Sunday, April 20, 2025

Reputation, relationships, and law school

One part of law school that has been more complicated to navigate than I expected is the social aspect of it.

I am no stranger to small class sizes or being around the same people everyday, as this was how my entire educational experience from K-12th grade was. However, there is one key difference here: this is professional school. I am surrounded by people who I may have to work with or around for the rest of my legal career.

I am someone who likes to keep a very clear boundary between my work life and my personal life. There are aspects of my life that I firmly believe are not for my colleagues or bosses to know. I have seen the drama that can ensue when boundaries between work and play are crossed, and I have absolutely no interest in being involved with any of it.

This also applies to law school.

At this school, I have a reputation for staying out of the loop. I avoid bar reviews, parties, and most large get-togethers that consist mostly of law students. I am also very private regarding my opinions on other students and with details regarding my personal life in general.

Many people have interpreted my behavior as being rooted in some sort of dislike or hate for other Davis law students.

This could not be further from the truth. I have actually met some really cool people here. Rather, it is me trying to maintain this balance that I have described. I have seen the amount of drama that arises for students who are heavily socially involved and this is just something that I want no parts of. Law school is difficult enough without the social drama.

Drawing these lines is always much easier to do in theory than in reality. Building relationships with people is very important for success and advancement within careers. Additionally, we cannot help who we naturally click with, especially when we are in this close of proximity to each other.

It is almost inevitable that you form at least some relationships with the people that you go to school with and work with.


There have been times that people make comments that upset me or make me uncomfortable. When this occurs, I am extremely careful in how I react. Generally speaking, I am very outspoken and have no problems standing up for myself. However, when surrounded by future colleagues, I cannot always react the way that I would outside of this space.

I have to be very wary of the “angry Black woman” stereotype. This is particularly true when an individual who says something that upsets me is white. If I raise my voice, or show too much emotion, there is a higher likelihood of me being perceived as “aggressive” or “scary” even if I did not instigate the situation.


If the person I have conflict with is someone who I end up working with in the future, my reputation could be damaged before I even get there. I could be perceived as “angry” or “difficult” before getting the opportunity to interact with anyone.

Beyond anger, people who like to gossip could share personal aspects of my life with potential employers and future colleagues.
This could also give potential employers and co-workers the opportunity to view me in an unprofessional light or have perceptions of me based on situations that have nothing to do with my job performance.

Therefore, it is much easier for me to just avoid certain social spaces altogether.

Race matters in regard to perception of emotions and interactions, and I have experienced many micro-aggressions throughout my life that have confirmed this. The rules are not the same for everyone, and

I do not receive the same grace in expressing my frustrations or anger as many of my peers. I have worked too hard to allow any drama to taint the professional reputation that I am building for myself, and distancing myself socially has been the best way for me to do this.

I am a very big believer in the importance of community, which is why I make pouring into my friendships a very large priority in my life. My friendships are everything to me because they are the spaces where I feel the most myself.

Among my friends outside of school, I do not have to police my interactions. I do not have to worry about the whole school finding out about my personal life. I do not have to worry about how my career may be impacted by how they perceive my emotions. I do not have to perform. I can just be me. This is simply not my reality in law school, and that is okay.

This is not to say that I feel as though the friends I have made here would ever do anything to harm my career or share my personal business with future employers/colleagues. However, the presence of that risk –no matter how low–is ultimately what makes me operate with more caution within my relationships here.

I am excited to see all the new connections that this profession will bring me in the future. I also look forward to finally figuring out how to navigate this balance between my professional life and social life.

Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, April 18, 2025

“Big Law” Series: What does the "end" of DEI mean for students and "big law" job prospects? (Part III)

See Part I and Part II.

DEI and Big Law: Benefits of DEI initiatives 

In some ways, the elimination of law firm DEI programs will not significantly impact first-gen students' abilities to get "big law" jobs. Sure, these programs offer students a high-paying job and scholarship. But grades, achievements, and fit have and will continue to take precedence in hiring decisions. As a 2009 LCLD scholar states in his LinkedIn post, “[m]ost employers aren’t really in the business of hiring people who can’t do the work.” However, the elimination of law firm-DEI programs will influence accessibility and retention. 

For example, fewer first-generation students may be encouraged to apply for these spots because they do not hear about potential positions as firms cut their marketing budgets. Even for students who are not selected to participate in these prestigious programs, they get a competitive advantage by talking to law firm recruiters early in the process. Eliminating incentives to apply––like a hefty scholarship––may mean fewer first-gen applicants. Demand for "big law" jobs is also increasing as the Trump administration has eliminated the DOJ Honors program and other government work opportunities. 

Retention measures may also be at risk. Affinity organizations––groups which underrepresented minority individuals can join within firms––often help associates transition into big-law life. Advantages like meeting coworkers your first year versus second, learning the culture of the workplace, or understanding the structure of a law firm are exponentially beneficial to students who are the “first and onlys” in their families; they are, perhaps, lost on illegible students who come from a long line of attorneys or working professionals who can give them the same mentorship they would gain from an extra summer of work. 

First-gen law students will have to overcome many barriers, obstacles, and unknowns to get to law school, let alone to succeed in “big law:” taking the LSAT, completing several law school applications, purchasing suits, participating in "OCI," getting good grades, attending networking events, and more. Accessibility, in my opinion, is not defined as whether the application "door" is open. Accessibility connotes whether interested students are given equal opportunities to set goals; participate meaningfully in school- and workplace-culture; or control their careers.

Law schools should continue to use holistic measures to create a more diverse student population. This diversity is not limited to ethnic or socioeconomic diversity, though. It should be, as Justice O’Connor noted in the majority opinion of Grutter, “focus[ed] on academic ability coupled with a flexible assessment of applicants’ talents, experiences, and potential ‘to contribute to the learning of those around them.’” Id. at 315. The legal field––which, according to the ABA, has long been dominated by white (78% of the profession, 2024), straight (approx. 93% of the profession, 2023), able-bodied (approx. 98% of the profession, 2023) lawyers––is thus served by instituting these diversity measures. As long as financial and informational disparities exist, these DEI programs are justified.


Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, April 15, 2025

“Big Law” Series: What does the "end" of DEI mean for students and "big law" job prospects? (Part II)

Context: DEI initiatives and Equal Protection

Several of my law school courses have explored whether DEI initiatives are legal under the 14th Amendment––the Constitutional requirement to treat all individuals equal. Even if they are legal, do DEI initiatives propel marginalized individuals forward? Or is “‘[d]iversity,’ for all of its devotees, is more a fashionable catchphrase than it is a useful term, especially when something as serious as racial discrimination is at issue,'" as Justice Thomas posed in his concurrence in the 2003 Supreme Court case, Grutter v. Bollinger?

The job market in an evolving “Equal Protection” landscape

President Trump’s cabinet asserts that DEI initiatives are not legal. Several “big law” firms have been the subjects of Executive Orders commanding them to halt their DEI practices, forgo certain pro bono projects, and end relationships with partisan clients. What do the orders mean for first-generation students applying for post-bar jobs? Although many “big law” firms recognize value in these DEI initiatives and are fighting to keep them in place, a growing contingent of big law firms have acquiesced. To avoid an Executive Order, the capitulating firms have promised the Trump administration hundreds of "pro bono" hours worth millions of dollars. Other large law firms have (thus far) remained silent.

As a law student, my news feed is filled with reactions against those firms bowing down to the Trump administration: open letters by associates threatening resignation; "big law" partners initiating focus groups for other partners to act; or data suggesting 1L students applying to jobs are avoiding those firms. The American Bar Association, law school deans, and various law school faculty have also issued statements against the Trump administration's actions. These entities, or members of the entities, also recognize value in recruiting diverse, first-generation students to their firms. They also observe a sizable risk to that goal in eliminating these programs.

So, how does this affect first-generation law students seeking admissions at law schools?

This year is the most competitive year in history for getting into law school. Law school admissions offices often consider a variety of factors––such as GPA, LSAT (law school admissions test) score, undergraduate institution and area of study, and reasons for attending law school––when determining which students to admit and how much financial aid to award them. With DEI programs coming to an end, will law school admissions be impacted? 

In my opinion, they will not be impacted significantly, if at all. Law schools have been afforded wide leeway to institute holistic review of applicants in the admissions process. See Grutter, 539 U.S. at 346. Programs which DEI initiatives may have been useful to “counteract”––like college admission legacy programs––have been largely dismantled. 

In Grutter, then-Chief Justice Rehnquist (joined by Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas) asserted that the University of Michigan Law School’s DEI admissions statistics do not support its stated DEI goals. Id. at 380-84 (Rehnquist, J., dissenting). They argued that “the Law School’s disparate admissions practices with respect to these minority groups demonstrate that its alleged goal . . . is simply a sham.” Id. at 383.  Maybe, as Rehnquist asserted,  DEI programs are "dishonest and dangerous activity . . . [that has] undermin[ed] democratic . . . process[es]." 

Perhaps Rehnquist is right––that the end of these programs means less gaming by prospective law students or “big law” associates who feel invalidated by DEI application questions. There may be less stigma associated with vulnerable students; who are racial or ethnic minorities or low-income, and who may be cloaked with a feeling of unreservedness, a lingering question of: “Was it what I achieved despite my adversity or my diverse perspective that gained me admissions? Or am I merely an ‘aesthetic [that shapes] the Law School[‘s] certain appearance, from the shape of the desks and tables in its classrooms to the color of the students sitting at them[?]’” Grutter, 539 U.S. at n. 3 (Thomas, J., concurring in part); see also an Op-Ed in The Atlantic about this sensation (reflecting on the autobiography Reflections of an Affirmative Action Baby).  

I will delve further into this debate in Part III, which will address whether this may affect first-generation students breaking into “big law” as a first-generation law student at a “big law” firm. 


Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, April 8, 2025

“Big Law” Series: Why do students want "Big Law" jobs? (Part I)

Firms are increasingly pushing the on-campus interview process ("OCI") earlier and earlier. Many DEI-eligible students have had a competitive advantage by applying to the 1L Leadership Council on Legal Diversity ("LCLD") or diversity programs offered by “big law” firms. But the existence of these programs raises the question:  why would students participate in stressful, opaque processes just to work in “big law”? What are the benefits of these programs? Why should firms solicit diverse, first-generation students to apply to their early-access programs? This post will explore what “Big Law” is and why first-generation, and particularly low-income, students might be interested in jobs at a big law firm. Subsequent blog entries will discuss President Trump’s executive orders against law firms and why these orders may be relevant to first-generation or diverse students interested in entering the legal field. 

What is “big law”?

Jobs in "big law"––the colloquial name for the top 100-200 law firms as ranked by American Lawyer––are highly coveted due to the type of work lawyers get to do (often representing titans in a field) and the enormous salary they earn (most "big law" firms have starting salaries of >$200,000). The financial stability, work, and prestige make competition for these jobs intense. I’ll unpack some of the details of what these firms offer in the sections that follow.

A. Financial Stability

For many first-generation students, these jobs are not just prestigious, they promise financial stability, which many first-gen students have not previously enjoyed. 

Law school tuition can be extremely expensive, averaging about $151,000 over three years at ABA accredited schools. Many students go into debt to pay for law school, on top of the debt they have accumulated for  college. A big law salary is typically the most efficient means to pay this debt off.

In addition, as a soon-to-be graduate, I have unveiled many "hidden fees" to becoming a licensed attorney: registration with the California State Bar ($150), registration to take the MPRE (ethics exam) ($160), registration to take the California State Bar Exam ($1,082), California Bar Exam prep course (>$2,800), moral character investigation (>$700), and more. These are all expenses for which my "big law” firm is reimbursing me and, in some cases, fronting. 

B. Work Opportunity & Resources 

Another reason why these jobs are so coveted is that they often provide a strong training ground for students to explore many different types of corporate/transactional law or civil litigation projects. As big law firms often have high billing requirements (e.g., minimum of 1900-2100 billable hours/year, often ~60-80 hours of work a week), they require that associates have strong work ethics. The "high-stakes" training ground signals that lawyers at these firms are detail-oriented, quick witted, and less inclined to make mistakes. This sets the lawyers up for opportunities to lateral into other careers in the future. 

C. Prestige

When I started law school, I was unaware that the legal field wielded prestige to impose and maintain hierarchy. There seem to be myriad ways for law students to be "ranked": judicial clerkshipsT-14 law schoolsLaw ReviewOrder of the Coif, and Order of the Barristers. Yet, data shows that fewer first-gen students are involved in these activities than are their continuing-generation counterparts.

A lawyer’s career can be shaped by how they excelled or the times they did not excel. The legal field can be extremely unforgiving. This puts heightened pressure on students––especially first-generation students––who are unaware of what criteria will be used to evaluate them. As discussed, if first-generation student can break into a “big law” firm, such an opportunity can yield fruitful career opportunities. However, President Trump’s Executive Orders may reduce such opportunities for first-generation students, as will be discussed in Parts II and III

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, February 26, 2025

"And thank goodness he isn't Mexican"

"You'll own nothing. And you'll be happy," is a prediction of the near future made by the World Economic Forum in 2018. This is a phrase that has come to mind more frequently as the world becomes increasingly dominated by subscription services, disposable plastics, and rentals. 

Desperate not to be lifetime renters, my fiancé and I recently purchased a condominium in the Greater Sacramento Area and have since been investing all our free time to the renovation and move-in process. Last weekend, this process involved the construction of a bookshelf and its installation into our living room accent wall (see photos below). To make our home improvement dream a reality, we enlisted the aid of my contractor "friend" (who I'll refer to herein under the pseudonym "Mateo" due to his documentation status).

Green living room accent wall
Green living room accent wall covered by white bookcase

Mateo is a paradox and an enigma, a middle-aged Mexican man with a hardboiled past and an impish sense of humor. Mateo was born in or around the city of Jalisco, Mexico, but with the way he describes it, you'd think he was born into the wild western frontier of the 1890s. In his early years, Mateo courted death numerous times working on neighborhood ranches. He's been kicked by a horse, hung on chicken wire, and has received more than his fair share of cuts and lacerations. I'm convinced his coarse hands are made up of scar tissue more than anything else. Regardless of the threats to his health, Mateo has always been happy to work and earn his living.

Mateo's time in Mexico was eventually cut short when he was forced to leave his pueblo around the age of 17. Alone, and with little money or supplies, Mateo crossed the Mexican-American frontier and survived by taking on odd jobs until he was finally taken in by a contracting company willing to exploit him for him full-time. A few years later, a now 19-year-old Mateo met his now wife while obtaining his GED. They became parents at a young age, an unseen inheritance. One fatherly punch to the jaw, a wedding, and a few years later, Mateo would find himself a respected member of his new family and a successful entrepreneur.

Mateo is an industrious man who values family, hard-work, and durability above all else. He has a very odd form of intelligence that allows him to organize labor, sell his skillset, solve problems and carry out complex renovations while believing with all sincerity and among other things that the world could be flat and that the act of flossing produces cavities. However, there is one odd trait about him I've yet to understand. While he carries great pride in his ancestry, being "hecho en Mexico," he also seems to carry an odd animus against Mexicans.

Recently, his daughter had an intimate courthouse wedding prompted by her now husband's obligation to the military (below, please enjoy a photo of the historic San Francisco courthouse for reference). Later that day, they held a beautiful reception restricted to 50 of their closest loved ones. One by one, her family and friends offered their blessings and shared memories about the bride and groom. When Mateo's turn came, he shared some of the joys and regrets he had accumulated along his life which ultimately played a small part in their union. Notably, he stated that while he was overjoyed by his daughter and her husband, he regretted bringing down his wife's potential in life. He concluded along these lines:

'I am so grateful that [my daughter] did things the right way. They are getting married today not out of responsibility but out of love. And to a great guy. Not like me. And thank goodness he isn't Mexican."

As he delivered that last line, his eyes (along with many others) fell in the direction of his niece's table, at which she sat beside her boyfriend, a relatively tall Mexican man with tanned skin and a wiry frame. After an awkward pause, the microphone and the attention eventually moved on.



Coming back to last weekend, as we drove back to my condo from El Pollo Loco to continue renovating, the topic of immigration and the Trump Administration came up in conversation. Being undocumented himself and a gracious employer to those in positions of need, I assumed he would feel a significant degree of empathy for those targeted by President Trump's authoritarian immigration policies (see, e.g., compulsory immigrant registry, removing sensitive area restrictions on ICE arrests, and contemplating the adoption of a pay-to-win back door for the wealthy into America). Instead, he told me that deportation is simply another consequence of choice.

"If you break the law, you go to jail. If you come in illegally, you get kicked out. You get what you deserve. Why I feel bad because you get what you deserve?"

I was shocked and disappointed, but I had no retort. How can one argue against such a simple, if not heartless, proposition? Even being at risk himself and knowing the collateral harms at stake with each removal, he was able to take the humanity out of the law. 

Mateo's confusing combination of Mexican pride and animosity is unfortunately not an isolated phenomenon. Hispanics and Latinx peoples across the country are shifting towards MAGA ideologies, as evidenced by our most recent national election; and for the life of me, I can't understand why. Mateo's case is especially troubling because, unlike those who voted for Trump this last November and wish to "close the door behind them" as they pursue their American dreams, Mateo "came in through the window."

If this self-destructive trend continues, those like Mateo may just receive the consequences they were willing to have others suffer. If that should come to pass, although he owns nothing, I doubt he'd be happy.


Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, February 18, 2025

Do you even know how smart I am in another language?

"Do you even know how smart I am in Spanish?" 

Gloria is my favorite character in Modern Family, not just because she's funny but because she embodies what many of us, whose first language is not English, feel. I grew up speaking Cantonese and Mandarin with my immigrant parents and never felt embarrassed until I was told at school that my "English was weird."

Just like how Campoverdi, in her memoir, would duck down to "tie her shoelaces" when passing by her school to prevent others from seeing her in her abuelito's old car, I would have my popo (grandma in Chinese) drop me off at the school's back entrance to prevent others from talking to her. I was ashamed that my grandma couldn't speak English to communicate with my teachers and that my parents were always busy working seven days a week. On the other hand, other people's parents were in attendance, helping out at every school function.

Seeing how my family members who couldn't speak fluent English were less respected and struggled to get opportunities, I bought into the idea that achieving the "American Dream" required complete assimilation into American culture, that meant English fluency. From then on, I spoke English whenever possible, even though it isolated me from the rest of my family.

The better my English got, the worse my Cantonese and Mandarin got. The way words are pronounced and the tonal changes in Chinese are drastically different than in English. This drastic difference is true of the written languages too. So, by becoming more fluent in English, I became more and more detached from the Chinese language, my culture, my family, and my identity. For many first and onlys, this is a common struggle because it appears to us that the fastest way to progress in our society is to "play the game right". The end-goal is to be amongst the people who are successful socially and career-wise, so you imitate their way of being to make it easier to get there.

It wasn't until I got to college, an environment much more diverse than the community in which I was raised, that I realized the error in my thinking. Meeting people from different states, countries, and socioeconomic backgrounds helped me learn the value of what makes me different than others. Being multilingual is a blessing in many ways. 

Living in the dorms with two roommates and a packed floor during my first year of college, I had little privacy. However, I could speak privately to my family in Chinese without having to leave the room. In job interviews, I can leverage my ability to connect with certain communities in our primary language. At restaurants, I can connect to servers and show them my appreciation for their food. 

Through these experiences, I got in touch with my identity as a Chinese-American again. However, something that still stumps me to this day is how certain languages and accents are more respected and valued. Despite a couple of my high school friends struggling with speaking broken English, they didn't face these same struggles. 

A recent conversation with a law school friend made me more curious about this accent and language preference phenomenon. We talked about how certain languages and accents have more positive connotations, like sounding more educated. For example, we have noticed that when someone speaks with a British accent, they are often perceived to be smarter or more attractive. When our friends spoke French, Italian, or other romance languages, their bilingualism was considered very admirable. 

Yet, I've been told in college to steer clear of certain professors with Indian accents, not because it's hard to understand the concepts they're teaching but because it's hard to understand what they're saying in general. This seems to be a common trend, not just in the United States. The stark differences in our experiences with those who speak in highly regarded accents or languages in American society are fascinating. I often hear about and see privilege in the context of being white, conventionally attractive, and wealthy, but I think this accent and language preference phenomenon is also notable.

I'm sure there are many underlying explanations, but what stands out most to me is that people like accents, languages, and people who are more similar to them, but just different enough. Certain accents and languages are associated with disadvantaged and low-prestige minority groups and are less "standard", and therefore viewed less positively. This makes them vulnerable to negative bias. For many first and onlys, this poses an additional challenge, along with all the other ones, to navigate.

Yet, we must not be discouraged because we need to remember that, despite our unique and different identities being a source of struggles, they're also what make us strong and resilient. They are what motivates our hard work. So even if others don't know how "smart we are in Spanish," it doesn't matter because we, ourselves, know our capabilities. 

Labels: , , , , ,

Saturday, February 8, 2025

Looking through the glass window: the first-generation experience

I am a first-generation law student. Technically, I wasn’t a first-generation college student as my mom attended college and nursing school online when I was a kid, and my dad earned his degree just a few years ago. But in many ways, I still shared the first-generation experience.

Both of my parents pursued their education later in life after I was born. My mom juggled nursing school while raising three kids, often on her own while my dad was deployed with the U.S. Army. My dad, too, worked tirelessly to build a career, and just last year, he was promoted to Sergeant Major while simultaneously earning his master’s degree. Watching them push forward, despite the odds, left a lasting impact on me.

My parents were teen parents. College and careers weren’t something they had been raised to think about and they were the least of their parents’ worries. But they were smart students, great athletes, and heavily involved in extracurriculars. They practically raised themselves before raising three kids and eventually, a fourth, born 11 years later in 2016.

They broke generational cycles: poverty, alcoholism, and the expectation of staying in the same place. But breaking cycles isn’t just about moving forward; it often comes with hard choices. Both of my parents are Native American from different tribes, and they met at a powwow. Being Native comes with deep ties to the land, community, and traditions. 

But as my parents built a better life for themselves, they moved farther from their reservations and the people they grew up with. Their success wasn’t always celebrated with some family members seeing their new lifestyle as my parents thinking they were “better” now that they had financial stability. They were often asked for money, as if they owed it. But when they were teenagers, pregnant and struggling, no one was there to guide them. No one told them what was best for their future. They had to figure it out on their own.

In First Gen: A Memoir, Alejandra Campoverdi talks about those referred to as “First and Only” defined as the first or only person in their community to cross a significant threshold. But with that comes what she calls the Trailblazer Toll. One part of that toll is breakaway guilt that develops with the feeling of having to prove your family’s sacrifices were worth it while grappling with the reality of having more financial security than your loved ones.

This post by AKJ discusses breakaway guilt and the trailblazer toll in more detail. 

I felt that tension growing up watching as my parents created a future they never had, while also seeing the weight they carried because of it. Now, as a first-generation law student, I carry that same drive. My parents always believed in my future, and college was always part of the plan. 

But they couldn’t provide much guidance on the hidden curriculum—the unwritten rules of higher education. They didn’t know about applications, campus life, or preparing for in-person classes. I like many first gen students learned those things from TV shows, movies, online research, and the occasional tip from a friend’s parent who had been to college. My mom only considered college because her wealthier friends were encouraged to apply. Without that push, she may have never pursued nursing.

This post by SC goes into depth on the struggles often faced by first gens new to a college environment. 

I had that encouragement, but in many ways, I felt like I was looking through a glass window—seeing the possibilities but unsure how to reach them. The first-generation experience doesn’t disappear in one generation. Even as one generation makes it better for the next, the effects linger.
Campoverdi notes that “there are thousands of people in each of our family lineages, and their emotional experiences leave a mark on us.”

 As a Native American, I often reflect on my ancestors and the trauma they endured. My great-grandmother and great-aunties survived residential boarding schools. That history isn’t distant, it echoes through my family. Progress beyond the reservation is difficult to imagine for many in my tribe because, for so long, the outside world was the enemy. That generational trauma still shapes us.

Campoverdi describes how being a “First and Only” means being forced to survive, and if you are good at surviving, the gap between where you came from and where you are now can feel even larger. But she also describes first-gens as the bridge—stretched from where we come from to where we hope to arrive. In many ways, my parents built that bridge for me.

I like to think one day someone else looking through the glass window won’t feel lost because I’ll be there to give them the answers I once searched for. And I like to think I will continue to create a path on the bridge.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, October 31, 2023

Stick to the status quo

When pursuing your career, should you chase after the far-fetched dream, or simply stick to the status quo? The students at East High in Disney’s High School Musical would wholeheartedly agree to sticking with the status quo. But what does that mean for an Asian American studying law?

In 2021, the number of Asian American lawyers comprised 4.7% of all lawyers nationwide. While this may seem small, Asian Americans were still the largest minority group at major law firms making up approximately 8%. However, Asian Americans have the highest attrition rate, comprising 10.4% of all attorneys who left their firms in 2019. Is this reflective of my own future where I join a firm only to eventually leave?

In 2022, Asian Americans made up 36.4% of all software developers, 34.1% of all computer hardware engineers, and 41.1% of all medical scientists in the nation. I have a mechanical engineering degree and could have been a part of the 14.9% of Asian Americans in that occupational field. Instead, I decided to pursue higher education, not in graduate degree engineering but in law. What prompted this choice was simply that I did not enjoy the work I would have to do if I had to build a career in engineering. But I was not sure what else to do. It only took one person to convince me to try and go to law school.

A majority of Asian American law students were motivated to attend law school in order to develop a satisfying career. In recent years, more and more students started to attend in order to change or improve society. I can see this amongst my peers, the determination to help change underprivileged lives and become a louder voice for those people. However, I'm here because of my parents.

My career path has been molded not by my own goals and ambitions, but those of others, namely my parents. All my parents want for me is to be successful, but their definition of success is not by a measurement of happiness but of economic class. The idea is to make enough money now in order to retire and have fun later, whenever that "later" may be. To them, being a lawyer means that I will be able to make enough money to not have any financial worries, but it feels as though I am a hollow shell, being filled by their own aspirations.

My parents tell me stories of when they first immigrated to the United States. They saved money from working office jobs in South Korea, then made the move once they decided they had enough. My parents first came to Los Angeles, California, and proceeded to use all their savings within 6 months. Only then did their struggle begin.

I know my parents want the best for me. To not have to go through what they did, scrambling to make money so they can pay rent and feed themselves. However, my own dreams were sacrificed in the process. I was unable to attend art school, I was unable to focus on baking, I was unable to pursue what made me happy. 

My dream is to open my own bakery, and I am determined to achieve this dream. But for now, I'll be sticking to the status quo.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, November 8, 2022

Ideologues, intellectual laziness, and the perils of a compassionless society

About a decade and a half ago I moved to Southern California to attend college. I was late to submit my enrollment paperwork so I did not receive a spot in the dorms. Instead, my mom and I travelled to the area a couple weeks before classes started in order to search for rooms to rent in shared homes and apartments. I sourced rooms on Craigslist while my mom used a low-key website tailored to the South Asian community.

I vividly remember visiting one of the homes that she found. She was excited. It ostensibly met all the requirements—it was close to campus, clean, furnished, private (I would have my own room and bathroom), affordable, and located in the home of a nice family (It was as if my mom was a long lost best friend of the mother of the household). My mom was confident that our search was over. This was the place she wanted me to stay, at least for the first semester.

Once we left the house, however, I immediately rejected the idea of living there. Why? Well, as I entered the front door of the home, I noticed a small piece of Arabic calligraphy hanging on the wall. It said “Allah”. I didn’t know how to read Arabic, but I knew what that sign said and meant. They were Muslim.

What was it about me that permitted such a detestable reason for not living in that home to emanate from my heart? Was I really prejudiced against an entire group of people based upon their faith? To this day, I am not sure why I felt the way that I did—or whether I didn’t want to stay in that home for a different reason and simply used their religion as an excuse. I had never been negatively affected by any Muslim (not that such a history would have justified such contempt). Quite the contrary, despite growing up in a Hindu family, I spent much time with a Muslim auntie and her children who cared for me at home after school while my mom worked. I only have positive memories about that noble family.

If I had to pinpoint my animosity towards Muslims to something, I would suggest that it may have stemmed in part from visiting my family in India as a young child. There I once heard (I don’t know when or from whom) that it is not acceptable to use any piece of cutlery if a Muslim had used it before. I also remember learning to wash myself in a way that was distinctly different than the way Muslims did (Muslims have a specific way and order of washing their limbs as part of their ritual ablution). But I also attended middle school in a relatively politically conservative county during and in the aftermath of 9/11 so who knows what clips and chattering I was exposed to about “uncivilized” Saudis and Iraqis. Or, maybe I was influenced by being called a “sand (n-word)” in high school, not having ever heard the term before. Perhaps, out of shame, I tried to distance myself from anything “Middle Eastern,” leaning into the Indian American role as a “model minority.”

Nonetheless my anti-Muslim sentiment continued in college where I was wary of the Muslim Student Association on campus. It is remarkable to me know that I once sent an email to a student group requesting that I be removed from the list serve because that group was holding a joint event with the Muslim Student Association.

Fast forward a few years, and I found myself in a town outside of Cairo ready to recognize Islam as my own faith. What happened? God knows best.

My path to recognizing Islam as my faith is a story too long for this post. But I share this background to highlight the pernicious evil of a troubling trend that I have perceived in the classrooms of King Hall: the justification of gross generalizations when the ends are justified by one's ideological commitments.

One fundamental problem that I suffered is what Adam Kirk Edgerton calls “intellectual laziness,” which entails the practices of “gross generalizations, oversimplification, and evidence-free claims.”

Interestingly, Edgerton calls out the progressive academic community for engaging in such intellectual laziness:

The default stance in today’s academy is to conflate a whole host of issues — white resentment, gun worship, religious fundamentalism, racism — and apply that uniformly to millions of people. It is far easier to blame our current situation on faceless, ignorant masses elsewhere than to consider how often we in academe practice what we claim to abhor — gross generalizations, oversimplification, and evidence-free claims — against broad swaths of the country.

In my experience, he is spot on.

In particular, progressive folks in the academic setting are able to get away with such shoddy analysis when it is directed against groups that are ostensibly outside the categorization of “oppressed,” (based upon the Marxist oppressed-oppressor dichotomy) such as white people, Christians, and Catholics. Hence, gross generalizations of these groups are simply justified. One may even ponder if this is a natural consequence of Ibram Kendi’s proclamation that the solution to racist discrimination is anti-racist discrimination.

In any case, we must call out intellectual laziness regardless of whom it is levied against since its results are catastrophic.

Take for example, Edgerton’s anecdote about his experience discussing the tragic Las Vegas shooting with a student who was disturbingly numb to the suffering of those who were murdered. The student “reasoned” about the victims who died: “If they were attending a country-music concert, they must have voted for Trump, which meant they loved guns and thus deserved death.” Surprisingly, Edgerton points out that this student’s perspective is not unique and extends to faculty members as well: 

It’s an extreme example of our discourse of dehumanization — a vivid one in my memory. But it isn’t rare for me to hear similar assumptions expressed by students or faculty members, often without the critical self-reflection. 

As a student at one of the most progressive law schools in the country that also touts itself as being one of the most "diverse" law schools, Edgerton’s anecdote doesn’t strike me as the least bit surprising.

I used to believe the reason for such awful takes is the erosion of American education, perhaps due to the the effective disappearance of the trivium (grammar, logic, and rhetoric) in K-12 curriculums. This is especially so since it is increasingly common to believe that grammar is inherently a tool of oppression (especially within the same Marxist circles that operate under the oppressed-oppressor dichotomy). However, I believe there is something else that is contributing to the extreme polarization that begets the deluded justification of intellectual laziness. It pertains to the hardening of hearts, to take a phrase from the Quran. A hardened heart is one that is devoid of mercy and compassion. I truly wonder whether we have become so spiritually void that we simply cannot recognize and appreciate the common humanity in people? I mean, individual, real human beings with names—not collective groups based upon physiognomy and the likes.

El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (Malcolm X) spent over a decade believing and proclaiming that “the white man is the devil!” Yet, though he recognized that there was a brutal reality to the racism of his time that led to such a belief, he ultimately denounced it. Anyone who has studied Malcom X recognizes that his life was one of transformations. He was a transformative human being who, as he admits, always kept an open mind even when proclaiming bold statements with utmost confidence. Malcolm’s ultimate, and arguably most important, transformation was a spiritual one. And it was through this he began to view the world through the lens of mercy and compassion.

In Mecca, upon performing the Muslim pilgrimage of Hajj, Malcolm X wrote a letter home reflecting upon his otherworldly experience with people from all sorts of backgrounds. He says in his autobiography:

I knew that when my letter became public knowledge back in America, many would be astounded—loved ones, friends, and enemies alike. And no less astounded would be millions whom I did not know—who had gained during my twelve years with Elijah Muhammad a ‘hate’ image of Malcolm X.

Even I was myself astounded. But there was precedent in my life for this letter. My whole life had been a chronology of—changes.

Here is what I wrote . . . from my heart:

"Never have I witnessed such sincere hospitality and the overwhelming spirit of true brotherhood as is practiced by people of all colors and races here in this Ancient Holy Land, the home of Abraham, Muhammad, and all the other prophets of the Holy Scriptures. For the past week, I have been utterly speechless and spellbound by the graciousness I see displayed all around me by people of all colors.

There were tens of thousands of pilgrims, from all over the world. They were of all colors, from blue-eyed blonds to black-skinned Africans. But we were all participating in the same ritual, displaying a spirit of unity and brotherhood that my experiences in America had led me to believe never could exist between the white and the non-white.

America needs to understand Islam, because this is the one religion that erases from its society the race problem. Throughout my travels in the Muslim world, I have met, talked to, and even eaten with people who in America would have been considered ‘white’—but the ‘white’ attitude was removed from their minds by the religion of Islam. I have never before seen sincere and true brotherhood practiced by all colors together, irrespective of their color.

You may be shocked by these words coming from me. But on this pilgrimage, what I have seen, and experienced, has forced me to re-arrange much of my thought-patterns previously held, and to toss aside some of my previous conclusions. This was not too difficult for me. Despite my firm convictions, I have always kept an open mind, which is necessary to the flexibility that must go hand in hand with every form of intelligent search for truth.

During the past eleven days here in the Muslim world, I have eaten from the same plate, drunk from the same glass, and slept in the same bed (or on the same rug)—while praying to the same God—with fellow Muslims, whose eyes were the bluest of blue, whose hair was the blondest of blond, and whose skin was the whitest of white. And in the words and in the actions and in the deeds of the "white" Muslims, I felt the same sincerity that I felt among the black African Muslims of Nigeria, Sudan, and Ghana.'

Later in the book, Malcolm X describes how his newfound understanding and recognition of God practically changed his own approach and experiences as a human being interacting with other human beings:

True Islam taught me that it takes all of the religious, political, economic, psychological, and racial ingredients, or characteristics, to make the Human Family and the Human Society complete.

Since I learned the truth in Mecca, my dearest friends have come to include all kinds—some Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, agnostics, and even atheists! I have friends who are called capitalists, Socialists, and Communists! Some of my friends are moderates, conservatives, extremists—some are even Uncle Toms! My friends today are black, brown, red, yellow, and white!

Unfortunately, we have forgotten Malcolm. Instead, we fall peril to justifying gross generalizations when they conform to our ideologies. Yet when we see the same base reasoning deployed against our ideologies, we cry foul.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, November 6, 2022

A personal reflection on structural racism (Part 1)

On my first day of law school I woke up early to perfect my hair, makeup, and outfit (that no one would even see because we were on zoom). I was so excited to see the faces of my section mates. I knew that I would stick with these people for the entirety of the school year. Since I did not already know anyone who was a law student, I realized these were the people who I would lean on for all of the upcoming struggles of 1L year. I logged onto my first class's zoom meeting and eagerly began scrolling through the faces of Martin Luther King Hall's Class of 2023 Section D. To my surprise, I was the only Black person in my entire section at King Hall.

Since then, I have been the only Black student in more courses than those in which I have not been. I have literally never been in a more non-black space in my life than here at King Hall. This reality has greatly shifted my view on the world.

This isn't my first time at a predominately white institution (PWI). However, in undergrad I was surrounded by Black people in both of my majors in African-American Studies and sociology. By choosing these two majors, I isolated myself from the statistical reality that only 5% of the student body was the same race as me. 

I remember feeling slightly uneasy during my first weeks of general education classes. Going from my high school that is 84% minority to a sea of white faces will do that to anyone. As Michelle Obama states in Becoming, when she recounted her time at Princeton, "It takes energy to be the only black person in a lecture hall...". After I found my people, however, I honestly tuned out the white sea. If anything, I started seeing them as the minority because I didn't know more than a couple dozen of their names whereas I knew almost every Black person on campus. I would never have guessed these names made up only 5% of the school's population because they were the entire institution to me.

At law school, however, there is no escaping the white sea. It's everywhere. Especially during the confines of zoom school during my 1L year. This has made me think long and hard about the world around me, specifically about this country's commitment to white supremacy. In No, I Won't Stop Saying "White Supremacy," Robin Diangelo gives the sociologist's definition of white supremacy as "...a highly descriptive term for the culture we live in; a culture which positions white people and all that is associated with them (whiteness) as ideal." 

I first learned about structural racism as an Af-Am major. We discussed redlining and I thought back to my hometown, Merced, California. In Merced, the south side of the city is majority black and brown. Ironically, Martin Luther King, Jr. Way splits Merced into the nice side of town and the hood. One of my UCLA professor's gave us the link to a website that allowed us to enter the name of a city to see how it was once redlined. It showed an almost exact replica of the racial makeup of Merced till this day. 

While discussing redlining, we learned about the different ways it impacted minority communities. The obvious way is the crippling effect it had on these communities' ability to generate generational wealth through buying, owning, and passing down real estate. I thought back to my family moving almost every year while I was growing up; we had to do that after our lease was up. This never stuck me as odd because a lot of people around me also moved a lot. I had no clue of the privilege it is to grow up in the same home and neighborhood throughout your childhood, and have that home passed down through generations. 

We then learned of environmental racism. I thought of mornings, when my brothers, who grew up with debilitating asthma, always showered first so they had enough time to take their thirty-minute-long breathing treatments before we left for school. 

We learned about food desserts and zoning laws. I thought about how I did not know what an organic food was until I moved to Westwood, Los Angeles because there were no healthy grocery stores in or near my neighborhood where I grew up. I also thought about the plethora of liquor stores in walking distance from wherever I lived. While attending a Merced City Council meeting I learned that our city council did not allow liquor stores to be zoned on the north side of town because they "interfered with the quality of life." This same quality of life was not maintained for those of us who lived on the other side of the railroad tracks. 

We learned about how property taxes fund public schools at the local level. Because property values in different areas are vastly different, the tax revenues that come from different neighborhoods are also vastly different. This creates thousands and thousands of dollars in funding gaps per student. I thought back to high school sporting events when we traveled to the nearby suburb of Turlock. We came to refer to the schools there as Beverly Hills academies because of the glaring differences in resources. They had nicely architected, two-story, brick buildings with fountains in front. Our campus was riddled with portable classrooms and chipped paint. They had huge, freshly painted gymnasiums and football stadiums on campus. Our home games were played at Merced Junior College because we did not have our own facilities.

This is a small portion of a long list of different ways structural racism has influenced the world around me. My undergraduate education opened my eyes to most of this while fueling my long-standing desire to become a lawyer. Growing up, I already felt like the world around me was racist. I actually used to believe that there was just a lot of racist individuals who made individual decisions over and over again that eventually made the world the way it is. I had no clue that what I was really experiencing were racist laws, racist structures, and racist policies. 

My younger siblings and I at my undergraduate graduation

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, October 5, 2022

Liberal Arts to Liberate the Mind: Why Every First-Generation Student Ought to Consider a Traditional Liberal Arts Degree

When I reflect on my experience applying to colleges as a high school student, I marvel at my family’s dearth of “insider information” in comparison to others. I now realize how some parents helped their children publish op-ed articles in the local newspaper, enroll in local college classes while still in high school, or guide them through countless science-related competitions. I am happy for these folks. Their kids ended up at MIT, Stanford, and the likes, and they earned it.
But I envy a different sort of insider information. That of families who realized the importance of a liberal arts education.

I didn’t know what a liberal arts college was when I submitted my applications to universities. I thought that real colleges were called “universities,” and that they were predominately research institutions that were featured in the US News rankings for “National Universities”. I paid no attention to the other list of top colleges produced by the same publisher: “National Liberal Arts Colleges”.

Maybe I missed this because of my immigrant background—I only imagined college as a means for acquiring a good career, which at that time probably meant becoming a doctor, lawyer, engineer, or someone who works in “finance”. The notion of education as a means to a job
a high paying jobis a relatively modern phenomenon, and one that has enraptured much of the South Asian immigrant community. Perhaps the roots of this, in my community at least, stems from strategic measures by British colonists to erase institutions of traditional learning (including madrasas steeped in what is now called the Islamic liberal arts) in India, replacing them with English-standard schools meant to train individuals to acquire “good jobs” in the colonial administration. (See John Walbridge, God and Logic in Islam: The Caliphate of Reason, 157-169, Cambridge University Press (2013)).

So, what is a liberal arts education, and why is it important? The American philosopher Mortimer Adler says:

The liberal arts are traditionally intended to develop the faculties of the human mind, those powers of intelligence and imagination without which no intellectual work can be accomplished. Liberal education is not tied to certain academic subjects, such as philosophy, history, literature, music, art, and other so-called "humanities." In the liberal-arts tradition, scientific disciplines, such as mathematics and physics, are considered equally liberal, that is, equally able to develop the powers of the mind.

The liberal-arts tradition goes back to the medieval curriculum. It consisted of two parts. The first part, trivium, comprised grammar, rhetoric, and logic. It taught the arts of reading and writing, of listening and speaking, and of sound thinking. The other part, the quadivium, consisted of arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music (not audible music, but music conceived as a mathematical science). It taught the arts of observation, calculation, and measurement, how to apprehend the quantitative aspect of things. Nowadays, of course, we would add many more sciences, natural and social. This is just what has been done in the various modern attempts to renew liberal education.

More importantly, Adler explains that the aim of a liberal arts education is to “develop free human beings who know how to use their minds and are able to think for themselves.” 
And in doing so, “[A liberal arts education] produces citizens who can exercise their political liberty responsibly. It develops cultivated persons who can use their leisure fruitfully. It is an education for all free men, whether they intend to be scientists or not.”

Finally, Adler concludes: “Our educational problem is how to produce free men, not hordes of uncultivated, trained technicians.” 

Interestingly, there is an argument for the liberal arts as a "social justice" tool to uplift those who face unparalleled, and even structural, challenges. Dr. Anika Prather and Dr. Angel Adams Parham argue in their recently published book, The Black Intellectual Tradition: Reading Freedom in Classical Literature, that the power of a classical liberal arts education is such that it is a tool to even “liberate the black mind.” 

This should be of no surprise to folks who have studied the great black intellectuals of the civil rights movement. 

The classical liberal arts undoubtedly influenced Dr. King. He was a master of the Western intellectual tradition. The syllabus for a seminar course he taught at Morehouse College would be controversial in the eyes of the contemporary “woke” culture at progressive institutions. It commences with writings from Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas, and continues chronologically with Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, Bentham, and John Stuart Mill—all dead white men, though with flaws in their lives and thoughts, nonetheless vital in their roles in the quest for justice and the good life.




Dr. King didn’t just teach these works, he internalized them. His Letter from a Birmingham Jail is replete with references to Socrates and verbatim quotations (from memory) from Aquinas, Augustine, and other great thinkers from the Western canon.

Roosevelt Montás, a senior lecturer at Columbia University, eloquently concludes of Dr. King’s relationship with the classical liberal arts and its relationship to our time:
King had internalised the liberatory history of ideas and debates he taught. For him, the Morehouse syllabus traced “the moral arc of the universe”, which he believed “bends towards justice”. Faced with ideological polarisation that threatens the foundations of liberal democracy, it behoves us to recover the political tradition embodied in King’s syllabus. It represents the connective tissue of our politics, the discursive bridges by which we may work out solutions to our thorniest problems. We must challenge the simplistic mentality that casts this tradition as irredeemably patriarchal, white, and elitist, and which, by doing so, makes students more provincial and less effective actors for social change. It is precisely because the tradition reflects an unfolding struggle for justice that it provides us with potent sources of argument, strategy and vision for addressing the inequalities and abuses that persist in our society. 
Unfortunately, for me, I realized this late. But I believed so strongly in the importance of a liberal arts education that I returned to college in my mid 20s to complete a second four-year bachelor's degree at a small liberal arts college. Despite the pressures to go to college to earn a degree that simply results in a good-paying job, I urge young students to explore the liberal arts, and to enter into the fascinating and immensely important realm of the life of the mind. 
 

Labels: , , , , , , ,