The Principle, Politics, and Finances of Introducing Academic Merit as the Standard of Hiring for "the teaching of law as a career," 1870–1900

Compared to the practice in other professional schools and academic fields at universities, law professors are hired at a young age based primarily upon their academic merit determined through grades, class rank, and school rank. This emphasis upon narrowly defined academic merit—apart from achievement demonstrated through original scholarship or experience in professional practice—first emerged during "the professionalization of the American law professor" between 1870 and 1900 at Harvard Law School (HLS). Though normative today, this outcome was neither necessary nor uncontested. In the late nineteenth century the new standard of hiring faculty according to their academic merit was energetically opposed by those favoring the antecedent standard of professional experience and reputation. Only when financial considerations counterbalanced that traditional standard did hiring decisions tip in favor of the new principle. Not until the early 1900s, when the second generation of academic meritocrats dominated the HLS faculty, did the new hiring standard become unequivocally established as policy in the school and, by extension, in legal education.     

The distribution of ethanol in postmortem blood specimens.

Ethanol was determined by gas chromatography in a variety of tissues and body fluids secured at autopsy in 61 cases. The specimens tested included right and left heart blood, femoral blood, pericardial fluid, cerebrospinal fluid, vitreous humor, urine, stomach contents, and brain. Statistical analysis of the cases revealed no significant differences among the various blood sites tested. However, the variations in blood ethanol concentrations among the various sampling sites within each case were as follows: 40 cases showed differences of less than 25%; 16 cases revealed variability between 25% and 50%, 4 cases had differences exceeding 50%. In one case, satisfactory blood analyses could not be accomplished. The larger variances occurred especially in those instances in which stomach alcohol concentration was 0.50% or greater. In one case, the variability amongst the different blood sites exceeded 400% (femoral blood--0.043%, right atrium--0.070%, root of aorta--0.156%); the brain was 0.050%, and the stomach contents was 1.2%. For all 61 cases, variances in blood alcohol content among the different sampling sites in a single cadaver ranged from 1.8 to 428%.     

SENTENCING AND UNWARRANTED DISPARITY: AN EMPIRICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE LONG-TERM IMPACT OF SENTENCING GUIDELINES IN MINNESOTA*

Using an interrupted time-series design, this research note analyzes the long-term effect of Minnesota's sentencing guidelines on reducing unwarranted disparity in sentencing outcomes that fall within their scope of authority. Unwarranted disparity is defined as residual variation not attributable to legally mandated sentencing factors. Findings suggest that although the sentencing guidelines initially reduced disparity for the no prison/prison sentencing decision, inequality began to revert to preguideline levels as time passed. Further analysis revealed that the guidelines had a permanent impact on reducing disparities in decisions on the length of prison sentence. Overall we observed an 18% decline in disparity for the no prison/prison outcome and a 60% reduction in inequality for the judicial decision as to length of prison sentence. Two explanations for the reversionary trend in the no prison/prison series are highlighted.     

Theoretical and empirical specification of a model of informal labeling

Recently criminologists have begun to explore the importance of disaggregating frequency measures of self-reported delinquency into the separate decisions of initiation and continuation. Given that labeling makes predictions concerning continuation, the purpose of this paper is twofold. The first is to test the ability of an informal labeling model to predict the decision to continue delinquent behavior once it is initiated. The second purpose is to address the broader question of whether disaggregation matters. The findings support the idea that the informal labeling model is predictive of the decision to continue delinquent behavior. The findings also suggest that, at least for a measure of general delinquency, there are some differences to be found by choosing the appropriate sample and form of the dependent variable.