ProfessorBainbridge.com

How much does a law professor make?

Above the Law continues its relentless march through the top state schools in the US News' ranking of law schools. It's previously reported on:

How Much Does Your Law Professor Make? Michigan Law Edition
How Much Does Your Law Professor Make? UVA Law Edition
How Much Does Your Law Professor Make? Berkeley Law Edition

Now it's the turn of the University of Texas, in a post that concludes:

Law professors at top schools like Texas certainly get plenty of love. How does professorial pay change as one goes down the law school hierarchy? We’ll find out in future installments of our law professor pay watch.

Considering that Texas was ranked # 15 in the US News latest rankings and UCLA was ranked 17th (with private law school Vanderbilt in the middle), I have the sinking feeling that we're next. Which prompts two thoughts: (1) It seems more than a tad unfair (at least from my perspective) that professors at private schools are exempt from this exercise and (2) the good folks at ATL ought to get directly to the issue of "How does professorial pay change as one goes down the law school hierarchy?" by skipping directly down to, say, #50 or so.

Commencement: Conservatives need not apply

Sadly, I missed this year's commencement at UCLA law school, due to a bad summer cold that had me sidelined for several days. If I had been able to attend, I would have had to sit through a commencement address by former Congresswoman Hilda Solis, who has been characterized by the On the Issues site as a " a Hard-Core Liberal."

Apparently, I would not have been alone in such a predicament. When I rose from my sick bed today, the Sunday LA Times included an oped by Kevin Hassett reporting that:

It's becoming increasingly apparent that conservative speakers aren't welcome on college and university campuses.

Last month, in the span of a few days, student protests disrupted a presentation by Karl Rove at the University of Massachusetts and one by Rand Paul at Howard University. That same week, formerBush administration official Robert Zoellick withdrew as a commencement speaker at Swarthmore College, while Obama critic Ben Carson did the same at Johns Hopkins.

Zoellick, a Swarthmore alumnus like me, pulled out after being attacked by students who said he'd helped instigate the Iraq war — a preposterous claim considering he was the U.S. trade representative at the time the conflict began.  ...

If Zoellick, a moderate gentleman with an impressive record promoting women's rights as president of the World Bank, can't speak on a college campus, no Republican can. Indeed, a look at the data suggests that is how things are trending. ...

To gauge how rare it is for a conservative to be invited to speak at a college graduation, I looked at commencement and other announced graduation event speakers for 2012 and 2013 from the top 100 universities and top 50 liberal arts colleges (according to the U.S. News & World Report rankings). ...

... All told, and including the data on political contributions, there were only three identifiably conservative speakers at the top 50 colleges and 12 at the top 100 universities, compared with a total of 69 identifiably liberal speakers.

I suspect the results would be no better if one looked at law school commencement speakers.

Western New England University School of Law's Got a VERY Interesting Commencement Speaker

The College Fix:

The woman in charge of the IRS division responsible for reviewing tax-exempt status applications and who is at the heart of an ongoing scandal over revelations the agency targeted conservative groups is set to receive an honorary tribute from Western New England University School of Law on Saturday.

Lois Lerner – director for the IRS Exempt Organization Division – isslated to deliver the school’s commencement address and be given the university’s “President’s Medallion.” ...

In the wake of revelations that her division zeroed in on and gave extra scrutiny to groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their names, Lerner, 62, has been thrust into the national spotlight, dubbed by some as the “face of the IRS scandal.”

Lerner knew of the inappropriate focus in her division on conservative groups since June 2011. She recently apologized publicly, but won’t comment on whether IRS employees will be disciplined, and denied any political bias was involved in the effort. ...

More recently, she has become the butt of jokes on social media and news websites after she revealed during a conference call with reporters Friday that “I’m not good at math.”

I kept looking for evidence this was a hoax or satire, but apparently not. Yikes.

Corporate Practice Commentator's "Top 11" Corporate and Securities Law Review Articles for 2012

The Corporate Practice Commentator has announced the results of its nineteenth annual poll to select the ten best corporate and securities articles.  Teachers in corporate and securities law were asked to select the best corporate and securities articles from a list of articles published and indexed in legal journals during 2012. Here's the results (HT: Leiter):

1. Armour, John, Bernard Black and Brian Cheffins. Delaware's balancing act. 87 Ind. L.J. 1345-1405 (2012). 
2. Bar-Gill, Oren and Ryan Bubb. Credit card pricing: the CARD Act and beyond. 97 Cornell L. Rev. 967-1018 (2012). 
3. Bartlett, Robert P., III. Making banks transparent. 65 Vand. L. Rev. 293-386 (2012). 
4. Barzuza, Michal. Market segmentation: the rise of Nevada as a liability-free jurisdiction. 98 Va. L. Rev. 935-1000 (2012). 
5. Bratton, William W. and Michael L. Wachter. The political economy of fraud on the market. 160 U. Pa. L. Rev. 69-168 (2011). 
6. Cain, Matthew D. and Steven M. Davidoff. Delaware's competitive reach. 9 J. Empirical Legal Stud. 92-128 (2012). 
7. Cheffins, Brian, John Armour and Bernard Black. Delaware corporate litigation and the fragmentation of the plaintiffs' bar. 2012 Colum. Bus. L. Rev. 427-501. 
8. Fisch, Jill E. The destructive ambiguity of federal proxy access. 61 Emory L.J. 435-500 (2012). 
9. Rock, Edward B. Shareholder eugenics in the public corporation. 97 Cornell L. Rev. 849-906 (2012). 
10. Squire, Richard. How collective settlements camouflage the costs of shareholder lawsuits. 62 Duke L.J. 1-78 (2012). 
11. Thomas, Randall S. and Robert B. Thompson. A theory of representative shareholder suits and its application to multijurisdictional litigation. 106 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1753-1819 (2012).

Apparently there was a tie for 10th.

How much do law professors make?

Efforts to slake your prurient interest in law professor salaries continue. Paul Caron has posted details from the Society of American Law Teachers 2012-13 Salary Survey, reporting the median faculty salaries and summer stipends at 68 of the 200 American law schools (132 law schools either refused to participate or did not respond to the survey). And Above the Law has posted the third in its series of law professor salary surveys, this time disclosing the salaries paid by the University of Michigan. Previous entries in the series include:

• Virginia (#7 in U.S. News) (salary spreadsheet)
• UC-Berkeley (#9) (salary spreadsheet)

Think Law School Tuition is too High? Blame Liberals

From the WSJ Law Blog:

... in an upcoming essay in Stanford Law & Policy Review, [Washington University at St. Louis Law Professor Brian] Tamanaha [focuses on] what he describes as the hypocrisy of his fellow liberal colleagues, whom he says have milked the system and turned their backs on debt-loaded students.

He writes:

If liberals are to be true to our professed values, we must critically examine our own conduct, however painful and embarrassing it might be. We cannot speak truth to power yet not to ourselves. [P]rogressive law professors, I charge, have profited from a system of legal education with harmful consequences to individuals and society—while claiming (and believing) that they were fighting the system.

He faults left-wing academic groups, like the Society of American Law Teachers, for taking a “a strong and unbending stance against” changes to accreditation standards — particularly tenure and other job-protection mandates — that he argues would slow the rise of tuition. (The co-presidents of the law society declined comment.)

But instead, Mr. Tamanaha says, his liberal colleagues have ignored the tuition problem:

Had professors on a faculty banded together to resist tuition increases, with the support of national organizations, the increases might have been tempered. Law professor organizations and law faculties nationwide sprang into action to effectively fight proposals to remove job protection from accreditation standards. Liberal law professors could have engaged in similar actions to resist tuition increases, but we did nothing.

Explaining why, he writes:

Tuition increases meant yearly salary raises, research budgets to buy books and laptops, additional time off from teaching to write (or to do whatever we like), traveling to conferences domestically and abroad, rooms in fine hotels, and dining out with old friends. A sweet ride it has been.

In contrast, I suppose, he thinks conservatives like me are happy just to enjoy the sweet ride. And, in fairness, I don't lose much sleep about living the law prof life. But then I teach my students something useful, instead of teaching them about speaking truth to power (whatever the hell that means), so I actually earn my money.

Law and Science Fiction bleg

I'm thinking about a possible seminar on law and science fiction, so I'm looking for science fiction books in which a lawyer figures as the protaganist or a legal case is a dominant plot theme or the author otherwise deeply engages law. Suggestions?

ULCA seeks Milken Institute for Business Law and Policy Director

Among other perks, you'd get to work closely with your truly:

The UCLA School of Law is seeking a highly talented, experienced individual to be the Executive Director of the Lowell Milken Institute for Business Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law.  The Institute’s mission is to bring world class policy analysis, research and educational opportunities in business law and policy to UCLA, the broader community of Southern California, the nation and the world.

The Executive Director will plan and oversee all aspects of the Institute’s programs, which are designed to support and expand research, policy analysis, and teaching (including clinical teaching) about business law and policy at UCLA School of Law.  The Executive Director will help to develop the business law curriculum, including improving and expanding the Business Law Specialization for law students.  The Executive Director will also supervise fellows, policy consultants, research assistants, student interns, and volunteers; engage in fundraising; and organize symposia and other academic programs related to the advancement of business law and policy.  The Executive Director will work closely with the Faculty Director, members of the business law faculty, and the advisory board of the Institute. 

Minimum requirements include an excellent academic record; a J.D., M.B.A. or equivalent advanced degree from a U.S. school; at least five years of successful business law practice or business experience; demonstrated management, administrative and organizational skills, with successful prior experience in fundraising or coordinating scholarly or professional conferences preferred; prior successful teaching experience and a record of publications concerning business law and policy topics preferred; and a strong record of established relationships with other business professionals and with professional organizations preferred.

 The level of appointment will be commensurate with qualifications and experience.  This is a full-time, academic, non-tenure track position. 

 Confidential review of applications, nominations and expressions of interest will begin immediately and continue until an appointment is made.  Please apply online at https://recruit.apo.ucla.edu/apply/JPF00016 by submitting a cover letter, resume, and the names and addresses for at least two professional references to the attention of: 

Edna Sasis

Office of the Dean

UCLA School of Law

Box 951476

Los Angeles, CA 90095-1476

The University of California is an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer, and seeks candidates committed to the highest standards of scholarship and professional activities and to a campus climate that supports equality and diversity.

 

If a law school held a conference on intellectual diversity and the panels really were intellectually diverse ...

You can bet your last nickel it was sponsored by the Federalist Society.

Requiring disclosure of scholarly conflicts of interest

Professing for pay has become a serious problem, with many academics--including a lot of law professors--making huge bucks serving as expert witnesses and affiants in both judicial and legislative proceedings. As I've noted before:

I quit doing consulting and expert witness work six or seven years ago precisely because I too had "an ill-formed intuition" that there was something sleazy about getting paid to put my academic reputation on the line for the specific benefit of private actors. All too often, I felt my name and expertise were being used by people engaged in some form of private rent seeking. Today, my income comes pretty much exclusively from salary and book royalties. So if I take a position (here or elsewhere) it's because I believe it, not because I'm getting paid to say it. That way, the only reason there will ever be "no doubt about ... [my] conclusions" is that a long-time reader will have been able to guess them based on the legal and political positions I've taken in the past. And it will never be "fair to assume that" I am "very well placed to make a lot of money" by having taken that position.

At a bare minimum, the conflict of interest inherent in these situations requires disclosure to one's university employer and to the readers of one's scholarship. In business law, moreover, disclosure of a conflict of interest is not enough. An agent with a conflict of interest must not only disclose the conflict, the agent must get approval from the employer before undertaking the conflicting activity. In my book, that means that before an academic gets paid to "testify in Congress, appear on television news, testify in a legal case or regulatory proceeding, give a speech, or write an opinion article," the university ought to make a determination whether the activity in question passes ethical muster.

So I am pleased to see that the Washington Law Review has adopted a dislosure of interests policy:

For any work accepted for publication, all authors, co-authors, contributors, and student authors must disclose all interests material to the main topic(s) of the contribution, and which could be reasonably seen to significantly influence the author’s views as set out in the work. An interest’s materiality and significance should be assessed from the perspective of a reasonable reader. Covered interests may include professional, business, and institutional affiliations; funding sources; and personal financial holdings. Only interests occurring within the last five years need be disclosed.

All journals should have such a policy.

Kudos to Eugene Volokh

The National Law Journal has named my friend and colleague Eugene Volokh to its list of the 100 most influential lawyers in America:

Socializing with law students

Over at Prawfs, Emily Gold Waldman asks Do you go to the Barristers' Ball?:

Every March at around this time, our Dean sends an e-mail encouraging us to attend our students' annual Barristers' Ball.  And every time, I cringe.

It's not that I don't like our students.  Getting to know them is one of my favorite parts of this job.  I really enjoy talking with them, whether in response to specific academic questions or just in casual conversation.  I've stayed in touch with many of them after they've graduated, and always love hearing what they are up to.

But I don't want to put on a little black dress and, with my husband in tow, spend a Saturday night with them at a formal dance.  Maybe because I'm still in my 30s and am not that much older than many of them (I'm still sometimes mistaken for a student here), I feel the need to maintain a certain separation.  I'm curious, though: do others have the same reaction?  And on the flip side, do students really want us there?   

I like my students, don't like dancing, but neither drives my answer to the question, which is a strong NO. If I've learned one thing over the years, it is that faculty, students, and alcohol are a highly combustible mixture. So even though I like a refreshing adult beverage as much as the next guy, I try to avoid law school social events where there tends to be a lot of drinking.

Manne on McDougal

When I took International Law at Virginia, it turned out to be a course not about law but about the legal methodology of Myres McDougal. I hated it. No, I mean I hated it. Incomprehensible mumbo jumbo. So imagine my amusement when I ran across this tidbit in Henry Manne's oral history:

I went [to Yale Law School on a post-graduate fellowship] and discovered a man named Myres McDougal, who was one of the more famous law professors of the era. He and Harold Lasswell, the famous political scientist, had devised a schemata for using the social sciences to approach law. It was called Law, Science, and Policy. All graduate students were required to immerse themselves in this, if you’ll pardon me, garbage. I say “garbage” because I think there’s only one rigorous social science and that’s economics, and Law, Science, and Policy had no economics in it whatsoever. What they thought they were doing, I don’t know. Today there are no remnants of it around. 

Henry's a lot smarter than I am (I take solace in the fact that he's a lot smarter than pretty much everybody), so if Henry thought it was garbage I find myself in the best of company.

Update: Tony Arend responds in his typically civil and intelligent manner, concluding that:

So, while I don’t recommend McDougal and Lasswell as bedtime reading, I do find their work to have continuing relevance in international law. But if you have not read any of their writings, I recommend beginning with John Norton Moore’s “Prolegomenon to the Jurisprudence of Myres McDougal and Harold Lasswell.” It is the Rossetta Stone for their work!

Did UC law reviews that used Scholastica's "diversity" questions violate Prop 209?

Josh Blackman speculates:

The Pacific Legal Foundation has sent requests under the California Public Records Act (the equivalent of FOIA) to the University of California Berkeley and University of California Davis, seeking information about how they use race and gender in making decisions about what articles to publish. You can download the requests here: [UC Davis PRA request; UC Berkeley PRA request.] The letters were sent to the Dean of the law schools, and carbon copied to the Editor in Chief and the Faculty Adviser. ...

As I noted in my previous post on this topic, these public institutions in California may have some issues with respect to Prop 209.

Law review angst

There's a lot of law professor angst about law review acceptances/rejections in a thread over at Prawfs. Been there, done that. Personally, other than that horrendous edit by the folks at Minnesota a couple of years ago, which nearly made me pull the piece, my dealings with law reviews have been angst free lately. I sent out my most recent article to about 10 places that I figured were (a) liable to accept it and (b) where I would be happy to publish. When the first offer came in, I asked them for the lead article slot, which they offered and I accepted their offer with no further fuss. None of that expedite crap, which is so degrading. Of course, the article before that was even easier. I posted a note about it on the blog and got a very good unsolciited offer from a top 30-ish journal, which I accepted on the spot, so I never even had to send that one out. No brag. Just fact.