I. Selection Process
A. Grade Associates
At the conclusion of their first year of study, invitations will be extended to the top sixteen students based on their cumulative grade point average. To be considered "eligible," a student must participate in the writing/editing competition, and receive a score which places him/her in the upper two-thirds of the writing/editing competition, i.e., a student will not be eligible if her score falls within the bottom 33.33% of the writing/editing competition. In addition, an invitation will be extended to any student ranked in the top two in his/her respective section who has not already been extended an invitation. In addition, all eligible students with grade point averages tied to the cut off grade (determined to the hundredth of a grade point) shall be selected. [Amended April 2008; December 2008; April 2009]
B. Writing/Editing Associates
1. The minimum number of second year students to be afforded associate status through the writing/editing competition shall be 20 percent of those completing the competition or 12, whichever is less. A higher percentage may be selected if a larger number of competitors have demonstrated superior ability.
a. Each competitor shall prepare a case note which will be judged on analytical and writing ability. Each note shall be judged by three randomly-selected members of a panel of editors selected by the Senior Note Editor in conjunction with the Editor-in-Chief. Each judge shall evaluate the note independently. Where deemed necessary by the Editor-in-Chief or the Senior Note Editor, an additional judge shall read and evaluate the note. Each competitor shall also complete an editing test that is graded by the Managing Editors. The Editor-in-Chief, when necessary, may resolve any disputes regarding grading of the editing portion of the competition. The competitors who receive the 12 highest average scores, or twenty percent of the participants in the writing/editing competition, whichever is less, shall be offered associate status. [Amended February 2005, February 2007]
b. The writing/editing competition shall be held in May. The beginning date and duration of the writing/editing competition shall be determined by the Editor-in-Chief after consultation with the Executive Editor. Judging shall be completed as soon after termination of the competition as practicable. [Amended February 2006]
c. Personal letters shall be sent by the Editor-in-Chief at the completion of the judging to all participants informing them of the results.
d. The Senior Note Editor shall prepare the topic to be addressed by students participating in the writing/editing competition. The Editor-in-Chief may appoint additional editors to assist the Senior Note Editor with this responsibility. The Senior Note Editor shall direct the competition itself, and act as a liaison between the Board of Editors, including the panel of judges, and the students participating in the writing/editing competition.
2. The Law Review encourages all students to submit notes for publication.
a. If a note so submitted is selected to be published by the Law Review, the author will be offered associate status on the Law Review, subject to revocation based on the fulfillment of the author's duties, under the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. [Amended February 2006]
b. To qualify for associate status under this provision, the author's note must be substantially his or her own work. The author may not cowrite the note with anyone else. [Amended February 2006]
c. Allowable Assistance
An author may receive assistance in selecting topics from anyone including faculty members and fellow students. Authors may not, however, submit notes under this provision which are based on papers prepared in conjunction with course work. Authors may receive limited assistance from faculty members in researching and writing notes to be submitted under this provision, and authors may receive guidance from a Law Review Editor if an editor so volunteers, subject to approval and any limitations set forth by the Editor-in-Chief. Thus editors and faculty members may assist the author with developing a topic and by reading and commenting upon a research memo and drafts of the note. The faculty member and student editor should use discretion to ensure that the final product is substantially the author's own work. [Amended February 2006]
C. Composite Associates
1. The Cornell Law Review believes that grades and writing ability are generally effective indicators of the qualities that will contribute to the Law Review. However, the Law Review recognizes that these criteria are not perfect, and often operate to exclude students who possess qualities that will benefit the Law Review. To improve the overall quality of its publication, the Law Review hopes to expand its membership to include persons from traditionally underrepresented groups as well as persons with diverse viewpoints, perspective, and experiences: To achieve this goal of a more diverse membership, and to reduce the potential for unfairness in the selection process, the Law Review will extend invitations to fourteen Composite Associates. [Amended February 2005]
2. The additional fourteen students shall receive invitations based on a composite score consisting of the sum of his or her grade point average, writing/editing competition score, and a personal statement score. A composite score shall be determined for all students who have not received invitations based on grades or writing alone. No student shall receive an invitation as a Composite Associate unless his or her grade point average or writing score exceeds 2.70. [Amended February 2005]
a. Competitors for Composite Associate invitations may complete a personal statement describing the diversity of perspective they will bring to the Law Review. A selection committee will review the personal statements to determine personal statement scores. The Law Review Editor-in-Chief shall select the members of the selection committee. In making their determinations, the committee shall consider the applicant's ability to add diversity to the Law Review on the basis of his or her unique law experiences. Factors may include prejudices faced and perspective offered as members of racial or ethnic minority groups or as economically disadvantaged persons. The committee may also consider character strengths shown in overcoming particular personal tragedies or hardships. The committee shall take steps to ensure the anonymity of persons submitting personal statements.
b. The selection committee shall, in their discretion, award qualified students personal statement scores of any amount up to and including 1.0. Each selection committee can decide the range of points to give personal statements not to exceed 1.0 and the committee is not required to share that information with anyone not a member of the committee. For example, a person who is awarded a personal statement score of 1.0 and who has a grade point average of 3.0 and a writing score of 2.7 will have a composite score of 6.7 (3.0 + 2.7 + 1.0 = 6.7). Students not submitting a personal statement will also be eligible to receive an invitation as a Composite Associate. For example, a person who has a grade point average of 3.4 and a writing score of 3.4, but has a personal statement score of zero, will have a composite score of 6.8 (3.4 + 3.4 = 6.8). [Amended March 2000, February 2005]
D. Transfer Students
1. Students transferring to Cornell Law School following completion of their first year at another law school are eligible to participate in a transfer writing competition.
2. The timing of the competition, the requirements thereof, and its manner of execution shall be determined by the Senior Note Editor subject to approval by the Editor-in-Chief.
3. Transfer students are only eligible for associate status based on the write-on method-grades from the transferee's school may not be considered.
a. In order to qualify under the write-on method, the transfer write-on score must be higher than the highest nontransferee write-on score that was not offered an associate position.
b. The number of associate positions offered through the transfer writing competition is at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. [Amended February 2006]
E. Writing Competition Demographic Information
1. For the purpose of measuring the effectiveness of Law Review's diversity and outreach initiatives, the Cornell Law Review shall request that the writing competition participants volunteer anonymous demographic information about themselves. The Editor-in-Chief shall analyze such information, comparing the diversity of the participants to the diversity of Law Review invitees. Such analysis shall be available to all Law Review members upon request. The Cornell Law Review shall retain such information and analysis for a period of at least ten years. [Enacted April 2008]
II. Publication Schedule
The Cornell Law Review shall publish each year one volume, consisting of six issues to be published in the following months:
Issue 1: November
Issue 2: January
Issue 3: March
Issue 4: May
Issue 5: July
Issue 6: September
III. Duties of Membership
A. Associates
1. At the first meeting with Associates each fall, or within one week after the beginning of the first semester following each Associate's admission to the Cornell Law Review, the Editor-in-Chief shall articulate the components of elevation as discussed in the Constitution and Bylaws. Thereafter, the Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editors, and Senior Note Editor shall take measures needed to put Associates on notice when they are not performing satisfactory work.
2. Except as provided in subsection (4) [regarding third year Associates] of this section, each associate shall submit one note or the equivalent thereof, as determined by the Editor-in-Chief, to be considered for publication. The requirements and due dates for individual associates may be adjusted by the Editor-in-Chief as circumstances require.
3. Each Associate shall perform such proving and other editorial duties as are assigned to him/her by the Executive Editor, Managing Editor, or the Editor-in-Chief. [Amended February 2006]
4. Any Associate who, when accepting Associate status, is a third year student in the Cornell Law School, shall:
a. Be required to submit one note to be considered for publication;
b. Be assigned approximately one half the editorial work assigned to other Associates. [As amended]
B. Editors
1. Elected officers of the Review shall perform the duties of their respective offices as outlined in the Constitution of the Cornell Law Review.
2. Editors who are not officers shall perform such administrative and editorial duties as are assigned them by the Managing Editors or the Editor-in-Chief. These officers shall make an effort to ensure that each editor who is not an officer contributes his fair share to the workload of the Review. [Amended April 2008]
IV. Election of Editors
1. Election of Associates to the Board of Editors shall take place at the first annual meeting of the Board of Editors, as specified in the Constitution of the Cornell Law Review. The qualifications of each associate shall be considered individually, and each shall be voted upon individually. A favorable vote of a majority of the editors present and voting shall be required to elect an Associate to the Board of Editors. All Associates or any number of them may be so elected. Each Associate so elected shall be deemed a member of the Board of Editors upon the close of the first annual meeting.
2. Recommendations for election of Associates to the Board of Editors shall be made by the Officers of the Cornell Law Review. Any Associate not recommended for election to the Board of Editors shall be so informed in writing, including a detailed explanation, at least one week prior to the first annual meeting. Upon notification to the Editor-in-Chief at least forty-eight hours before the first annual meeting, any associate not recommended for election shall have the right to appear before the Board of Editors at the first annual meeting. At this meeting and prior to the election of associates to the Board of Editors, such associate(s) shall have the opportunity to explain why the Board of Editors should nonetheless elect the associate to the Board of Editors.
3. If the Board of Editors votes not to elevate an associate, notification of this decision must be sent to the associate along with an explanation of the decision. The associate may appeal this nonelevation decision to the Appeals Committee by submitting written notice of Appeal to the Editor-in-Chief within one week of receiving notification of the nonelevation decision . The Appeals Committee will consist of the following people: Two members of the outgoing Board of Editors chosen by the Editor-in-Chief, two members of the outgoing Board of Editors chosen by the appealing associate, the faculty advisor to the Law Review, the Dean of Students, and one faculty member of the appealing associate's choosing. The Editor-in-Chief may not be a member of the Appeals Committee. The Appeals Committee shall conduct an appropriate investigation, including at the minimum interviews with the appealing associate and the outgoing Editor-in-Chief. If a majority of the Appeals Committee determines based on the evidence presented to it that the decision not to elevate the associate was made on egregiously improper grounds, the Appeals Committee may take whatever action it deems appropriate, including overturning the nonelevation decision.
V. Election of Officers
A. Election of officers from among the members of the Board of Editors shall take place at the second annual meeting of the Board of Editors as specified in the Constitution of the Cornell Law Review. For each office to be filled, nominations shall be taken from the floor. Those nominated shall leave the room, and the qualifications of each nominee to fulfill the duties of the office shall be discussed. Upon conclusion of discussion, the vote shall be had; the first nominee to attain a majority of the votes cast shall be elected to fill the office. The outgoing Editor-in-Chief shall chair the meeting. The officers shall be elected in the following order: the Editor-in-Chief; five Managing Editors; the Executive Editor; the Senior Article Editor; the Senior Note Editor; ten Article Editors; one Symposium Editor, and five Note Editors. [Amended February 2006, April 2008, February 2009]
B. The outgoing Editor-in-Chief, in his or her role as chair of the meeting, may deviate from the election procedure outlined in (A) unless a majority of members of law review attending the election meeting object. [Amended February 2005, February 2009]
VI. Grievance Committee
A. The Grievance Committee shall consist of the Editor-in-Chief and four Editors that the Board of Editors selects pursuant to subsection B within one month of the second annual meeting.
B. The procedures for selecting Editors to serve on the Grievance Committee shall follow the procedures used to elect officers at the second annual meeting, except that at least one General Editor shall serve on the Grievance Committee and the Symposium Editor shall be ineligible to serve on the Grievance Committee. If an Editor on the Grievance Committee is the subject of an alleged violation made pursuant to subsection C, then the Symposium Editor shall replace that Editor on the Grievance Committee for the duration of the matter. [Amended February 2009]
C. Only upon written notification from any Associate or Editor of an alleged violation of the Law School Standards of Professional Conduct, the Law School Code of Academic Integrity, University Code of Academic Integrity, or Article III, Section 7 of the Law Review Constitution, the Grievance Committee shall convene and take reasonable steps in consideration of the alleged violation.
D. The Grievance Committee, in its discretion and within a reasonable time after receiving written notification under subsection C, may pursue such measures as it deems appropriate, including but not limited to: no action, informal consultation with the parties directly involved, a letter of admonition, or a recommendation to the Board of Editors for removal or suspension from some or all Law Review duties. Any action that involves removal or suspension, or adoption of any measure that involves formal notice to the Law School administration, shall require approval by the Board of Editors at a special meeting.
E. The Grievance Committee shall request from both parties written accounts of their versions of the events giving rise to the written notification and shall take any other steps necessary to reach a fair resolution of the matter.
F. All decisions of the Grievance Committee, including a decision to take no action, shall be communicated to all parties directly involved in the matter.
G. Any issues discussed in connection with the work of the Grievance Committee shall remain confidential to the extent possible. In the event of a special meeting of the Board of Editors, any issues discussed shall remain confidential within the Board of Editors.
H. The Grievance Committee shall not review complaints regarding evaluation of production work unless such complaints involve a possible violation of the Law School Standards of Professional Conduct, Law School Code of Academic Integrity, University Code of Academic Integrity, or Article III, Section 7 of the Law Review Constitution.
I. It is the responsibility of each Editor on the Grievance Committee to make himself or herself available for consultation concerning a perceived violation of the Law School Standards of Professional Conduct, Law School Code of Academic Integrity, University Code of Academic Integrity, or Article III, Section 7 of the Law Review Constitution.
J. The Editor-in-Chief shall inform each new Associate of this section no later than one week after the beginning of the first semester following his or her admission to the Cornell Law Review.
VII. Note Selection
A. Within two months following elections of new Board officers, the Senior Note Editor, in consultation with the Note Editors and subject to approval by the Editor-in-Chief, will publish, internal to the Law Review, a policy indicating how and when Note selection will occur for the volume. The Note Editors will seek to select two Notes per issue, for a total of ten Notes, not including the Symposium issue. If there is no Symposium issue for the volume, the Note Editors may select two additional Notes for the issue normally slated for the Symposium. Additionally, the Note Editors may vary the number of Notes published based on the quality of the submissions, subject to approval by the Editor-in-Chief.
B. In selecting Notes for publication, the Note Editors are free to consider submissions from all Cornell Law students who are active students at the time of selection. [Amended February 2006]
VIII. Diversity Committee [Enacted April 2008]
A. The Diversity Committee shall consist of five Editors that the Board of Editors selects pursuant to subsection VIII.B within one month of the second annual meeting.
B. The procedures for selecting Editors to serve on the Diversity Committee shall follow the procedures used to elect officers at the second annual meeting.
C. The Diversity Committee shall develop and, with the approval of the Editor in Chief, shall conduct outreach to groups traditionally underrepresented on Law Review. The Diversity Committee shall also review the organization's diversity initiatives and recommend to the Editor-in-Chief such changes as it feels necessary to achieve the goals set forth in section I.C.1 of the Bylaws.
D. All meetings of the Diversity Committee shall be open to allow the attendance of any member of Law Review.
