Thursday, July 17, 2008

Law School Rivalry

Some people may not realize it, but there is such a thing as "law school rivalry".

The Top Three law schools are of course UP, the Jesuit law school, and the Benedictine law school. Admission into these three schools is quite an ordeal, and you can just imagine the pride of the students coming from these schools.

To qualify for admission into UP, you have to pass the Law Aptitude Exam, more popularly known as the LAE, and you also have to meet the required average, and you have to pass the interview. And aside from this, you have to be a "virgin" law student---meaning you should not have been kicked out of any law school, which of course includes Ateneo and San Beda. If a student from either Ateneo or San Beda wishes to study in UP Law, he or she has to be a legitimate transferee, meaning he or she has to have passed all the subjects, and he or she will have to repeat the first year curriculum.

This does not apply only to UP, but to Ateneo and San Beda as well. Ateneo will not accept drop-outs from UP and San Beda; San Beda will not accept drop-outs from UP and Ateneo.

On its face, the prohibition seems to be justified, as there is a strong possibility that the drop-out might affect the quality of education. But that is just a possibility. It has never been proven.

Which is why UP Law has decided to let go of the pride. The Law Admissions Committee has voted unanimously to scrap the rule prohibiting drop-outs from other law schools from enrolling in UP. The LAE, undergrad general weighted average, and the interview are sufficient enough, as anyone who can pass these three requirements is deemed qualified, since passing them is quite difficult in itself.

It has been the subject of debate, whether or not the prohibition rule cited earlier violated students' right to equal protection. And the Admissions Committee took a bold step in the right direction by declaring such prohibition unconstitutional. Although it still requires the vote of the faculty, it looks like it's already in the bag.

Should the faculty vote against the unanimous decision of the Admissions Committee, it will just go to show that some faculty members still have that pride inside of them. They should know that it was pride that turned Anakin Skywalker to the dark side. But should they vote for the scrapping of the prohibition rule, then we will once again have proved that UP is still the leader---nay, the trailblazer---in anything academic.

I don't know how reliable my source is, but my source is old, and my source is a member of the faculty, so I guess there must be some truth in it.

Oh, and beginning next year, there will be no more interviews for the incoming freshmen law students. Times truly are a-changing.

Monday, July 7, 2008

Black, White, Burger, and Frankfurter

Trivia about some of the Justices of the United States Supreme Court:

Black and White served on the same bench for a period of ten years.
Justices Hugo L. Black and Byron R. White served together from 1962-1972.

There was a Justice Burger, and a Justice Frankfurter.
Justice Warren E. Burger, 1969-1986, and Justice Felix Frankfurter, 1939-1962.

There was no Justice Milkshake, or Justice Soda. Nor was there a Justice Bacon N. Eggs.

* * *

Also quite noticeable is the sheer number of cases involving unlawful arrests and seizures concerning our favorite plants cannabis sativa and cannabis indica, more popularly known as Mary Jane.

Oh how the court dockets would be freed from unnecessary clogging if only the plant was made legal.

Saturday, July 5, 2008

Lesson Number 3

Lesson Number 3
Lawyers are also human beings.

Friday, July 4, 2008.
Professor Solomon Lumba. College Secretary. Property 18:30-22:30.

This was a two-hour class, yet he managed to squeeze the lesson in just an hour.

He asked us if we watched the TV show Amazing Race, and said that today's class would be like a "Non-Elimination Day". By that he meant that we would not be graded for recitation, so anyone who read the cases better volunteer to recite. He rubbed his hands in agitation when the student wasted time by not getting straight to the point, and he interrupted them in an attempt to lead them in the right path.

He was also able to explain the differences between actions in rem, quasi in rem, and in personam, in just a fraction of an hour. If it were a regular school day, he would confuse us with very tricky questions, and finish the whole two hours on just that topic. But like I said, this was a Non-Elimination Day.

Finally, before he dismissed the class, he told us the reason for his behavior. "May hinahabol kasi akong sine, eh," he said. "'Yung Hancock."

I guess every working person, lawyer or not, has the right to enjoy a Friday night. Which is why me and my girlfriend Aika decided to join her former officemates in a few beers after class.