Professor Litman is fantastic. I am currently taking her Federal Courts class and am confident that there a few professors out there who could do a better job teaching a class involving complex issues of Constitutional structure and theory.
Her style of teaching is fast-paced. She cold-calls all 83 students around once per week. The questions are more difficult than cold-calls I’ve seen in other classes. With little preliminary guidance, she frequently asks students to draw on concepts and doctrines taught earlier in the semester to determine how a scenario outside of the readings would play out, or how students would respond to actual hypotheticals posed by Supreme Court Justices. These questions become much easier to answer and anticipate as the semester progresses, and they aid tremendously in the learning process.
The course-load is moderate but not unreasonable. Expect between 18-30 pages of dense textbook reading per class, with most classes hovering around the 22-page range. Although the order of textbook readings seemed sporadic at the beginning of the semester, it’s all starting to shape up now, and what might be confusing from the readings always makes more sense after class.
She also assigns problems for roughly half the classes. The problems often serve as the basis of class discussion, as opposed to a rigid doctrine-to-doctrine or case-to-case approach. The midterm assignment (worth 25% of our grade) looked a lot like these problems—again, not unreasonably difficult given the preparation she gave leading up to the assignment.
Overall, Leah Litman is one of those few Professors who you really wouldn’t want to miss a class for.
Leah Litman is the real deal. I’m taking FedCourts with her this semester, and she is a master of the Socratic method. In terms of difficulty and preparation, it’s definitely up there with Eve Primus’ CrimPro class. But that’s precisely why you should take it. It’s one of those classes that makes jaded 3Ls feel like real law students again. God speed to the 1Ls who have her for ConLaw next year.
She was great for Con Law. I’m not sure if the exam would be different if the class wasn’t pass-fail (COVID), but I thought the exams (midterm & final) were fairly straightforward. She doesn’t hide the ball much, but she does indicate where there is disagreement about what the law is and what spots you will need to take a stance on. You get cold called about once a week and you will have to do the reading closely if you don’t want to bomb it (“I don’t know” was a common response to cold calls).
Echoing everything others have said, a doctrinal with Litman will be among both the best and most demanding classes you ever take. Her cold calls are next level, but she knows how hard they are and doesn’t expect right answers all the time. That they’re so difficult means that you’re going way beyond the four corners of the casebook. She no longer gives midterm exams because of all the cheating, but she gave us 2 optional ungraded practice problems on which she gave us detailed individualized feedback, which set us up really well for the final because we knew what she was looking for. She cares so much about helping her students learn that it makes you want to put in more effort. I actually started briefing cases again just because I wanted to get the most out of class (and not disappoint her!).
MLaw Prof Reviews
Professor Litman is fantastic. I am currently taking her Federal Courts class and am confident that there a few professors out there who could do a better job teaching a class involving complex issues of Constitutional structure and theory.
Her style of teaching is fast-paced. She cold-calls all 83 students around once per week. The questions are more difficult than cold-calls I’ve seen in other classes. With little preliminary guidance, she frequently asks students to draw on concepts and doctrines taught earlier in the semester to determine how a scenario outside of the readings would play out, or how students would respond to actual hypotheticals posed by Supreme Court Justices. These questions become much easier to answer and anticipate as the semester progresses, and they aid tremendously in the learning process.
The course-load is moderate but not unreasonable. Expect between 18-30 pages of dense textbook reading per class, with most classes hovering around the 22-page range. Although the order of textbook readings seemed sporadic at the beginning of the semester, it’s all starting to shape up now, and what might be confusing from the readings always makes more sense after class.
She also assigns problems for roughly half the classes. The problems often serve as the basis of class discussion, as opposed to a rigid doctrine-to-doctrine or case-to-case approach. The midterm assignment (worth 25% of our grade) looked a lot like these problems—again, not unreasonably difficult given the preparation she gave leading up to the assignment.
Overall, Leah Litman is one of those few Professors who you really wouldn’t want to miss a class for.
Leah Litman is the real deal. I’m taking FedCourts with her this semester, and she is a master of the Socratic method. In terms of difficulty and preparation, it’s definitely up there with Eve Primus’ CrimPro class. But that’s precisely why you should take it. It’s one of those classes that makes jaded 3Ls feel like real law students again. God speed to the 1Ls who have her for ConLaw next year.
She was great for Con Law. I’m not sure if the exam would be different if the class wasn’t pass-fail (COVID), but I thought the exams (midterm & final) were fairly straightforward. She doesn’t hide the ball much, but she does indicate where there is disagreement about what the law is and what spots you will need to take a stance on. You get cold called about once a week and you will have to do the reading closely if you don’t want to bomb it (“I don’t know” was a common response to cold calls).
Echoing everything others have said, a doctrinal with Litman will be among both the best and most demanding classes you ever take. Her cold calls are next level, but she knows how hard they are and doesn’t expect right answers all the time. That they’re so difficult means that you’re going way beyond the four corners of the casebook. She no longer gives midterm exams because of all the cheating, but she gave us 2 optional ungraded practice problems on which she gave us detailed individualized feedback, which set us up really well for the final because we knew what she was looking for. She cares so much about helping her students learn that it makes you want to put in more effort. I actually started briefing cases again just because I wanted to get the most out of class (and not disappoint her!).
Every positive thing they say is true!