Find a Local Lawyer

Close This Box!

I was excited about the 3L survey email (with justifiable procrastination time written all over it). But as I started filling it out, I found that a couple of the questions just had a ?gotcha? quality that rubbed me the wrong way.

Among the offending questions: How do I rank the prestige of various legal jobs? And how do I and others ?value? public interest work?

I don?t think you can rank different career options in any sensible manner and I don?t think people can express value for something in the abstract (How much do I value world peace? A lot. But ask me how much I value finding my favorite cereal on sale and you?ll get the same answer).

But I think the more fundamental problem I have with these survey questions is that the term ?public interest? ? like its even more irksome sister ?social justice? ? is treated like it has one (super duper earth saving) definition. That?s not really the fault of the survey authors; people at Boalt talk about ?public interest? in this generic way all the time.

And I think that?s a problem. Treating ?public interest" as an amorphous blob is actually incredibly polarizing. In a black and white public interest vs private sector world, you are either (a) saving the world or (b) being a selfish prick. Or, on the other hand, you are either (a) a lunatic hippie who may one day stage a protest by living in a tree or (b) a rational human being who wants to pay their bills and live in a house. Needless to say, these dichotomies are unfair.

Specific issues resulting from this linguistic set up include:

• Suggesting that people must fall into one camp or the other. In practice, many people may bounce between various legal fields (ie time in the public and private sectors). I worry people are discouraged from thinking like that and fully considering their options, however, because we tend to approach the career question by asking people which camp they fall into (implying that you pick just one).
• Losing sight of government work. Working for the government may technically fall under public interest, but it doesn't get the same granola street cred as some of the other public interest-y options).
• Losing sight of the many options available within the "public interest" and "private sector" categories. I think law school would be an infinitely more valuable experience if professors and others spent more time talking about various career paths and options in specific terms rather than just public/private.
• Losing sight of the fact that ?public interest? work does not have an inherent value based on that tagline alone. Depending on the causes you support (and don?t), some of this work will see helpful and effective, other avenues perhaps wasteful or harmful.