Students of the Law School v.
1Ls in the Library
75 U.Va 8 (2022)
Kulkarni, J. delivers the opinion of the court.
I.
Today’s case is a low-temperature issue. While this is not a court of public opinion, this Court understands that we will face judgment for our decisions.[1] There are some rare times, however, when the opinion of the Law School points in a singular direction—rarer still is when that opinion aligns with what the law demands. The complaint at bar has been filed by a coalition of students from each class, with amicus briefs filed by the administration, staff, and professors of the Law School. They all state the same thing: The 1Ls currently studying daily in the library need to stop. The 1Ls in question have been camped out at the same tables before, during, and after classes, at times without break. This contingent of students has decided, quite early in the semester, to move on from doing their readings to building outlines.
II.
There are two main parts to this analysis. The first is whether it is appropriate for the 1Ls to be in the library at all during this time of year. These students, the same as all other students, have the option to spend their time in the four areas of Scott Commons, the hallway tables, the lounges, or Spies Garden. Their choice to spend time in the library does not speak well of their decision-making skills. Law school is an inherently social activity, and by isolating themselves in the library, these students are reducing their opportunities to be social. In particular, with the weather getting colder, these students are missing out on the last few days that Spies Garden is a viable place to spend their time.
However, there is only a small number of 1Ls that have taken up residence in the library alone. These students in particular are enjoined from continuing their solo run to gunner-dom. Not only is it detrimental to their mental health, it also presents an equity issue when it comes to the entire 1L class. The students that are aware of how to study, how long to study, and how to convert old outlines with effectiveness are more likely to be second- and third-generation law students. This injunction will hopefully prevent them from using their unfair advantage. To anyone who argues that this remedy is too similar to legislation, I point you to the First Petty Rule of Civil Procedure: “We do what we want.”
The other students—those studying in groups—however, are not subject to the same injunction. By studying in groups, these 1Ls are already reducing their own levels of productivity. Moreover, they are being social. While this Court may question why these 1Ls have decided that the library is the best place to spend time with their friends, we will admit that law students are inherently weird. Though this choice is odd, there is no remedy available to the plaintiffs for these students simply being in the library this early in the semester.
III.
The second issue is where the plaintiffs may find some relief against the groups of 1Ls who reside in the library within groups. The issue arises from what those students are doing in the library. All law students have readings to do almost daily, especially 1Ls. These students can merely be called diligent if they are working on their daily readings. As most of the members of this Court are participants in the lifestyle known as “3LOL,” we can look upon them and reminisce on our own pasts.[2] The plaintiffs, though, have brought a far graver accusation to our Court. These 1Ls are accused of having started their outlining far too early. Some of the best students will claim that one month of studying is enough for exams. Others will claim that two weeks suffice. The most ambitious, especially a good portion of the Class of 2023’s Section A, will claim that each 1L exam only requires two to four days of dedicated studying. Regardless of which of these three ranges is used, these 1Ls are taking their exams far too seriously. This is Week Nine of Fourteen. There is still plenty of content to learn. For these 1Ls to study so early, they are gunners. Moreover, these 1Ls are breaking one of the fundamental rules of law school: collegiality. All law students have to suffer through exams. During 1L, they have to take the same exams. By beginning to study this early, they are forcing their peers to start studying early as well. Regardless of whether they are studying in a group or alone, they are cutting into their peers’ time to have fun. Therefore, these students are enjoined from outlining. Go out and touch grass, 1Ls.
IV.
Not only do 1Ls always lose in this Court, these 1Ls in particular need to quit their heinous actions. Beyond their gunner behavior, they are taking space in the library from students who are just starting to do their readings for the semester and catching up. They are also taking space away from Law Review upperclassmen who just remembered that they have Notes to write. For themselves and others, 1Ls must be in groups within the library from now on and are barred from outlining until at least November 15.
Walsh, J., dissenting.
The majority’s opinion today is utterly confounding. There’s so much to unpack here, it’s not even worth opening the suitcase. Rather than explore the complete lack of legal grounding for today’s opinion (beyond a brief mention that 1Ls always lose), the bewildering relief granted that will likely result only in making all parties worse off, or the inexplicable decision to encourage 1Ls to form groups while studying, I will limit myself to simply stating the following: If you’re not a 1L, and you’re bothered by there being 1Ls in the library right now because they’re interfering with your own library usage, you’re the problem.
Yes, it is the case that “1Ls lose,”[3] but so do gunners.[4] And the cold, hard truth is that if you’re not a 1L and you’re in the library before November, you’re a gunner. The only acceptable reason to be in the library right now as a non-1L is if you’re grabbing snacks from one of the journal offices and then booking it right back out those doors and into the hallway of Brown. Otherwise, I don’t want to see it.
It pains me to side with 1Ls, but because I believe that they should be cordoned off from the rest of polite society whenever possible, the 1Ls should be allowed to remain in the library, whether in groups or alone.[5] Now, this becomes another matter entirely once finals season hits and I need my back-of-the-library spot back—in which case any 1Ls trying to occupy my seat will have hell to pay. But until then, the 1Ls are allowed to do whatever it is that they do in the library, so long as I don’t have to see them do it.
As such, I dissent.
---
omk6cg@virginia.edu
saw8rc@virginia.edu
[1] Something Justice Alito should learn.
[2] And then immediately sober up by remembering that our 1L year was dominated by Covid, masks, and virtual classes.
[3] 1L Gunners v. Everyone Else, 324 U.Va. 22 (2019). See also Snowman v. Student Admin., 73 U.Va. 15 (2021) (Tonseth, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part); 1Ls v. God, 73 U.Va. 16 (2021).
[4] 2Ls Who Are Way Too Eager to Post on LinkedIn v. Everyone Else, 75 U.Va. 2 (2022).
[5] Also, can we talk about that whole “it’s okay if it’s in a group thing,” because what the hell is that? You’re telling me that you want to jumpstart the 1L frenzy that happens whenever one member of a 1L group inevitably sends the rest of that group into a collective panic attack? Why??