Columbia Law School has decided to delay exams for law students to overcome “trauma” of Ferguson, Garner decisions. It is the first such delay of exams for such decisions that I have seen at a law school and it has attracted criticism from both academics and lawyers as a poor preparation for real life as lawyers. Nevertheless, students at Harvard and Georgetown are now demanding the same right to delay their exams. Columbia has brought in a A “trauma specialist” to work with students. The University of California-Irvine has also offered such counseling to facilitate “healing, grieving and support.”
Robert E. Scott, Columbia’s interim dean,issued the following announcement: “For some law students, particularly, though not only, students of color, this chain of events is all the more profound as it threatens to undermine a sense that the law is a fundamental pillar of society to protect fairness, due process and equality.”
The decision was made after a group of minority students petitioned the schools, stating that it was difficult to sit for exams and apply legal principles that are used to “deny justice to so many black and brown bodies.” Calling the cases “legal violence,” the Columbia Law School Coalition of Concerned Students of Color wrote that
“We have struggled to compartmentalize our trauma as we sit and make fruitless attempts to focus on exam preparations. In being asked to prepare for and take our exams in this moment, we are being asked to perform incredible acts of disassociation that have led us to question our place in this school community and the legal community at large. . . We sit to study with the knowledge that our brothers and sisters are regularly killed with impunity on borders and streets; we sit to study with the understanding that our brothers and sisters are marching to have our humanity recognized and valued by a system that has continually failed us.”
As both a litigator and academic, I also question the decision to delay exams. As lawyers, we are often asked to continue to work after highly traumatic decisions. I have seen judges make highly prejudiced and insulting decisions in court. I commend the schools for reaching out to students and I sympathize with students who feel deeply injured by what they view as injustice. When I was a law student I was deeply upset by the ruling in Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986) that upheld the criminalization of homosexual relations. It prompted me to discard my applications to over half of the Court as a Supreme Court clerk applicant. However, I understood that lawyers have to continue function in the face of such decisions. The best course in my view is for law schools to hold seminars and meetings exploring these decisions and their merits as well as discussions on how to work for change. However, as lawyers, we work in a field of stress where the rights, and sometimes the lives, of our clients are always in the balance. To put it simply, we worked in a trauma-filled environment. As a civil libertarian, the last ten years have been some of the most depressing of my career as core constitutional principles are stripped away or ignored. One has to learn to use such disappointments to rekindle your commitment to justice . . . even against all odds.
I have seen delays in exams when there have been protests on campus and public interest rallies that disrupt studying, including for those engaging in the protests. This is the only time that I have seen a grand jury decision or a case ruling prompt a delay due to “trauma.” I also do not see where the line will be drawn in the future for students. Would students who opposed criminal charges in Ferguson be given the same option if the result was different? Could religious students claim the same option after a Supreme Court decision refusing to recognize a core right of free exercise? I am unsure of how the law school rates the levels of trauma or makes this case-by-case determination.
The concern shown for the students at these schools is commendable and I am reluctant to add my voice to those who question the decision. However, I do not view this as helpful in shaping lawyers for what they will encounter in practice or in life.
Someone needs to teach the children here about actual trauma vs. internalizing external issues.
If I was a HR director, I’d remember this when looking at resumes from Columbia Law School graduates for the next few years.
Nursing school exams wouldn’t be delayed for hell or high water. No wimpy nurses allowed.
apologies for the bad link above. Fixed:
If Professor Kingsfield were the dean…
Perhaps the law school professors could utilize the extra time to prepare a different, one question exam for those too “traumatized” to sit the regularly scheduled exam.
Something along the lines of…
What are the potential consequences, both legal and personal, for resisting arrest while ignoring the commands of duly commissioned law enforcement officers? (Please cite case law and legal reasoning in your answer.)
What a bunch of pussies and weenies!!
Really….too traumatized to continue on with life by something that peripherally affects you? Your world view is that fragile that you curl up into a little ball of whimpering fluff when something challenges the outcome that you think should happen? Did they all go into deep dark depression when they didn’t get their pretty participation trophy for showing up at soccer practice when they were in elementary school?
What kind of a world would it be if everyone just stopped what they were doing because they were in an emotional state due to something that didn’t even happen to THEM or which did happen to them?
When 911 happened, there were a lot of traumatized people who continued on with their work. Firemen, police, medical personnel….ordinary people.
At the time I was working in my financial practice. I was in shock. People that I knew were wiped out in the event. I had frequent relations with the Cantor Fitzgerald firm and dealt exclusively with a couple of their traders. The market was in chaos. Everyone was stunned. What will happen next? Is this just the first shoe? How many other people in that area who I knew professionally died? Will there be attacks on other cities and other financial institutions?
Did I get to sit at home and curl up into a fetal position? NO!. I had to go to my office, make many many phone calls and personal visits to my clients and reassure them that we would get through this and that I and my firm would be making moves to protect their assets. (whatever those might be, I had no idea at the time) My duty was to watch out for my clients who had placed not only their money in my care, but also placed their trust.
As future attorneys, this weenie weak attitude does not bode well for their ability to do their job in stressful situations. Their future clients should be made aware of these current actions and their special snowflake status. I know it would affect my decision to hire them.
Maybe a special snowflake pin or badge should be awarded…..hmmmm 🙂
DBQ – a special snowflake medallion must be made for their diplomas so everyone will know who the pussies of the world are.
For Columbia law students who are members of the Ferguson or Staten Island communities, I appreciate their reasons for seeking exam postponements. But I suspect few have any direct relation to the events. For most of the petitioning students, this sounds more like civil disobedience than trauma.
Still Columbia has a large, diverse student body attending its law school. So the dean did the right thing by offering postponements to those who feel they need the delay. Realistically though, delays should have been requested at the time of the shootings. Legal proceedings are, by definition, controversial — they exist because of a controversy between two or more parties. At least one party will always be disappointed and sometimes traumatized by the results.
The affected law students should have been bettered prepared for the grand jury decisions. Eric Garner died of a heart attack initiated by the physical trauma he incurred while resisting arrest. The medical examiners determined that his weight (~350 lbs), age (43), and general physical condition (poor) were contributing factors. His decision to fight the arrest is curious since he had previously been arrested some 30 times, and therefore should have been comfortable with the routine. Barring signs of unusual abuse, criminal charges against the officers would have been specious: the police had probable cause, Eric Garner resisted arrest, and the police used physical force to subdue Garner.
In Michael Brown’s case, he robbed a convenience store, he accosted an armed police officer, and in a final attempt to lunge at the officer, he was fatally shot. Add to this all of the contradictory testimony provided by the various witnesses, and even a rookie defense attorney could have established probable cause. A criminal trial would have wasted money and time while further stirring community emotions.
What many fail to appreciate is that a criminal indictment and conviction against a policeman can go a long way toward winning a civil case against the police department. Eric Garner’s family is suing for $75 million, while Michael Brown’s family is preparing to sue. I wonder how much of the community outrage is facilitated by the families’ attorneys. The video of Michael Brown’s step father inciting arson after the Ferguson grand jury decision was announced gives me cause to think about where all of this anger is really coming from.
If the traumatized law students really want to make an impact on reducing the number of unnecessary deaths to young black males, then they should also focus on reducing black-on-black crime. The death rate from homicides, “accidents”, and suicides for black males between the ages of 11-14 is bad (217 per 100K population in 2009). Alarmingly the rate _septuples_ for young black males between the ages of 15-19 (1,508 per 100K population in 2009). The increase is not because of police shootings, but rather a depressing fact about the level of intra-racial violence amongst black teenagers living in poor neighborhoods. The homicide rate for black males between the ages of 20-24 stays constant, so the killing doesn’t end with the teenage years. This is a national crisis more worthy of the law students’ focus than grand jury disappointments.
I envision thousands of law students marching on Ferguson, placards held high, banners waving, chanting slogans I can’t quite make out. Then I wake up.
Yes–madmen at the helm. It appears all rules and laws are under immediate situational approval. If it is inconvenient, said rule or law is thrown out the window. Dangerous precedent for society.
Oh, look, a law school implies that the justice system, with the grand jury, didn’t get it right, in spite of evidence released to the public. And that you need a time out from work when a court case doesn’t go your way. What excellent training for lawyers defending justice.
Another university defends a feminist professor who assaulted 2 young pro-life women voicing their opinions on campus, calling them terrorists for speaking their minds.
Madmen are running our education system.
When the going gets tough, only the tough get going.
I don’t recall any exams being delayed when the OJ Simpson case decision was made and I was in shock when it came out. This case was just as traumatizing as the Eric Garner case, except opposite ends of the spectrum. I feel both of these cases outcomes were wrong.
Eric Garner was selling single cigarettes and business’ complained. Why didn’t they just give him a ticket and ask him to vacate the premises or he could go to jail. At most this was a misdemeanor violation, so what! They sent 5/6 officers to stop him from selling these cigarettes. . . . really! What a waste of tax payer money. You would have thought the guy was a drug dealer. I was very upset on how this went down.
I believe the Micheal Brown grand jury was the right decision.
With that said, this decision by these ivy league schools only solidifies that higher education should remain neutral. Offer students free psychology meetings or counseling. Delaying exams is for cupcake attorneys.
Msjettexas – cupcake attorneys = special snowflakes. 😉
Our “greatest generation” cannot possibly recognize the country they helped build. The education process is supposed to get students out of their comfort zone. Columbia is setting a precedent that will be used beyond their law school. Are we going to see law enforcement academies pausing training every time an officer is injured or killed? Hell, they’d have to decommission the BUDS training in Coronado using Columbia’s standards.
Fundamentally transform America….CHECK!
On the other hand….
If I were a dean of a law school and I received a letter from law students saying they cannot study to become part of ” … a system that has continually failed us”, I might then think that they are not cut out to be lawyers. A compassionate dean would enable them to find a more suitable profession sooner, rather than later. But I’m not a compassionate dean so I would simply say “Show up for the exams. Take them. Else you fail.”
While I agree with Professor Turley that these students should work through this.
At first when I read a different version of this story, I thought, How weak are these kids?
NOW?
I happen to think it is quite nice that they have this much passion for the
law, that a court case can affect them this deeply.
That says a LOT about these Up and Coming Lawyers,
It says they have a DEEP passion for the law.
After reading the way that Professor Turley has explained this, I now have a great deal of respect for these kids.
Reading a few of the comments that had to mention race, they make it quite clear that they did not read what Professor Turley wrote.
justagurl – for these ‘special snowflakes’ I really do not think race is an issue. Race is an excuse not a reason. Each student who takes this option should have their bar exam delayed for a comprehensive psychological examination. It may be that they cannot handle the stress of working in a law firm or as a lawyer. It is clear they are having trouble handling the stress of being a student. Actually, they have their priorities screwed up. They should have been spending their time in the law library rather then protesting in the streets.
Wasn’t it Shakespeare who said: “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers, but let the ones who can be traumatized live.”?
As one who tutors law students for the bar, I thought I had heard every excuse under the sun. . . until this. What kind of trauma would these poor darlings have experienced if they were alive in 1968, with the murders of King and Kennedy, Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia, near revolution in France, and the riotous Democratic convention in Chicago? They would have had to be insttutionalized. Where does this stop? Life has its ups and downs, several times each day. Will the school postpone exams every time someone feels upset about a news story? Also, to be quite blunt, the school administration is acting like a bunch of enabling idiots. A “trauma specialist”? You want trauma? My parents’ generation overcame the Great Depression, Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo. They did what needed to be done and went back to their own lives, without expecting any special recognition. While it may not be popular, the best advice for these delicate people would be to grow up and get over yourselves, boys and girls.
I wouldn’t want any lawyer trained in this manner to represent me nor would I have relished seeing one appear in court before me representing a client that would have been foolish enough to retain such attorney.
Rules and standards don’t apply to members of the approved “victim classes”.
If these were white students they would not even consider it. These students are manipulating the system and the system is allowing them to do it. Life is going to be rough for these ‘special snowflakes’ when they graduate.
As a teacher I have let individual students take exams late because of extraordinary circumstances, but this would not qualify. In this case, if I gave the exam late, I would make it harder, since they had more time to study.