It got me into this law school and got me a job, and it made me great at baking cookies when I was younger[1] because I stuck to the recipe and didn’t risk deviating for anything. I mean my measurements were precise. But being a perfectionist also means that I don’t like being bad at things. And so, when quarantine began and I realized the need for a hobby that didn’t involve going to Bar Review,[2] I was left with a quandary. Would I pursue certain interests even if it meant that I would also be bad at them? What follows is a catalogue of my adventures in discovering different interests and overcoming the need for perfection.

Coffee

I love coffee, like most law students, and decided that if I was going to “get into something” during quarantine, why not choose coffee? How hard could it be? I already had my parents’ old coffee grinder and figured I would just need some beans. It turns out that I was wrong. Coffee people are, to be frank, insufferable. They take something as joyfully simple as coffee and muck it up. What kind of grinder do you have? How hot is your water? What kind of water are you using? What is the exact ratio of coffee to water?

            I wanted to experiment with coffee, but it seemed that if I wasn’t going to do it like the coffee nerds then I might as well not do it at all. This was part perfectionist[3] and also part laziness. After all, I like coffee not just for its taste but for its ease, and I simply don’t have the patience to worry about every little detail when making coffee before class.

            I will say, however, that my coffee caper was not a complete failure. I bought one of those coffee subscriptions and now have a vague idea of what coffees I do and don’t like. And that’s all I really wanted from this experience.

Cocktails

There was a point early on in quarantine where beer and wine simply were not enough. When there is a new pandemic and no one really knows what to do and everyone is scared of everything, you need something a little stronger. And so began my interest in cocktails, which started with perfecting an Old Fashioned and is still going strong.

            But my interest in cocktails has really been a team effort. During the summer, my firm hosted a virtual cocktail making class, where I learned how to make something other than an Old Fashioned. And while my interest waned as I became busier with school, it was reignited during winter break when I was gifted a bar set[4] and a recipe book. With better tools and more recipes, my interest in cocktails has persevered. It also helps that making cocktails is relatively simple, and therefore ideal for my perfectionist sensibilities.

Making things from scratch

I used to think Tik Tok was just a Vine knockoff—a failed attempt to recreate the magic of my high school and early college years. But when quarantine dramatically increased the amount of free time I had, I discovered that the app wasn’t half bad. In fact, it’s brilliant and filled with lots of people with lots to teach me. More specifically, it’s filled with people who know how to make things from scratch. And if some random 14-year-old can make no-knead bread, then why couldn’t I?

            And so, during quarantine I have made corn tortillas, bread, and bagels, all from scratch! This is the perfect activity for a perfectionist because these recipes are very forgiving, and so even if you think you messed up every step, you can find success. It also helped me lose some of my perfectionism, because I was so happy to have made something that even remotely resembled bagels that I couldn’t care less if they were perfectly round. Like cocktails, this interest has stuck.

Drawing

Drawing is perhaps the most intimidating of my interests because it requires so much practice to be good at it. And the practice takes a lot of time and effort and never looks as good as you want it. It’s like your 1L memo, or almost anything I write.

            But as I write this article, I am attempting to learn to draw once again. I’ve learned that my sketches won’t be perfect, and that has helped, but only time will tell if I can get over my perfectionism enough to stick with it. But in the meantime, at least I can eat some homemade bagels.

---

shp8dz@virginia.edu

---

[1] I had my own cookie-baking business called “Sam’s Baked Desserts.” It was a huge success until I got too lazy.

[2] 1Ls still don’t know what this is and that really pains me.

[3] You know what perfectionists say: If the going gets tough, stop before you must acknowledge your failure.

[4] My sister got me the bar set, and it’s funny because I had never mentioned that I made cocktails. Did she just assume lawyers need cocktails to function with our long, stressful hours? Do I just seem like the person basic enough to want to make cocktails?

No-Bake Dessert Recipes

---

Grace Tang ‘21
Foreign Correspondent

With spring semester in full swing, nobody has time to make eighteen-step French pastries or lavish cakes.[1] We law students are short on time. BUT, that doesn’t mean you can’t whip up easy no-bake desserts. Don’t be afraid to take up your whisks—these desserts are pretty much foolproof, and they’re fairly quick to make. Most importantly, the delicious end result is worth it.

Some of these desserts will require whipped cream. Pro tip: if you don’t have a KitchenAid or hand mixer, use a blender to whip up the heavy cream instead.

Cheesecake and Chill—No Bake Mini Cheesecakes

These mini cheesecakes are decadent and simple to whip up. I like to make two different variations, either using an Oreo cookie base or a classic graham cracker base. This recipe is also easy to customize, you can add jam, honey or other toppings to change things up. 

Cheescake Photo Curtesy of Grace Tang '21

The secret to this version of the cheesecake is a dash of fresh lemon juice, which gives the cheesecakes a brighter flavor. You can use the recipe to make one big cake rather than mini cheesecakes using a six-inch Springform pan. The finished product can be frozen and stored for up to two weeks.

Ingredients for ten mini cheesecakes:

150g (5.25 oz, or 1 ½ cup) of crushed Oreos or graham crackers (I recommend getting the box pre-crushed rather than crushing cookies yourself).

1/4 cup of melted butter

12 ounces of cream cheese (softened to room temperature)

1/2 cup granulated sugar (adjust sweetness as desired)

1/3 cup of heavy cream, whipped into stiff peaks

1/4 cup of sour cream

2 tablespoons of fresh lemon juice

A muffin tin and cupcake paper for assembly. If you do not have the cupcake and muffin tin, feel free to use a shallow Tupperware instead (scoop out the cheesecake).

Cheesecake instructions: 

Combine melted butter with crushed cookies and distribute into cupcake tins. Use the back of a spoon or your fingers to press down on the base.

Combine cream cheese, and sugar until incorporated, and then add in lemon juice. Next, combine with sour cream and whipped heavy cream.

Pour the cheesecake batter into the lined cupcake paper, on top of the cookie crust base.

Refrigerate at least two hours before consuming. I like to use a spoon to eat the cheesecake.

The BEST Tiramisu—Grace’s Secret Recipe

This tiramisu is absolutely incredible, and it’s a very authentic Italian recipe. It’s also probably my favorite recipe of all time. The key to success and most important step is allowing the tiramisu to rest in the fridge for at least 48 hours. Once made, the tiramisu can be frozen and will last a long time, although I suspect it won’t be around for long before it’s devoured. 

Tiramisu Photo Curtesy of Grace Tang '21

Tiramisu looks fancy but it’s actually super simple to make and requires no baking. So, if you follow the recipe precisely, your dessert should turn out well. Feel free to half the portions for a smaller size of tiramisu.[2]

Ingredients for a large tray of tiramisu:

1000g (4 ¼ cups) mascarpone cheese (I highly recommend Italian-made, softened to room temperature)

10 egg yolks 

3/4 cup sugar

1 ½  cups heavy cream, whipped into stiff peaks

2 cups of very strong coffee (+ 3 shots of rum and 3 shots of cream liqueur like Baileys) 

2-3 packages of ladyfinger cookies (depending on size)

A sprinkling of cocoa powder (or hot chocolate powder)

A large casserole dish or tray for assembly

Tiramisu instructions: 

Whisk raw egg yolks with sugar until it turns lighter in color, then add mascarpone cheese and blend thoroughly.

Add in whipped heavy cream to the mascarpone mixture. 

In a separate bowl, combine rum and cream liqueur with cooled strong coffee. 

Assemble tiramisu: briefly (1-2 seconds) dip ladyfinger cookies into coffee mixture and layer between mascarpone cream.

Keep in the fridge for a MINIMUM of 48 hours before dusting with cocoa powder and serving. Tiramisu can be frozen (for up to one month) and thawed before serving. Freezing Tiramisu will not affect its taste at all.

 ---

gt5ay@virginia.edu

---

[1] If you want those, I recommend hitting up MarieBette to satisfy your sweet tooth

[2] If you make more tiramisu, you can always share it with friends and family. If you do, you’ll probably become their favorite person.

How to be a Nutty Buddy

---

Jack Brown ‘23
Staff Editor

Imagine...it’s a post-COVID world. You’re in Spies Gardens and just got a care-package of homemade cookies. You offer one to the bright-eyed 1L to whom you’ve spent the last fifteen minutes trying to explain how to thrive in law school. Entranced by your stories of nights spent outlining, they nod their head and scarf the perfect cookie down. Suddenly, their face turns beet-red and they fall to the ground. Dumbfounded, you hear them weakly force out two words, “Nut allergy.” You realize the cookies were made with almond milk, an important fact for future Torts casebooks that will immortalize your mistake for generations of cold-calls to come.

The Law Weekly is proudly nut, gluten, and shellfish free.

Is there anything you can do to stop this nightmare from coming true? Hi, I’m Jack Brown ’23 and you might call me an expert on nut allergies (both peanuts and tree nuts!). I’ve had reactions at family dinners, on the first day of school, and of course, on a plane at cruising altitude. While allergies are scary, there are easy steps that you all can take to be a real “nutty buddy” and keep the legume-adverse people in your lives safe!

What causes a nut allergy?

We don’t know! While there are many theories about what has caused the massive spike in the proportion of the population with food intolerances (0.4% of children in 1997 had nut allergies compared to 2.5% in 2016), none have emerged as the definitive answer. What we do know is that it is not entirely genetic; for example, no one in my family has an allergy.

Having a food allergy is classified as an immune system disorder. This is because our bodies produce antibodies which target proteins that are otherwise harmless. When these antibodies detect the proteins, histamines are produced, which in turn cause inflammation throughout the body. Some proteins are only in one distinct food (peanuts) while others are shared between a broad group of foods (tree nuts and shellfish).

In severe reactions, this inflammation can cause the reaction most people are most familiar with and most afraid of: anaphylactic shock. While this reaction is fairly uncommon, with most allergies causing milder symptoms, when it does happen, it can be very traumatizing for both the person going through it and nearby spectators.

What leads to a reaction?

By far the most common cause of an allergic reaction is eating whatever food your immune system has decided to not vibe with. Restaurants that don’t know what goes into their food, mislabeled candies, and the classic killer pesto (made with pine nuts if you didn’t know!) are just some of the ways someone’s allergy can get triggered.  

Stopping these reactions mostly falls to the people with the allergy. If we’ve made it this far, we’ll know what questions to ask. Now if you’re dealing with kids, or K-JDs, you might need to take some of the responsibility in double-checking the labels, but hopefully you’re never in that position without more training.  

On the other hand, cross-contamination is a very real threat. A microwave which had just been used to reheat a piece of pecan pie and someone putting a knife into a jar of jelly after using it to smear peanut butter on a piece of bread are just two of the ways I have had a routine meal turn into a fun adventure to the ER.

Stopping this from happening does not require you to completely ban peanuts from your household. My family has always loved tons of dishes that I cannot have and I’m still here. Keep track of what utensils come into contact with allergens, clean countertops regularly,  listen to whoever has an allergy, and you’ll be golden.

The other main indirect way to trigger a reaction is less known. For up to four hours after you eat peanuts or tree nuts, trace amounts of the food can be found in your saliva. If in this period you kiss someone who has a particularly severe allergy, things will escalate quickly.

Anything else I should know?

If you ever do find yourself in a situation where someone is having a reaction, please do not panic. While it is a scary situation, staying calm will put you in the best position to help out. Most people with an allergy know how their bodies react and will be able to tell you exactly what they need. Some might just need some Benadryl and to lay down for a while, others might need you to chauffer them to the emergency room.

That being said, if it’s a kid having a reaction, call 911 immediately, unless their parents/guardians are right there and tell you differently. And if the reaction of an adult is particularly severe, also call 911. You’re going to have to make a judgement call because of how different each situation can be, but again stay calm and most of the time the solution is simpler than any Property hypo.

---

jwb4bb@virginia.edu

Disbarred for Defense: Attorneys in China Under Threat

---

Dana Lake ‘23
Production Editor

China’s legal profession has evolved along with changes in government priorities and social movements. Today, foreign law firms can establish branches in China and take part in the country’s massive economy. Many restrictions remain, however. For example, foreign lawyers cannot take the Chinese bar exam or practice Chinese law. Even for native Chinese lawyers, politics remain a massive barrier to justice.

China has had thousands of years of history that has formed its legal system. But despite its ancient history, China’s legal profession has only existed in its current form for a few decades. Below is an extremely brief summary of the tumultuous road Chinese law has taken.

The earliest fully preserved Chinese legal code dates to the 600s. It was a primarily inquisitorial system with strong Confucian foundations. Modern Chinese law began with the fall of the Qing Dynasty in 1911 and a push for a western-styled code of law in the 1920s, followed by an informal decentralized system that emphasized social pressure under Mao in the 1950s. The next decade saw a push for codification, more judicial autonomy, and the growth of the legal profession—gains that were largely erased during the Cultural Revolution. It wasn’t until Mao’s death in the 1970s that China’s first criminal legal code was enacted. The 1980s saw growth in the legal system once again, with the 1982 Constitution expanding individual rights and denying exemptions for party leaders. A civil code was introduced, and by the 1990s, an adversarial system was adopted. Under Xi, China has continued to grow its legal profession while maintaining a strong central government.

What this summary only hints at are the executions, disappearances, and imprisonments of many of the legal professionals who have worked to push China into a modern system of law. Their work has not ended. The Weiquan Movement continues to push for greater freedom of speech, defend persecuted minorities, and fight for greater food safety and environmental protections.[1] Lawyers who take cases that contribute to the movement put their own freedoms on the line.

The 709 crackdown is a recent example. In 2015, more than 200 Chinese lawyers and Human Rights activists were arrested, imprisoned, and in some cases tortured for their work.[2] The defense attorneys for those arrested in the round-up found themselves facing legal action for taking their cases.[3]

Pictured: Human Rights Attorney Ren Quanniu was Disbarred for his Advocacy. Credit: Photo Courtesy of: Leo Ramirez/AFP via Getty Images

In a country where the prosecution has a conviction rate of over 99%, Chinese defense attorneys already have a high bar to overcome for their clients.[4] In high-profile or politically sensitive cases, it can be impossible. Attorneys are blocked from meeting with incarcerated clients, and accused parties are often assigned government counsel instead. If the defense attorney is not imprisoned themselves, they increasingly face disbarment as retribution for not stepping down.

This is what happened to the lawyer who sparked this article.[5] Ren Quanniu is a human rights attorney who specializes in religious freedoms. In 2016, the Chinese Ministry of Justice passed an order making it illegal for lawyers to advocate for their clients outside the courtroom.[6] For Ren, it was his language in the courtroom that provided the grounds for his disbarment: While defending a member of a religious minority, he refused to call his client’s movement a cult.

Another Chinese attorney, Zhou Ze, recently had his license to practice law suspended for publishing a video of police torturing his client to force a confession. Other human rights lawyers, like Gao Zhisheng, who was last seen in 2017, have been “disappeared” and their whereabouts are unknown.[7] More commonly, defense attorneys find themselves in positions like Sui Muqing. Sui was not only disbarred for representing a human rights advocate who had done work for the families of Tiananmen Square protesters, but he also continues to be completely censored.[8] He cannot publish writings or have any social media accounts.

The risk for Chinese attorneys in politically sensitive cases is enormous. Even in modern China, the repercussions for representing sensitive clients range from secret, indefinite detention to the end of one’s financial livelihood. Still, Chinese attorneys continue to defend political prisoners and human rights advocates. I was driven to write this article because of a quote from Ren that struck me in a way that I hope will also strike you. The quote is from shortly before he was disbarred: “Even if my lawyer's license is canceled, I have at least made good use of it.”

---

dl9uh@virginia.edu

---

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/25/magazine/the-lonely-crusade-of-chinas-human-rights-lawyers.html

[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/25/magazine/the-lonely-crusade-of-chinas-human-rights-lawyers.html

[3] https://ge.usembassy.gov/five-years-of-injustice-following-chinas-709-crackdown-july-8/

[4] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/world/asia/china-inmate-murder-zhang-yuhuan.html

[5] https://www.npr.org/2021/02/18/963217332/where-no-one-dares-speak-up-china-disbars-lawyers-on-sensitive-cases

[6] http://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2016/content_5113014.htm

[7] https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa17/0199/2019/en/

[8] https://www.npr.org/2017/10/12/557444676/chinese-activist-in-government-custody-is-in-failing-health

COVID: Loneliness, Guilt, and a Sad 1L

---

Jonathan Peterson ‘23
Staff Editor

My back aches. My mind is tired, whittled down to an unproductive nub by countless hours of mental strain. I’ve never worked this hard in my life, and my body, hunched into a position fit for someone fifty years my senior, is beginning to reflect that fact. The pillow caresses my grossly convex back, a seemingly well-intentioned act undercut by the extreme lack of lumbar support. My TV plays what must be the millionth episode of some sitcom, affirming that I am Netflix’s most dedicated customer. A knock on my door—my mom has brought me dinner. Life is hard.

            Suffice to say, despite the melodrama playing out above, I had a cushier quarantine than your average Wahoo. I was, like many before me, locked in my room for ten full days after exposure. I, like many, saw the outside world mostly through my window and interacted with friends entirely virtually. However, because of my own personal situation—living at home—I likely retained more amenities than most in a similar position. Oddly, it felt reminiscent of high school. Scarily, I can’t say I hated it.

            For that to be the case, my story is necessarily riddled with privilege. I am lucky. Lucky to have a vaccinated mother, lucky to have caring friends, lucky to be capable of Zooming into school. And I am blessed to have remained COVID free. Which is why my personal experience is perhaps not the best to highlight when trying to talk about the strains of quarantine and isolation, or what one should picture if they have a friend or acquaintance going through the same. It isn’t easy. Which is why I believe it’s important to talk about what people can do for those going through it.

            The most difficult part of quarantine is perhaps the loneliness. In our technological era, it isn’t especially difficult to kill time, although doing so enjoyably is its own beast. However, Snapchats, texts, and even FaceTime calls don’t exactly substitute the coffee-and-muffin-conversations we enjoy in ScoCo. Even the brief wave and smiling eyes of a passing friend in a hallway have a different impact than virtual interactions. Of course, when in quarantine these options aren’t available, but interaction remains essential nonetheless. Interaction is of paramount importance to those who are either coping with the worries associated with having COVID, of which there are many, or the fears of possibly contracting the disease. And, for those two groups of people, that coping is done alone out of necessity. There is no one who can be there for them, at least not physically. Which is why it is important that, if you are a friend or an acquaintance of someone going through quarantine, you check in on them. It is a small gesture and as I’ve stated above, it’s no substitute for actual interaction. However, for those in quarantine, simply having people reach out to them every once in a while—to check in on how they’re feeling, if they have symptoms, how school is going, anything along those lines—is a pleasant reminder that, despite their current loneliness, they are not alone.

Pictured: It felt as though life were passing me by as I watched, lonely, from my window. Photo Courtesy of Jonathan Peterson '23.

            Another important thing to remember, especially when interacting with people who have COVID, is that they’re scared. They’re scared for themselves, but even more than that, oftentimes, they’re scared for the host of known and unknown people they may have impacted. And it’s necessary to understand that even the most COVID-conscious among us can, without error on our own part, become infected at any time. Even a simple trip to the grocery store, fully masked, yet made at the wrong time, can be all it takes. And yet, for those who contract the virus, many of them feel fundamentally responsible. Responsible for contracting the virus and responsible for possibly, innocently, passing it along to others. This message of responsibility is important on a societal level—if individuals didn’t feel responsible for these things, what would nation-wide COVID compliance look like? However, on a personal level, when dealing with those around you who are in this situation, it’s important to remind them that this is a global pandemic. These things are, often, uncontrollable. The guilt that accompanies a positive test result is frightening and, for those who are already going through the mental strain of a fourteen-day isolation, crippling. Briefly, to qualify this, not all who contract COVID are blameless. However, I believe the vast majority of people are not intentionally reckless. Nonetheless, they may feel responsible for their test results, and that guilt makes the already extremely difficult experience of isolation that much more harrowing.

            My goal in highlighting this is to point out that if a friend or acquaintance gets COVID, these concerns may be on their mind. However, times are crazy. Some even say unprecedented. Personal accountability is important, and it’s hard not to feel accountable when staring an astronomically deadly virus in the face. However, guilt is not necessarily the appropriate response. Certainly, if there’s a lesson to be learned about following protocol, that lesson should be learned. However, that feeling of loneliness which is fundamentally a part of isolation is only exacerbated by the fears  that you may have infected not only your friends, but your community. I do not believe that people already struggling with COVID should, or need, to feel that added guilt.

            So please, if there’s anyone you know in isolation or quarantine, just reach out to them. See how they’re doing. Ask if you could drop some food off for them. That alone will mean the world and show them that they aren’t alone and that they aren’t ostracized. It’ll show them that COVID is the danger, COVID is the enemy, and not our suffering friends. We can still care for them, even from afar, and look forward to their return.

---

jtp4bw@virginia.edu

Antitrust at a Crossroads: The Biden Administration

---

Donna Faye Imadi ‘22
Current Events Editor

The Biden-Harris Administration inherited an era of antitrust akin to that at the turn of the early 20th century. Except, rather than the industrial era, it is the new technological dynamism in the economy challenging our leaders to craft a path forward in a pandemic-ridden business climate. How does the Biden Administration intend to chart a path forward? From federal agencies, Congress, and the Executive Branch, here are some key developments to watch in 2021.

The Agencies | DOJ & FTC

Expert Leadership in Antitrust with DOJ AG Merrick Garland and BigTech Investigations continued...

The Biden Administration’s DOJ and FTC, two apolitical antitrust enforcement agencies, are inheriting major monopolization cases against Google and Facebook, with probes also open into Apple and Amazon. If action is not taken in Congress to clarify our antitrust laws, these agencies may be at the helm of setting precedents that will transform the application of antitrust law in the 21st century, wherein new technologies are redefining our understanding of market structure. The five cases[1] include three against Google and two against Facebook. These are the biggest antitrust cases that the government has considered in the past quarter-century (since the Microsoft case). At a time when antitrust law is at a crossroads, with a philosophical debate[2] questioning the efficacy of the consumer welfare standard, the arguments that animate and determine the outcome of these cases have great potential to reshape the economic theories and concepts applicable to antitrust in a tech-driven future.

Further, the nomination of Merrick Garland as Attorney General marks only the second time in DOJ history where the AG has had extensive experience in antitrust. Incoming AG Garland taught antitrust law at Harvard University and has a reputation as a well-balanced expert. In his recent 2019 opinion as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Marshall’s Locksmith Service v. Google, he affirmed the dismissal of claims against Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo! by applying the Communications Decency Act’s Section 230 immunity provisions; though it has also been said[3] he holds a view deferential to the directive of the legislature's intentions and not purely economic analysis. Incoming AG Garland is forecasted to bring a balanced lens, likely guiding the DOJ to pursue well-developed cases in legal and policy principles.

Congress | Senate Judiciary and House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust

Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar and the Antitrust Law Enforcement Reform Act

As Democrats control the House and Senate, the potential for legislative reform on antitrust is sky-high. Amy Klobuchar’s appointment as the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on antitrust is setting a tone for greater antitrust scrutiny, with her sweeping proposed reform bill, “Antitrust Law Enforcement Reform Act,”[4] referred to as the biggest overhaul of antitrust laws in  forty-five years. Senator Klobuchar, who has a reputation[5] for advocating stronger antitrust enforcement, reflects the prospects of tenacious leadership that will be strong enough to rally political-will in pushing antitrust reform legislation, coinciding with the advent of a Democratic-controlled Congress. Chairwoman Klobuchar may even conduct investigations into BigTech and other concentrated industries, akin to the House Subcommittee in 2020, which led to a sweeping 450-page report.[6] Notably, the Republican-minority issued a companion[7] report agreeing with Democrats on increasing agency funding, data portability and interoperability, reforming the burden of proof in merger cases, and clarifying the role of market definition in antitrust inquiries.

The Executive | The Biden-Harris White House

A Populist-Paradigm, potentially in the form of an Antitrust Czar

The Administration has been vocal in their advocacy of bringing a diversity and equity lens[8] to many of their policy efforts. Action on reviewing impacts of algorithm bias,  antitrust and labor, and introducing a civil-rights lens to competition policy, will be influenced by the forthcoming FTC Chair (yet to be announced). Further, the Administration has entertained proposals for a hyper-specialized office: an “Antitrust Czar,” who may oversee the coordination and information sharing back-and-forth between the agencies. The prospect of such a conduit may be arguably beneficial in increasing coordination, yet has potential to be harmful if viewed as politicizing and duplicating the efforts of the apolitical agencies.

2021 at a Crossroads

Antitrust has become a central concern, not least due to worries over economic concentration and income inequality. Implications of the concentration of power in the hands of a few companies controlling information, media, and access to business opportunities have sparked vigorous social debates over cancel culture, free speech (see Parler v Amazon)[9], and other issues that influence society far beyond the bounds of the Sherman and Clayton Acts. Cast in this light, the potential of a White House czar on antitrust[10] and proposed “reality czar”[11] may not be coincidental. Rather, it reflects the relationship between the two arenas where economic power is a gateway to social/political influence over the construction of our realities.

A new season of “antitrust populism” may be on the horizon, but is not yet written in the stars. Time will tell whether or not federal agencies, Congress, or the Executive will have the first word on the way forward.

---

dfi3un@virginia.edu

---

[1] https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/what-to-expect-in-antitrust-policy-enforcement-from-biden-administration

[2] https://www.lawweekly.org/front-page/2019/10/2/make-antitrust-cool-again-antitrust-in-the-digital-economy

[3] https://www.law.com/thelegalintelligencer/2021/01/22/attorney-general-nominee-merrick-garlands-antitrust-experience/

[4] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/04/klobuchar-unveils-sweeping-antitrust-bill-laying-out-her-vision-as-new-subcommittee-chair-.html

[5] https://www.klobuchar.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2020/3/klobuchar-introduces-legislation-to-deter-anticompetitive-abuses

[6] https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.skadden.com/-/media/files/publications/2021/01/2021-insights/competition_in_digital_markets_450_pages.pdf?la%3Den&sa=D&source=editors&ust=1612836072683000&usg=AOvVaw2hvmb_gWh766ppqv0e6sYN

[7] https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.skadden.com/-/media/files/publications/2021/01/2021-insights/buck_report_companion_report.pdf?la%3Den&sa=D&source=editors&ust=1612836089687000&usg=AOvVaw0kBYL6t_kL5usRqW3T8aF8

[8] https://www.c-span.org/video/?507733-1/communicators-social-media-tech-issues-2021

[9] https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/11/parler-amazon-antitrust-suit-457579

[10] https://www.law360.com/articles/1347585

[11] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/02/technology/biden-reality-crisis-misinformation.html

Response to a Letter to the Editor: Corpus Linguistics and Legal Interpretation, Part 2: An Imperfect Tool

---

Rachel Martin ‘23
Staff Editor

(The following was written as a reply to Professor John Setear’s Letter to the Editor, appearing February 3, 2021, responding to the author’s January 27, 2021 article “Corpus Linguistics and Legal Interpretation: A (Very Brief) Introduction.”)

Dear Professor Setear,

            Thank you for taking the time to engage with my article. I actually agree with a lot of what you said—as I mentioned at the end of my article, corpora and other linguistic tools are not going to be a panacea for all the woes of legal interpretation. Due to space constraints, I admittedly had to simplify things quite a bit and gloss over a lot of the complications and qualifications (hence the “(Very Brief)” in the title). I cannot give a full account of all said complications here, but I would like to take the opportunity you have provided to make a few more general comments.

            As a general matter, I think that anything purporting to be an interpretation of a written text should probably at least start with said text, even if in many or most cases the process cannot end there. (It often cannot end there because language is, after all, inherently ambiguous to some extent. However, I would say a finding of irreducible linguistic ambiguity in a given situation is itself valuable.) And inasmuch as one starts with the text, I think it better to take account of all the tools at one’s disposal and their strengths and flaws, rather than to blindly bow down before the divining rod of the dictionary and the whims and caprices of its compilers.  

            Corpora and other linguistic tools are merely that—tools. Corpora provide a way to compile and search naturally occurring language and were built to aid in the study and teaching of languages.[1] Tools such as corpora are neither inherently good nor bad, neither inherently conservative nor progressive. As one illustration, data from the Corpus of Founding Era American English (COFEA) has recently been used to argue that the phrase “bear arms” was, at the time of the founding, used overwhelmingly in a military or collective, not individual, sense.[2]

            As you rightly pointed out, choosing a relevant and representative database can be a thorny issue, and depends at least in part on what question you are asking. If one wants to know more about the terms of art used in the diamond trade, then a general, “balanced” corpus designed to be representative of the English language as a whole[3] would probably not be very helpful. However, even in specialized trades, much of the language used might be termed “ordinary”—e.g. “dog” in a veterinarian manual or animal control statute—and in these cases a general corpus may suffice. 

            Philosophical differences on what to prioritize also come into play. Languages change over time.[4] One may favor contemporary ordinary meaning on the principle that legal language should be understandable to the contemporary ordinary people whose behavior it is aimed at. Another may favor a variant of original meaning on the principle that judges should follow what was actually enacted by the voice of the people through the legislature and leave any changes to the same. What side of this debate one falls on affects what questions one asks and what corpus or parts of a corpus[5] are relevant to answering them. I do not intend to weigh in on the debate between originalism, living constitutionalism, and other such ‘-isms’, as my initial impressions[6] are that they all have some degree of merit and fault, and I do not pretend to have the wisdom or experience to proclaim some sort of ideal mix. However, whatever side one takes, I would encourage transparency about what one is doing and take care in avoiding the many methodological pitfalls that could lead to confirmation bias.[7]

            Of course, quantifying how common words are in a given context will only take one so far. A meaning that is less common is by definition used sometimes. Beyond doing frequency analyses using corpora, there are whole subfields of linguistics, such as syntax, semantics, and pragmatics, that relate to how words link together and have their meanings altered by their specific contexts. And even taking all of these subfields into account, one could never say with absolute certainty that there is some inherently “right” meaning in any given instance, especially with something like a statute that was written and approved by multiple people to be applied to multiple contexts. Language, like people, is messy, which is part of its beauty. Corpus linguistics is just one tool, empirically based but still imperfect, to test some of our assumptions about what “ordinary meaning” is, and I would not suggest that it should be the only or final word on who wins or loses in court.

Sincerely,

Rachel Martin

---

rdm9yn@virginia.edu

---

[1] While some recent corpora, such as COFEA, were at least inspired by potential legal applications, and others compile legal texts, these are recent developments and not the norm.

[2] See, e.g., Neal Goldfarb, Corpora and the Second Amendment: “bear arms” (part 1), plus a look at “the people,” LAWnLinguistics (Apr. 29, 2019).

[3] I would be remiss in my duty if I did not mention that how to properly balance general corpora is also a matter of debate.

[4] Consider the word “gay” or, as you pointed out, “federalist”.

[5] One can either choose between historical and contemporary corpora, or take a corpus like the Corpus of Historical American English (COHA), which spans from 1810–2009, and sort and compare results by decade.

[6] Being in only my third week of Constitutional Law.

[7] Such as searching for “firearm,” “carry,” and “vehicle,” if one wants to know whether “carry a firearm” more commonly means “transport by vehicle” or “have on one’s person.” See Stephen C. Mouritsen, The Dictionary is Not a Fortress: Definitional Fallacies and a Corpus-Based Approach to Plain Meaning, 2010 B.Y.U. L. Rev. 1915, 1957–58 (2010).

Legal Writing Fellows Demystified

---

Anna Bninski ‘23
Staff Editor

Who are Legal Writing Fellows?

They are, at first, creatures of legend.

            When Legal Research and Writing (LRW) began over Zoom last semester, knowing who was who made for a challenge. Some of the gallery-view faces appearing in our LRW I class were not the sweaty visages of disoriented neophytes. Scattered among us were students advanced in skill and wisdom, who already knew the way of the Bluebook and the arcane calculus of (not) underlining punctuation. These were the Legal Writing Fellows.

            More seriously, as we all know, the Legal Writing Fellows are upperclassmen who serve as a bridge between the LRW professors and their many students, providing crucial feedback on the 1Ls’ very first stabs at legal writing.

            With the tryouts for next year’s cohort in progress (the last day to turn in tryout packets is March 8), here are some professorial and student perspectives on the LRW Fellow program and experience.

            When Professor Ruth Buck began teaching LRW in 1988, she had about 160 students. That was, she told me in an interview, “too many,” and required a cohort of twelve Legal Writing Fellows just for her own classes. Nowadays, she works with fewer Fellows. “They’re just as essential as ever, though!” she said, and added that the program has been around for some forty years.

            In addition to simply providing the manpower to give detailed feedback on writing assignments, Professor Buck explained, the LRW Fellows provide a perspective that is useful to professors. “It’s very helpful that they’re both more informed than 1Ls you’ll be surprised how much more you understand in your 2L year!—and very close to the 1L experience. They remember what they didn’t know then and are able to get to the bottom of any particular issue that a student is having with respect to writing.”

            One of the things that Professor Buck stresses when preparing a cohort of new Legal Writing Fellows is the importance of providing feedback in a way that 1Ls can receive well and actually act on. Professor Buck recalled a Fellow many years ago who crossed out the entirety of a student’s very first memo with red ink. She does not recommend this route.          

Pictured: This legal writing fellow begins reviewing each memo with a healthy dose of excitement. Photo Courtesy of Perrin Tourangeau '21.

              Erin Edwards ’21, a current Fellow, echoed the importance of finding a balance in written feedback. “Even with a perfect memo, you can be really nitpicky. Sometimes it’s hard to balance what you should comment on and what you should let go.”

            Edwards emphasized that students learn just as much from feedback on what, specifically, they did well as from critique of areas that could use more work. After all, getting affirmation on the strength of particular research or analysis will enable the student to build on and replicate it in the next assignment.

            “During 1L it felt like the only practical class,” Edwards recalled. “I felt like it was really teaching me a skill that I could go apply somewhere.” That experience brought her back to LRW. “I wanted to become a Legal Writing Fellow because I really wanted to stress to my students why this class was worth their time. I understand that not everyone will be quite as enthusiastic as I am about LRW, but when students take feedback seriously, when I see every single written assignment get better—that’s really enjoyable.”According to Perrin Tourangeau ’21, another current Legal Writing Fellow, the benefits of the program flow both ways. “Helping other people work on memos and briefs has made me a more efficient writer,” she said. “You see a bunch of mistakes that everybody makes—it’s amazing how consistent it is—and think ‘I definitely did that last year!’ It helps you avoid errors and think about your process.” Particularly, reading many memos attuned her to a common tendency: “Everyone has the inclination to want to use big words and sound very academic, and you don’t want to be casual. But that can make it longer than it needs to be—or there’s a more clear way to say things.”

Pictured: This legal writing fellow has to sometimes give more constructive criticism than positive feedback. Photo Courtesy of Perrin Tourangeau '21.

           Both Tourangeau and Edwards mentioned that serving as a Legal Writing Fellow makes for a unique way to get to know newer students in an explicitly academic context. It’s also “resume gold” in Professor Buck’s estimation, a sentiment that Edwards concurred with. “It caught employers’ eyes, which is an extra benefit. Being a Fellow, you’re signaling: Legal writing is so important to me that I’m willing to spend a significant amount of time helping other people become better writers. It’s helpful for the job or clerkship search.”

            Aside from those benefits, how should one sum up the experience of being a Legal Writing Fellow? Tourangeau put it succinctly: “It’s a lot of work, but it’s fun.”

---

amb6ag@virginia.edu

Letter to the Editor: Regarding Corpus Linguistics

---

John Setear ‘84
Professor of Law

I enjoyed Rachel Martin ’23's recent, front-page-and-center discussion of corpus linguistics in the Law Weekly (Vol. 73 Edition 14). Textual interpretation is a difficult and contentious endeavor that should concern all of us at the Law School, and Ms. Martin's piece pithily raised intriguing issues. Besides, why should the Court of Petty Appeals have all the heavily-footnoted fun?

Still, I am a little leery of whether we can reliably resolve textual ambiguities by referring to collocates in electronic databases.

One problem is choosing the database. For a contracts case about diamond merchants in New York City, are we to consult a corpus of the English language as a whole, a lexicon of diamond merchants across the country, or a database of communications among all merchants in New York City?  Do the latter two databases even exist?

Additionally, the use of a general database favors the most common locutions, but common locution and legal vocabulary are not the same thing. Without state action, there cannot be a First Amendment violation, yet I have recently seen many denizens of virtual media complain that employers, or online media companies, or even other forum participants are violating their "freedom of speech." Unless the government is sponsoring the forum or the employment, however, these are simply not constitutional violations—even though a tally of collocates in common usage might lead one to believe otherwise. (Selina Meyer's in-elevator observation about many of the "real people" whom she has met may be relevant here, if unduly harsh.)

Finally, the counting of collocates in electronic databases may elide important issues of linguistic evolution. The website of the Federalist Society states that it is "a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current legal order," without breathing a word about their actual view on federalism—that is, the proper balance between state and federal government. See https://fedsoc.org/about-us (last visited Jan. 31, 2021) (admittedly, I only read the first three paragraphs, which, in my defense, do exhaust their description of their purpose). I would bet a cornucopia filled with delicious Chick-Fil-A, however, that "conservatives and libertarians" generally favor a weaker federal government vis-a-vis the states. Yet James Madison—literally the face (at least in profile) of Fed Soc—was a "federalist" who favored precisely the opposite re-balancing of governmental responsibilities. I worry about anyone's ability to use a database to ferret out an "ordinary" meaning of a word that, over time, has both drifted 180 degrees from its origins (to Fed Soc-ers) and stayed right where it started (to constitutional historians). Meaning in words, as in life, can be elusive.

 ---

jsetear@law.virginia.edu