Posted on 01/03/2006 11:01:33 AM PST by SouthernBoyupNorth
Bradford Berenson doesn’t remember Harvard Law School as the most encouraging place for an ambitious young conservative.
The 40-year-old partner at Sidley, Austin, Brown and Wood in Washington, D.C., who served in the White House Counsel’s office under President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2003 and has chaired committees for the Federalist Society, the conservative and libertarian lawyers’ group, entered the program in 1988, in the immediate aftermath of the Reagan-era culture wars.
Back then, he said, it was not unheard of for a student pressing a conservative line in a class discussion to get hisses and boos from classmates. He said that a single professor among the 60 or so full-time faculty actively propounded conservative jurisprudence and politics from the lectern.
“It wasn’t that uncommon or unusual to hear the word ‘fascist’ associated with a mainstream conservative,” Mr. Berenson said.
Then, last year, the law school surprised him with a barrage of additions to the faculty—among them prominent conservative scholars. This year, Mr. Berenson is “significantly increasing” the amount he is giving to the law school (though he, like most others interviewed by The Observer, declined to specify by how much).
For the rest... go here.... it a long article. http://www.observer.com/politics_newsstory3.asp
(Excerpt) Read more at observer.com ...
The roots and founding of that school were solidly opposite to what it has become.
One wishes that this is not simply a ploy to get funds graduates would not give any longer because they got out, grew up and learned that liberalism is a sick answer to problems.
My own experience at Columbia in the mid-1990s was that the law school professors are, for the most part, moderate liberals in political persuasion, not in the least bit punitive of suppressive of conservative thought expressed in class, and that the student body was split about 1/3 left-left, 1/3 not-very-political left, and 1/3 center right, with a few right-righties.
Law students like to argue with other law students - it's job training, after all. And law professors like to be provocative in class and get students to argue.
At a place like Columbia Law or, I'd expect, Harvard Law (I would distinguish the law schools from the undergraduate university population) you've got a lot of smart, career-minded students who are paying a fortune to be there - generally out of their own pocket. They're almost all adults, and enjoy differing opinions.
I founded a Republican Club at the Columbia Law School (there wasn't one at the time, although there was a Federalist society, of course, well-attended). The Democrats responded by founding a Democrat club. And for the most part we drank each other's beer (on the school's dime - ergo a motivation for forming a CLUB) and argued politics with each other.
At least at Columbia, there's political interest, and plenty of clubs, but I can't remember anything that was really bad natured or bad tempered there from either the students or the professors.
The civility you describe would really be what one would expect at almost any normal Law School--even amidst Leftist undergraduate populations. But how did you all manage to drink beer at the school's expense? Does Columbia subsidize social clubs?
"But how did you all manage to drink beer at the school's expense? Does Columbia subsidize social clubs?"
Clubs have a small budget for food and beverages. Enterprising clubs use that budget to host Friday "Beer in the Hall" at the Law school (it's all in one building), having a keg rolled in and giving the law students the opportunity to socialize. This is a good way to get lots of people to sign up on the club's roster, which then means a bigger budget, so you can buy more beer.
Another big annual event is The "De Vinimus" Club wine tasting. My last year there Justice Scalia came and hosted it. He is a very, very entertaining man.
The Republican Club actually got a lot of members, but we certainly did not take ourselves terribly seriously. You COULDN'T, really, because there are lots of smart folks there who will bust your chops. The Federalist Society, of course, was much more serious, but the good thing about having the two clubs was that it made it easier to host speakers, since some speakers charge a fee.
Like everything else institutional, clubs are at least partly a budgetary game. We had fun, and folks who were in that club, Democrats and Republicans alike, still keep in contact with each other and still form a network that spans the country. And that, of course, is REALLY the point of having beer in the hall.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.