Chicago Law School faculty hated Obama

theblogprof. ^

[New Perspective]

LOL

[DrC]

“According to this article, Richard Nixon was also president of the Review.”

I think you misread this:
Irwin Griswold, a dean of the Harvard Law School and Solicitor General under Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon.

The reference was to Griswold’s serving under Nixon. Nixon went to Duke Law School, not that any of its professors are particularly eager to publicize that fact.

But there was one other interesting quote in that article:
“Law reviews, which are edited by students, play a double role at law schools, providing a chance for students to improve their legal research and writing”

It’s pretty obvious from his behavior that Obama did NOT take this opportunity to improve his legal research or writing. An ambitious HLR president with even a modicum of work ethic might well have taken the same opportunity to actually chip in and help out and/or accomplish some other initiatives related to HLR (e.g., raise funds to endow its operations etc.). Obama’s about collecting trophies. Being HLR president was a means to and end—no more, no less.

[murron]

I keep the books at a Law Review, and I interact with the students a lot. They have to write notes and comments for credits. The editor in chief particularly is expected to write for one of the issues. This is why I find it strange that as head of the Harvard Law Review particularly, one of the most prestigious law reviews in the country, he didn’t contribute at all.

[DrC]

“The editor in chief particularly is expected to write for one of the issues.”

Right, but Obama was not editor, he was president of HLR. I don’t know how many journals have both positions or how the responsibilities are supposed to divide between them. My impression is that Obama viewed his role as “figurehead” whereas the complaints from the editor at the time suggests others thought he should have rolled up his sleeves to help out more than he did.

I think what’s key is that law reviews tend to attract individuals with a passion for writing and learning how to do that better. Regardless of expectations, the HLR president surely COULD have made written contributions to the review had he elected to do so. That Obama elected not to do so displays a curious lack of ambition (or at least a very different form of ambition in which he sought positions not to actually DO anything, but as a stepping stone to higher office etc.). It’s hard to imagine a John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, or Samuel Alito being content to do so little with such an honor. ‘Nuf said.