According to the benefits of a recent study of existing law school students conducted by the Buckley Institute, about two out of every three law school students believe social justice is more critical than achieving a winning outcome for a customer.
Which of the following do you think is more crucial when starting to practice rules: ensuring that the customer you represent receives a winning or positive effect or ensuring that the work you do advances a more politically just and equitable constitutional system, according to the national survey of 232 law school students?
Sixty-nine percent of respondents chose a” socially only” results, while only 28 percent chose a “winning effect”, and the remainder, three percentage, were confused.
Lauren Noble, Buckley Institute’s creator and executive producer, called those findings “most concerning for potential law companies”. These potential attorneys” worry more about cultural justice than they do about delivering a positive effect to their prospective clients,” she said in a press release.
The upcoming attorneys were also asked whether legal law practitioners should show particular sympathy to victims because the rule of law is in the public’s interest and people have the right to fundamental rights like safety and security.
About quarter, 53 percentage, said victims, but a big chunk — 29 percent — said the offenders, and another 19 percent were confused, according to the effects.
The majority of conservatives and Republicans supported patients when broken down by interviewees ‘ ideologies, while law students who identified as democratic or Democrat supported offenders.
In an email to The College Fix, Ari Schaffer, communications director at the Buckley Institute, said it was particularly alarming to see that diversity or near diversity of liberal individuals view social justice as necessitating more sympathy for thieves than the victims of their crimes. This is an echo of the policies that progressive District Attorneys are pushing for major cities.
The institution released the survey in late June and was conducted online between April 25 and May 25.
Additionally, it found that 54 percent of law students believe the LSAT is” an unfair way to evaluate prospective law students” and that the application process should not be taken into account. Another 57 percent called the bar exam unfair, too.
Additionally, the survey inquired about issues involving free speech and academic freedom.
One-third of respondents said they felt intimidated to share their opinions in class because they disagreed with their professor, and 50 % said they frequently felt intimidated to do so because they disagreed with their peers ‘ opinions.
Students who identified as Republicans were more likely to say they were intimidated when sharing their opinions on both measures.
According to Schaffer,” There has always been an undercurrent of censoriousness on campus, but we’ve seen it reach new heights in recent years.”
Although law students perform better than their undergraduate peers in terms of free speech, it should come as no surprise that more progressive students are likely to support censorship of their fellow classmates.
The American Bar Association referred The Fix to its new accreditation standard, 208, when The College Fix reached out for comment regarding the survey results.
Approved earlier this year, the standard mandates law schools “adopt, publish, and adhere to written policies that protect academic freedom”.
Law schools must protect” the rights of faculty, students, and staff to communicate ideas that may be controversial or unpopular, including through robust debate, demonstrations, or protests”, it states.
Schaffer claimed that concerns about free speech have persisted on campuses over the past few years.
” This small but loud minority of censorious, progressive students have led shout downs and calls for censorship in Yale and other prominent law schools,” he said. The disruptions are so bad that the leadership at the law school did little to stop them, causing the disruptors to demand more restrictions on their speech.
A Yale student panel on free speech was shouted down by “progressives upset about one of the conservative speakers on the panel,” according to a case from March 2022.
He also cited recent UC Hastings and Stanford law school disruptions.
According to Schaffer, the administration encouraged these free speech violations, and Yale’s students were not punished at all for it.
The problem will only get worse, he said, as university after university reduces the impact of those who occupied campus buildings, blocked traffic, or otherwise threatened their classmates in a way that would defame Israel.
” Law school leaders, and university leaders in general, need to realize that they are sacrificing the interests of the majority of their students” when they meet the demands of a censorious and disruptive minority, he said.
MORE: Law schools must adopt sweeping free speech protections to maintain ABA accreditation
IMAGE: Zolnierek / Shutterstock
Follow The College Fix on Twitter and Like us on Facebook.
