Reading Groups Make for Lively Discussions Among Faculty and New Students

by Vinayak Balasubramanianvinayak, Class of 2019. Blog post reproduced with permission of the Communications Office.

There are many fears that are common among incoming law students. For some, there is nothing scarier than an unsolicited interaction with one of those incredibly smart law professors at the front of each classroom.

But that was not the case at Chowning’s Tavern in Colonial Williamsburg, where six 1L students gathered with Professor Thomas J. McSweeney on a hot August day to discuss “The Return of Martin Guerre” by historian Natalie Zemon Davis. The book explores a legendary sixteenth-century French legal case.

As they sipped on cold beverages and enjoyed some appetizers, the group engaged in a lively chat about various themes presented in the book, including the French legal system in the Middle Ages, the role of women during that time period, and the growth of state power over the church. Over the course of that discussion, the students connected with the professor and got to know each other.

“One of my goals was to get people talking to each other, and I thought that went very well,” McSweeney said, reflecting on the meeting. “There were interesting questions and reactions, and the conversation was very lively and collegial.”

Professor Thomas J. McSweeney, second from left, and 1L students discussed "The Return of Martin Guerre" during a get-together at Chowning's Tavern.

Professor Thomas J. McSweeney, second from left, and 1L students discussed “The Return of Martin Guerre” during a get-together at Chowning’s Tavern.

McSweeney’s group is one of 14 led by faculty that make up William & Mary Law School’s 1L Reading Group Program. Among the books chosen this year by participating faculty for discussion were “The Autobiography of an Execution” by David R. Dow, “Gideon’s Trumpet” by Anthony Lewis, and “Between the World and Me” by Ta-Nehisi Coates. (See this year’s list of books and faculty discussion leaders.) According to Rhianna Shabsin, Senior Assistant Dean for Admission, there were 159 1L participants this year (more than two-thirds of the new class).

Over the summer, all incoming 1L students were sent an email inviting them to sign up for a group. Professors then reached out to the students in their groups to schedule a time and place to meet. Many groups met at restaurants or at professors’ homes.

Vice Dean Laura Heymann said the program was launched in 2015 to provide new students with an opportunity to get to know the school’s faculty and to expose students to legal topics in a casual setting.

The reading groups covered a large array of legal topics, including legal history, religion, terrorism, race, criminal justice, and feminism. They were all designed to help students think about the law and to prompt discussions about important legal and social issues.

For example, McSweeney said he chose “The Return of Martin Guerre” because it helps provide a framework for students to understand legal texts. He said that the story is constructed using facts from depositions that later permit the judge—and by extension the reader—to draw conclusions about the heroes and villains.

“It helps us understand how legal actors become characters in a story,” he said. “Events may not have significance at the time of occurrence, but they must come together in the end to tell the story.”

Kelly Ann McCarthy, a 1L student in McSweeney’s group, said that she participated in the program because she thought it would be a good opportunity to get to know a professor outside of class, as well as an excuse to read something other than a legal casebook.

“It was interesting to see how students applied what we were learning in class to non-class materials, and how different aspects of the law met in one place,” she said. “It was also interesting to see how records of legal proceedings provide a window into a different time.”

Heymann said that she had received very positive feedback about this year’s program.

“Both students and faculty seemed to have really enjoyed the experience,” she said. “I’ve heard from some students that the books they discussed caused them to see things in new ways, both within and outside the classroom.”

Supreme Court Preview Provides a Special Look at the Future of Election Law

willisby Blake Willis, Class of 2018

The news lately has been full of different election law issues. While it is a presidential election year, with plenty of news-worthy stories, there have been numerous court cases from around the country in recent months which are appearing to reshape the way that the legal community looks at election laws. William & Mary is known for having one of the oldest and strongest Election Law Programs in the country. This year, the Supreme Court Preview, hosted by the Institute of Bill of Rights Law (IBRL), featured a high-powered panel which focused on the Court’s possible future in this highly charged area of the law. Moderated by Professor Rebecca Green, the Chair of the Election Law Program at the Law School, the panel featured four of the most prominent Election Law experts in the country, including: Paul Smith (Jenner & Block), Paul Clement (former Solicitor General) , Pam Karlan (Stanford Law School) and Lyle Denniston (SCOTUSBlog).

One of many panels that occurred as part of the Supreme Court Preview.

One of many panels that occurred as part of the Supreme Court Preview.

These experts focused on a number of different election issues including racial gerrymandering, the Voting Rights Act, race and politics in elections, voter suppression, different types of court review, and whether or not the court should even be involved in this area of the law. One thing they all certainly agreed upon, was that this area of the law is incredibly exciting and one of the most volatile areas of legal study occurring right now.

This is but one example of many from the Supreme Court Preview this month. The Preview, which takes place every September, features a Moot Court demonstration by some of the nation’s leading appellate advocates, and sessions focused on criminal law, civil rights, the Court and the 2016 Election, Business Law, Race and the Legal system, the legacy of Justice Scalia, and the current Supreme Court with only 8 members. Each year, the Preview is attended by numerous students, faculty, legal experts and practitioners from around the country and members of the public. It is one of the most popular events at the school and definitely something to look forward to each and every year, especially in years like 2016, where there is no shortage of legal debate around the country.

Click here to learn more about the Supreme Court Preview.

To learn more about our student bloggers, click here.


1L Perspective- The First Month

zaleskiby James Zaleski, Class of 2019

Just like that the first month of law school has come to an end! It has been a month filled with stress, late nights, and exhaustion but I have thoroughly enjoyed the experience. Now is a good time to reflect back on the first month of this crazy transformative experience we call law school.

Classes have consumed the majority of my time this first month. All 1Ls take the same classes during the first year. The classes I am taking this semester include: (1) Criminal Law, (2) Civil Procedure, (3) Torts, (4) Legal Writing, and (5) Lawyering Skills. One of the rumors about law school that I quickly found to be true is the copious amount of reading! Law school professors assign multiple cases for each class. The readings are complex and often the main point of the case is not particularly clear. I frequently find myself reading the cases multiple times. However, after just one month of practice, I know my classmates and I are increasing our proficiency and are on our way to becoming savvy case readers.

The professors are some of the most brilliant and accomplished instructors I have had in my academic career. As a former high school teacher, I have an appreciation for excellent teachers. All of my professors are experts in their field; they have a passion for teaching their material and challenging students to think critically about the law. One way professors cultivate this atmosphere of learning is through the Socratic Method. I received a personal introduction to the practice during the first week of classes. My classmates and I have found that the rumors regarding the Socratic Method to be overblown. The Socratic Method ensures everyone comes to class prepared. It keeps the class engaged and challenges students to arrive at key insights. While everyone was nervous the first week, I feel most people have become accustomed to the method and enjoy the rigorous discussion it provides.

I also spent a lot of time this past week preparing for my first law school exam. While most law school classes only have final exams, several professors offer midterms. These midterms help relieve some of the anxiety over final exams because they serve as a good introduction to the law school exam format. In preparation, I reviewed my class notes and I completed my first outline. The professor also provided a hypothetical that I used to practice responses. The most challenging aspect of the exam was the time crunch! My classmates and I are anxiously awaiting the results.

student orgsOutside of class, I have found myself busy attending interest meetings for many student groups. I have attended meetings for the Immigration and Law Service Society, the Military and Veterans Law Society, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Mock Trial, and the Latino Law Student Association. These meetings are great opportunities to learn about the organization, to meet new people with similar interests, and to learn how to become involved as a 1L. A nice perk is all of them provided lunch!

The first month of law school has been a demanding experience. However, after just one month, I can already tell I am receiving a valuable education, and I am on my way to becoming an excellent attorney.

To learn more about our student bloggers, click here.

Hixon Center for Experiential Learning and Leadership

To be completed in the spring of 2017, the James A. and Robin L. Hixon Center for Experiential Learning and Leadership building will provide an additional 12,000-square-feet to the Law School.

The Center for Experiential Learning and Leadership will serve as headquarters for our clinics and practicum, which give students opportunities to
represent real clients in actual cases. It will also be home to our highly regarded Legal Practice Program. For three semesters,
students gain the writing, oral communication, and professional skills they’ll need to be great lawyers.

Students, faculty, and staff signed their names and left messages of good will for the new wing on the last piece of steel, and this piece of steel was installed on August 18.

building 1

building 2










Visit the construction website to see the latest pictures.

Professor Jay Butler Joins Faculty

by Jaime Welch-Donahue, Blog post reproduced with permission of the Communications Office.

Top Medieval Law Scholars Explore Magna Carta’s Legacy at BORJ Symposium

On Friday, March 18, the William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (BORJ) hosted “After Runnymede: Revising, Reissuing, and Reinterpreting Magna Carta in the Middle Ages.” The day-long symposium explored Magna Carta’s impact between its issuance in 1215 and resurgence in the seventeenth century.

Professor Thomas McSweeney, William & Mary Law School’s resident specialist in the early history of the common law, said that although 2015 represented the 800th anniversary of the foundation of the original document, King John’s death the following year led to important revisions that make 2016 an equally significant anniversary in its formation.

“2016, in a sense, kicks off the anniversary of the later development of Magna Carta, the process by which a failed peace treaty was transformed into a charter of liberties, which became part of both the English and American constitutional traditions,” McSweeney said.

Elaborating on those developments, the symposium offered four panels with world-renowned scholars in medieval legal history from the United Kingdom and North America.The first session, “Magna Carta’s Dissemination,” featured Janet Loengard (Moravian College), Richard Helmholz (University of Chicago), and Paul Brand (University of Oxford), and addressed Magna Carta’s influence upon such topics as the widow’s quarantine, the English Church, and the diffusion of texts in the thirteenth century.

The second panel featured Professor McSweeney and Karl Shoemaker (University of Wisconsin-Madison) delving into the religious dimension of Magna Carta.

The next panel explored the later history of the Charter of the Forest, featuring Ryan Rowberry (Georgia State) and Sarah Harlan-Haughey (University of Maine).

Prof. Tom McSweeney

Prof. Tom McSweeney

Charles Donahue (Harvard University), Anthony Musson (University of Exeter), and David Seipp (Boston University), rounded up the day with a discussion of Magna Carta in the later Middle Ages. Topics included an investigation of the transformation Magna Carta from law to symbol, and Magna Carta’s role in the “lawless” fifteenth century.

Students appreciated the opportunity the symposium held in providing a glimpse into a significant aspect of legal history.

“History not only helps us to understand why the law is what it is today, but it also forces us to think about what the law can be tomorrow and what role attorneys can play in shaping it,” said Alyssa D’Angelo J.D. ’18. “We learn that the law has never been—and will likely never be—divorced from people, economic systems, and governments.”

D’Angelo added that she is confident that “this lesson will serve us well in practice, where we will be forced to confront the law in context.”

D’Angelo’s classmate Breanna Jensen concurred. “Events like the Magna Carta symposium are important for law students because they provide that historical background that we don’t always have time to cover in class.”

The event was sponsored by William & Mary’s Bill of Rights Journal. Since 1992, the BORJ has published important scholarly works on constitutional law. Published four times per year, the journal is ranked the third most-cited student-edited constitutional law journal by Washington and Lee’s Law Journal Rankings Survey.

Law Behind Innovation

ibrahim_475Blog post reproduced with permission of the Communications Office.

A Q&A with Professor Darian M. Ibrahim on his interest in entrepreneurial law.

Professor Darian M. Ibrahim joined William & Mary from the University of Wisconsin Law School, where he was a tenured member of the faculty. His teaching and research interests encompass corporate and securities law and their application to entrepreneurial activity. He received his J.D.,magna cum laude, from Cornell, where he was articles editor of the Cornell Law Review and inducted into Order of the Coif. He holds a B.S. in chemical engineering from Clemson University. Following law school, he practiced law at Troutman Sanders in Atlanta and clerked for Chief Justice Norman S. Fletcher of the Georgia Supreme Court. He taught previously at the University of Arizona College of Law, where he was voted Teacher of the Year for 2006-07 by the student body. His work has appeared in the Cornell Law Review, Vanderbilt Law Review, theUniversity of Illinois Law Review, and other leading journals.

How did you become interested in entrepreneurial law?

My father was a small business owner. Startups (which are at the heart of entrepreneurial law) are businesses that begin small, but their trajectories quickly lead them to outside financing, rapid scale-up, and eventually initial public offering (IPO) or trade sale. Think Mark Zuckerberg in his Harvard dorm room to Facebook as a large public company in a relatively short span. That trajectory is exciting both as a practical and legal matter. Startups present unique legal issues every step of the way: from choice of entity, to how/why angel investors and venture capitalists (VC) contract as they do, to securities regulation that impacts both private angel/VC financing and an eventual IPO.

Your latest article investigated “intrapreneurship.” Can you speak about what the term intrapreneurship means, and the focus of that research?

This article was a bit of a pivot for me. Instead of focusing on innovation in startups (or “entrepreneurship”), this article looks at innovation that takes place inside large corporations (“intrapreneurship”). Intrapreneurship is substantial, important, and understudied. Yet practical problems inside large corporations lead to less intrapreneurship than might be expected. My article suggests that Delaware corporate law can mitigate these problems and affect the intrapreneurial/entrepreneurial balance we observe. The article also explores a hybrid approach—corporate venture capital (CVC)—that combines entrepreneurial and intrapreneurial advantages. In CVC, a corporation’s venture arm can invest in promising startups, and thus share in innovative gains, without having to overcome obstacles to developing those projects internally.

Talk about another recent paper you wrote on equity crowdfunding. Do you think crowdfunding is a positive development for startups? For investors?

As you mention, another of my recent articles examined the latest craze in entrepreneurial finance: crowdfunding. Equity crowdfunding is selling stock over the Internet to a large number of investors. Some of these investors are the “accredited” (read wealthy/sophisticated) angels and VCs who already invest in startups offline. This trend is not at all worrisome from an investor protection standpoint to me, and in fact has several advantages. However, the new crowdfunding law goes further by allowing even unaccredited, unsophisticated investors to invest in brand-new, unproven startups over the Internet. The idea is to help more startups raise money while at the same time democratizing startup investing. However, real investor protection concerns emerge when the pool of potential investors broadens this way. I argue that the law addresses these concerns in the wrong way. The law currently limits the amount unaccredited investors can invest; but this in no way ensures these individuals will make better investment choices. In my article, I suggest the websites that list the startups act as “reputational intermediaries” for those startups – i.e., vet them and vouch for the ones they list. The current law expressly prohibits the websites from doing this.

Given your research, what does the future look like for entrepreneurs?

The future is extremely bright for entrepreneurs. While the outsourcing of manufacturing etc. erodes traditional American strengths, technology and innovation remain things American businesses excel in. My research will continue to focus on how and where this innovation takes place, and importantly, who funds it before an IPO. My niche has been to explore the angels, VCs, CVCs, venture lenders, and other financiers that allow startups to go from small business to public companies. Entrepreneurial finance is a key ingredient to the innovation economy.

What interested you in teaching at William & Mary?

William & Mary has a tremendous faculty; one of the best in the nation. To call these amazing scholars and teachers my colleagues has been a dream come true. It’s also a “traditional” law school in the best sense of that word. Our law school keeps pace with changes in legal education, but we do not overreact to the latest craze or perceived crisis. We continue to do what we do very well, and our students are the beneficiaries.

Is there anything about your experience at William & Mary different from Wisconsin or Arizona?

Many things. The students really stand out. I think that is reflective of how well William & Mary is doing in a down law school market. We offer an outstanding legal education, a collegial and fun environment, and excellent job opportunities for our graduates at a relatively low price point.

As an undergraduate, you studied chemical engineering. What attracted you to the law? Has having a strong scientific background informed how you approached law?

To be honest, I was running away from chemical engineering by going to law school. I am not a person who cares how his car runs – I just want it to get me where I’m going. Chemical engineering was wonderful in terms of its analytical rigor, and it definitely prepared me to excel in law school and beyond. But calculating the viscosity of a liquid was not what I wanted to do on a daily basis. The law has such a practical effect on people’s lives. I had to be a part of that.

Arguing Before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals — Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic

lizrademacherby Liz Rademacher, Class of 2016

I’ve had lots of great experiences at William & Mary Law School over the past three years, but the most rewarding—and most challenging—experience of them all was arguing my very first case in front of a court. And not just any court. I’m talking about the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, a federal appellate court just a step down from the U.S. Supreme Court. I can honestly say that I never would’ve thought I’d argue a case in front of the D.C. Circuit before I started law school, but William & Mary made it all possible for me through its excellent clinical education program.

This journey started in August, when I joined William & Mary’s Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic. Although the clinic focuses mainly on First and Fourth Amendment cases, the issues in our cases are wide-ranging and groundbreaking. The students in the clinic work in pairs throughout the year to monitor and manage our case load.

In September, the clinic began representing a veteran from D.C. in a Fourth Amendment case. Police searched our client’s home after he mistakenly called a suicide hotline, thinking it was an emotional support hotline for veterans with PTSD. Although our client explained his mistake to the hotline operator, the operator called 911.  After going outside his apartment to talk to police, the police put our client’s hands in zip ties and took him to a hospital. Afterwards, police searched his home twice, opened locked containers, and found unregistered guns. Our client was then arrested and charged for having the guns, but the charges were dropped after another court suppressed the evidence as a result of Fourth Amendment violations. Afterwards, our client brought a civil rights lawsuit against the police officers and D.C. government. His case was dismissed by a district court because the judge held that the police had acted reasonably even without a warrant. Dissatisfied with the outcome of the case, the clinic stepped in to handle the appeal. My partner and I were assigned to the case.

courthousefrontOn appeal, we argued that the police acted unreasonably by doing the searches without a warrant and without our client’s consent. For months, my partner and I researched the D.C. Circuit’s precedent regarding similar warrantless searches. In December, we learned that our case would be argued in April. With several deadlines looming in front of us, we decided I would be doing the oral argument and began writing our first brief. In February, the D.C. government submitted their own brief, which we had two weeks to respond to in a second brief. By March, it was time to start practicing giving the argument. I poured over the hundreds of pages of the record in our case and, with the help of the other students in the clinic and professors from the law school, did multiple moot arguments. With each practice round, I got more and more confident and my answers to tricky questions got smoother and more concise.

But it didn’t really hit me that I would actually be arguing the case until the morning of April 18 in the courthouse, when I sat down at the counsel table and saw the three judges on my panel walk into the courtroom. What followed was a volley between the judges and me about the legal issues surrounding our case and the facts on the record. Before doing the argument, I was scared that I would feel too nervous to answer their tough questions. But after doing so many practice rounds, getting peppered with the judges’ questions felt less like sitting through an interrogation and more like slipping into a spirited conversation. Before I knew it, the red light in the courtroom came on, and my time was up.

Whether or not we end up winning on appeal, arguing the case was the most fulfilling part of my law school career. I got to do something that most real attorneys never get to do, and I got to do it before even graduating. It was tougher than anything I’ve done before, but I was well-prepared and learned so much. I’m so grateful that I got this opportunity, and so grateful to have been part of a law school community that was so supportive throughout the whole experience!

Read more here.

Learn more about our Student Bloggers here.

Joint Journal Competition

borkby Emily Bork, Class of 2018

Spring is in full bloom here in Williamsburg! Coming from Buffalo, New York, I am not used to seeing flowers budding and the grass sprouting so early in the season, so it is wonderful to enjoy the sights and smells of an early Spring! With the last few weeks of the semester upon us, exam season is also in the air as my fellow classmates and I prepare for our final set of 1L exams. For most of the 1L class, our summer won’t officially kick off though until the following Friday after exams as we will be participating in the annual Joint Journal Competition (JJC).

JJC is a week-long competition program for 1L students who wish to join one of William & Mary’s five academic journals by serving as a staff member during their 2L and 3L years. As part of the competition, students are required to submit both a short written paper, or Comment, of a legal issue and also complete an editing exercise. The competition is designed to evaluate students’ strengths in both their written work as well as their abilities to properly review writings for citation and grammar checks.

journalsWilliam & Mary’s five academic journals are:

  • William & Mary Law Review
  • William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
  • William & Mary Environmental Policy Review
  • William & Mary Journal of Women & the Law
  • William & Mary Business Law Review

Students who are selected to work on journals as a staff member are responsible for writing a paper called a Student Note during their 2L year. The Student Note not only satisfies William & Mary’s writing requirement for 2L students, but also has the added bonus of possible publication! Students who serve on journals also complete citation and other editing checks of scholarly articles that are submitted to the respective journal for publication. Credit hours are additionally available to students working on their Note and students who serve on an editorial board for their respective journals during their 3L year.

Although this year’s JJC will no doubt present some challenges, I am looking forward to this annual rite-of-passage as I hope to serve on a journal for the rest of my time here at William & Mary. I look forward to this year’s JJC and the opportunity to be a part of the fellowship, teamwork, and collaboration of our journals!

To learn more about our student bloggers, click here.

Oral Arguments- Legal Practice

kingby Garrett King, Class of 2018

A few days ago, I found myself in William & Mary’s Courtroom arguing before a practicing attorney against a Motion to Dismiss for improper 1332 Subject Matter Jurisdiction. After arguing for 20 minutes, while constantly being interrupted for questions, the opposing counsel and I were dismissed, allowing the judges to deliberate their holding.

As part of William & Mary’s Legal Practice program, students are required to give oral arguments in front of practicing attorneys, who serve as judges during the fake trial. We are each graded on our argument’s presentation, including the ability to pivot our speech to satisfy each judge’s needs and questions. Although I am not allowed to disclose the actual facts of the fake legal dispute (in case they use the same fact pattern in the future), I can talk about the argument and about preparing to speak in the Courtroom.

A week ago, my adjunct professor held practice oral arguments at her law firm’s Williamsburg office. During the argument, she brought in a guest, who is an actual state judge in Virginia. After the 20-minute argument, we received feedback and advice for how to improve our presentation’s logical flow and effectiveness. The judge told me that I did a great job presenting the material; however, she had great constructive criticism. This advice is something you simply don’t learn from a book but rather through experience. After the practice oral argument, our class had a week to prepare for our graded oral arguments. In the practice argument I argued for the judge to dismiss the lawsuit, but during the graded argument, I tried to persuade the judge to deny the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.

The real oral argument occurred on campus inside the Courtroom. Our adjunct professor played the role of judge. Although many people don’t know this, when you are presenting an argument in court before a judge, you will be interrupted with questions. In fact, the judge may ask you to fast forward to a certain portion of your argument. Therefore, you should not simply memorize the material, but rather have the ability to flexibly adjust the argument to fit the judge’s needs. Additionally, the judge may pose very detailed questions about the fact pattern, or even regarding cases used as evidence.

An actual argument is composed of three parts: (1) The movant’s argument; (2) the non-movant’s argument; (3) the movant’s rebuttal. In this case, I was the non-movant because I was trying to defeat the defendants’ motion to dismiss. Therefore, my friend Josh, whom I was arguing against, gave his argument first. I tried to simply rebut his argument, so much of my argument depended on what Josh mentioned in his presentation. In addition to being flexible, you also have to prepare for every possible scenario, because you simply don’t know what the other party will say.

When it was my turn to speak, I felt prepared, but before I began the judge wanted me to address a very specific issue within the case. I had planned using that point at the end of my argument, so within the first minute, my argument had been turned on its head. However, I quickly recovered and simply interwove the other arguments behind the judge’s question. Additionally, during the argument, you want to highlight a “theory of the case” or a theme regarding your client’s actions. During the presentation, I was constantly emphasizing the legal theme and trying to create sympathy for my client.

After my argument ended, the rebuttal was given. Then, the judges dismissed us and heard the next set of oral arguments. Although I don’t know what my grade is, or even the winner of the argument, I do feel confident that this experience will help me in the future.

To learn more about our student bloggers, click here.

W&M Honor Council and Exams

borkby Emily Bork, Class of 2018

It’s hard to believe that my first year of law school is quickly coming to an end! Although I can’t deny that I’m feeling the stress of the looming exam period, I have taken comfort in the supportive W&M community of my peers and professors. Throughout my exam preparation, I have realized that everyone here genuinely wants their fellow classmates and students to do well on their exams. Our community is rooted in a deep desire to provide students with an opportunity to do their best and be given a fair chance to succeed.

The W&M Honor Code embodies this sense of fairness and justice among the law school community and works to uphold the dignity of W&M’s mission of educating Citizen Lawyers. The Honor Code is rooted in instilling a sense of moral responsibility in all W&M students as we are called to refrain from lying, stealing, and cheating both within our interactions at the law school and also outside the law school as aspiring attorneys.

The Honor Council is made up of student justices from among each of the three classes who work to enforce the Honor Code and educate students as to the Honor Code’s application in various aspects of law school life, especially final exams. I was fortunate to attend an Honor Council info session on how the Honor Code relates to exam-taking policies.

Many students have open book exams and are allowed to use their own class notes and outlines during exams. Additionally, students often have self-scheduled exams in which they can take the exam at home at their own convenience. If an exam is not self-scheduled but rather must be taken during a specific time period at the law school, professors often leave the room during the duration of the exam. Questions are typically raised concerning what can and cannot be used during exams. Fortunately, the Honor Council is more than willing to provide students with an overview of some of the default rules regarding exam-taking.

For example, if an exam is open-book, the default rule is that a student is allowed to use any outline he or she has prepared for that class as long as the student has had a substantial hand in making the outline. Although professors can change the default rule for their particular classes, the Honor Council info session was a good way to start thinking about these policies. We are all encouraged to think about how the Honor Code relates not only to this semester’s final exams, but also to our goal of becoming Citizen Lawyers.

At W&M, we are called to be honest with our exam taking so as to ensure the integrity of both the exams themselves as well as the integrity of our school. One of the things that I love most about W&M is our dedication to each other as a community, and the Honor Code is just another example of how we are called to uphold and preserve this community of trust.

To learn more about our student bloggers, click here.