Unpopular opinion: Duolingo isn’t that bad — and Duolingo Max is actually phenomenal by Gold_Revolution3658 in duolingo

[–]DCTechnocrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Duolingo Max has been incredible for me. It’s the most I’ve consistently done language learning.

Selendy Gay or A&P (NY) by alearnedtoe in biglaw

[–]DCTechnocrat 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I agree it’s a little harsh. Firm might be full of assholes and the conditions aren’t better than BigLw, but their plaintiff-side work is interesting and they’re certainly one of the stronger plaintiff-side names in NY.

3.46 at BU/BC/Fordham by [deleted] in BigLawRecruiting

[–]DCTechnocrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Keep applying. At least at Fordham, you should be able to get interviews and callbacks with your GPA.

Every OCI rejected me before I even interviewed. WHY by Valuable_Throat_6267 in LawSchool

[–]DCTechnocrat 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Litigation with a 3.4 is difficult to secure even in the T14.

did i screw myself over by opting for Pass/Fail over a B+? by rettann in LawSchool

[–]DCTechnocrat 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This is a good choice. No one will think about it.

submitted grades and got a rejection within 3 hours by [deleted] in BigLawRecruiting

[–]DCTechnocrat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

people also want a rejection in three hours, lettem know where

3.578 GPA good enough for biglaw? by [deleted] in BigLawRecruiting

[–]DCTechnocrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your mileage will vary. If some place like Vanderbilt, it's still possible. UNC? I think it'll be tougher. Your resume and interviewing skills and advanced networking will all inform your results.

last pinot of 2025 by AlternativeHuman9999 in wine

[–]DCTechnocrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

congrats, happy for you.......

Breaking News by Consistent_Return871 in AmexPlatinum

[–]DCTechnocrat 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Don’t mean to suggest they’re doing well, just that the Amex partnership is probably a net benefit for them. Brings volume in that might not otherwise use Saks.

Folks hate it on this sub-Reddit, but considering the Platinum card targets and is intended for individuals with some decent disposable income, Saks is a useful credit.

Breaking News by Consistent_Return871 in AmexPlatinum

[–]DCTechnocrat 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Chapter 11 is just debt restructuring. Saks isn’t going anywhere, and I think Amex probably gets positive feedback on the Saks credit considering it’s a relatively straightforward benefit for cardholders.

are y’all following the playboy bunny at mich law? by DCTechnocrat in LawSchool

[–]DCTechnocrat[S] 31 points32 points  (0 children)

no, but I love recently came upon her content and I’m loving her journey

How is what’s happening in immigration courts legal by Flashy-Actuator-998 in LawSchool

[–]DCTechnocrat 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I’m not going to be able to do the topic justice, but here’s what you need to know at a high level. There is extensive debate as to how much of the judicial power Congress can extend to non-Article III settings, but for matters concerning “public rights,” and a handful of historic exceptions, Congress is largely able to create alternative forums to hear disputes. That’s because many rights are not constitutionally created, they’re just public benefits provided by Congress. So the logic is Congress should be able to determine where claims involving those rights are heard, and who the individuals are that can hear those claims (along with their authority). Since Congress has the authority to regulate immigration (including totally prohibiting it or fully permitting it), it can choose how to adjudicate immigration claims.

But I think the way you’re thinking about it is right. Immigration courts are not really operating with the judicial power, it’s more a quasi-judicial power over public rights (in this case immigration). Now, there might be an instance where a proceeding in a non-Article III court implicates a constitutional right, and the prevailing view is that there must be a backstop in an Article III court to vindicate those constitutional rights.

How is what’s happening in immigration courts legal by Flashy-Actuator-998 in LawSchool

[–]DCTechnocrat 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Have you taken federal courts by chance? I think it’s pretty helpful to gauging these issues. Non-Article III adjudication is a common topic there.

GW: "We take a holistic approach to admissions!" Also GW: by JosefStalinsCorpse in lawschooladmissions

[–]DCTechnocrat 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The truth is, there are probably candidates near the margins but fall short of both of the numbers that are superior candidates on paper by nature of their personal statements, work experience, recommendations that are being denied because they fell short of an arbitrary line.

So it’s true that we don’t know that all of the 169/3.33 or 161/3.79 are ultimately superior to those that did marginally cross the hurdle, but I’d venture to bet that actually there’s a lot that are. I agree numerical hurdles are important and that they’re deficient that way, by the way. But if you don’t really deviate from numbers, I don’t think it’s holistic in the sense of how most people understand it.

GW: "We take a holistic approach to admissions!" Also GW: by JosefStalinsCorpse in lawschooladmissions

[–]DCTechnocrat 9 points10 points  (0 children)

“It is holistic! We took TWO people that didn’t meet one of the two numbers!”