Law Faculty Votes Down Review's Comp Proposal

In a non-binding vote, the Law School Faculty yesterday recommended that the student-run Harvard Law Review scrap its recent proposal to move its selection process from June to April.

The Review, which last week distributed a report to faculty members stating that the June writing competition caused a "logistical nightmare," had asked the Law School faculty to discuss the date of the selection process.

As part of the process, students must submit an article and edit a sample Review piece.

Regardless of faculty opinion, the Review independently will make a final decision on the date of its writing competition during the next two or three weeks, Review President Carol S. Steiker '82 said yesterday.

"We do things democratically here," she said.

Although the Review is an independent student organization, it relies on faculty support and traditionally has consulted the faculty before making major policy decisions.

"The faculty has a responsibility to say 'You can't mess up the educational program,'" said Professor of Law Richard B. Stewart, chairman of the faculty's Ad Hoc Committee on the Law Review.

At yesterday's faculty meeting, in which editors of the Review presented their proposal, "more than 80 percent" of the faculty present agreed that an April comp would be "undesirable," Stewart said.

He added that "a majority" of faculty members voted to recommend that the Review continue the June writing competition. Faculty Secretary Stephen M. Bernardi '52 could not be reached to confirm voting tabulations.

Despite the current conflict of opinion, Stewart said he expects the faculty and the Review to reach a "mutual accomodation."

Steiker said she hopes her organization will "harmonize its decision with the faculty viewpoint."

If an impasse is reached, however, Steiker said that she doubts the faculty will take a more active role in control of the Review. "I don't expect that the role [of the faculty] will change with disagreements over Law Review policy," she said.

But the proposal to hold the Review comp in part during spring break has recently encountered opposition not only from professors but also from Law School Dean James Vorenberg '49, who last week called the Review's proposal "highly undesirable."

Vorenberg has not returned numerous phone calls to his office this week.

The Review, which formerly based elections on first-year grades, last year decided to require all candidates to participate in a writing competition over a one-week period in June.

Election to the Review, one of the nation's most prestigious legal journals, is considered a significant achievement and a major advantage in professional placement. Competition for Review slots is described as intense.

Despite Review editors' claims that a June comp favored wealthier students and resulted in "an unsatisfactorily low number of entries," Stewart said a spring-break comp would present a "serious adverse effect on the academic experience of the first year."

"It's just more pressure," he said, noting that students need spring break to prepare for final examinations and to relax during the intense academic requirements of the first year.

Steiker, however, said, "The weekend after exams is also a time the students like to relax, too."

Review editors who prepared the recent report criticizing the June comp said the process discriminated against students who could not afford to forfeit a week of summer employment in order to participate in the comp