Thursday, August 25, 2011

Profiles in Academic Douchebaggery: Brian Leiter, Sissy and “Professor” at University of Chicago Law School

Leiter Lashes Out, Like a Cornered Cat, Against LawProf:

"ScamProf is the failed academic who has done almost no scholarly work in the last decade, teaches the same courses and seminars year in and year out, and spends his time trying to attract public attention, sometimes under his own name, this time anonymously. These are important facts about ScamProf, since he is indeed scamming his students and his state, and his initial posts were tantamount to a confession that he's not doing his job. His colleagues, in any case, now know who he is, and are quite understandably angry, since the reckless genearlizations are naturally read as commentary on them."

Yes, because producing law review articles entitled “The Radicalism of Legal Positivism” and “The End of Empire: Dworkin and Jurisprudence in the Twenty-first Century” is extremely helpful in training people on how to practice law, right?!?! For clarification, what are "genearlizations"? Douchebag continues:

"ADDENDUM: A colleague from Penn writes:

I don't know who this jerk is, but I appreciate you calling him out. I clicked through to his posts and felt the urge to throw something. I bust my butt preparing for class and educating myself deeply in my fields (and, indeed, refuse to teach any class in which I don't consider myself highly qualified), and students clearly understand and appreciate those efforts, but this kind of recklessly expressed cynicism can undermine an enormous amount of good work in the creation of a cooperative and engaged learning environment."

Apparently, the anonymous "educator" at Penn thinks that it is cowardly to post under a pseudonym when pointing out the flaws of the law school industrial complex. Conversely, it must be courageous for one to "bravely" defend this sick, depraved industry, right?!?! By the way, tell your colleague to calm down from his tantrum. It is beyond embarrassing how sensitive you academics are, at the slightest criticism leveled at the Ivory Tower. Yes, readers and prospective law students: these are the pansies who are entrusted to "teaching" the next generation of lawyers.

"ANOTHER: A colleague at Maryland writes: "Scamprof is easily explained by the well known proverb that 'a thief thinks everyone steals.' Don’t let up on him." By the way, several readers tell me that ScamProf moderates comments, and will not approve those that are too critical."

Does your colleague catch the irony of emailing this drivel to a blog author who DOES NOT ALLOW blog comments?!?! Or is the academic too busy drafting his or her next law review article on the historical context and underlying currents of the Rule Against Perpetuities?

Did this "scholar" criticize former dean Karen Rothenberg, of the University of Maryland Sewer of Law, when she received $410K in bonus loot - on top of her annual $360K salary?! Eventually, this esteemed educator returned the money. Did your colleague praise Rothenberg's “responsible” actions? Before we cite to her as a beacon of ethics, let's keep in mind that this was in response to a legislative audit and tons of negative press. As you can see, state university system officials asked her to return the money.

Ass Hat's History of Abusing Others Online:

"VanDyke's temerity in giving prime real estate in one of America's most respected legal publications to Beckwith's work was particularly galling to Brian Leiter. Intelligent design? Francis Beckwith? In the Harvard Law Review? It was all too much for Leiter, which may be why he risked his prestige to make this petty, but deadly serious attack on VanDyke:

The author of this incompetent book note . . . is one Lawrence VanDyke, a student editor of the Review. Mr. VanDyke may yet have a fine career as a lawyer, but I trust he has no intention of entering law teaching: scholarly fraud is, I fear, an inauspicious beginning for an aspiring law teacher. And let none of the many law professors who are readers of this site be mistaken: Mr. VanDyke has perpetrated a scholarly fraud, one that may have political and pedagogical consequences."
[Emphasis mine]

Wow! That is “tough” nerd talk, huh? By the way, I’m certain that Lawrence VanDyke could knock you out in 60 seconds, weakling. You should take up boxing, so that you can gain a genuine taste for fierce competition. My guess is that you wouldn't last one full round with the majority of moderately healthy men under the age of 65.

“Anyway Burton wrote a post attacking Leiter's blogsphere conduct, Burton trying to give Leiter a taste of his own medicine by using an especially harsh and insulting tone. Leiter responded in the comments section by "outing" his former friend. And an interesting dialogue continued from there.”

If the allegation above is true, then you should seek counseling.

How Practicing Lawyers View the Urchin:

“Professor Leiter responds to this post with the very first comment - and doesn't that speak volumes about what may be an unhealthy narcissism. Leiter's comment is:

Try "former" friend. What happened to you, Steve? Does your ex, Scott--who was always the nice one--know that you've sunk to this level?

I always admired your philosophical acumen, and your contrarian views in aesthetics, and think it a travesty of our profession that you did not secure permanent employment in it.

Ooooh! Meeow! Claw-claw, scratch, scratch.

In case you missed the innuendo, Burton is gay! Quick run him off the sacred premises of conservative thought, which must not be sullied by carnal sin....”

“'[LawProf] was far more popular with practicing lawyers and law students, but then, we don't get a law school paycheck or judge our manhood by the number of articles published in law reviews.”

Does anyone see Leiter measuring up as a man, in terms of looks, character or physical strength?!

Conclusion: Smearing someone's reputation is a common tactic for those who have no case and no argument. I like beating down my opponents relentlessly with facts, charts, graphs, stats, and industry statements - before I take a few shots at them. See the difference, philosopher?! Now, continue with your riveting insights on the (useless) themes of utilitarianism and existentialism. In the end, this douche feels that his little academic presentations at Joseph Raz’s Legal Philosophy Seminar are more important than training lawyers.


  1. If Leiter thinks Jim-dandy, rootin-tootin, scholarly work is all so important at a Law School, he will be glad to know that back when I was at Touro Law School, I had a Jurisprudence easy elective class with material about Witchcraft and feminism blah blah thrown in.

    I feel that some of the material was an example of some of the dubious Law chool quasi-scholarship material that Campos discussed in one of his recent posts.

    Indeed! That old Jurisprudence class has proved to be the bane of my existence, for a curse of deep, deep Student Loan usurious debt has been placed on my life.

    Every man is evil, Yes!
    Every man a Liar
    and unashamed, with wicked tongues
    sing in the black soul choir

  2. It looks like Leiter spends too much time online, and writing law reviews no one reads. How does writing a bunch of garbage and that's what all this amounts to help people file a simple motion?

  3. Nando,

    Great post - a home run. I had never followed Professor Leiter until his shamful and cowardly attacks on Professor Campos. How this guy was able to spread such venom and attempt to ruin lives for so long without scrutiny is mind boggling.

    Not to get into an armchair diagnosis, but any plain reading of Leiter's online attacks suggests that he suffers from a mental illness. I do not say this lightly. There is something profoundly troubling about the obsessive nature of his attacks, and the frequency and viciousness of his diatribes.

    I too find the fact that he doesn't allow comments on his blog all too ironic.

    Professor Leiter obviously needs some type of help/intervention. I feel bad for him. I've known others with his tendencies and from my experience, they really can't help how they act and don't realize how their actions are perceived.

    Here is an amazing link that provides a glimpse of Professor Leiter's obsessive, narcissistic and troubling behavior. He searched his own name on a website critical of him no less than 14 times in two weeks. Look at some of the deeply disturbing term searches that were conducted from his IP address. I don't what diagnosis in the DSM-IV this type of behavior falls under, but one of the diagnoses is clearly appropriate.

  4. LeiTTTer is a parasite who feeds off student loan cash at the expense of hapless lemmings. He publishes useless rankings like "Top 25 Law Schools for Faculty Scholarly Impact"

    This fraud has never practiced law. Not even for one day. Take a look at his resume:

    Held academic positions at:

    University of Chicago Law School
    The University of Texas at Austin
    University of San Diego
    Oxford University
    University of Paris X, Nanterre
    University College London
    Yale University
    University of California

    Held Legal Positions at:


    LeiTTTer is arrogant beyond belief. He thinks he should be paid on the same level as medical school professors. Apparently his lectures on moral philosophy and other pseudo-scientific babble are as valuable as cancer research. The sad thing is, this blowhard is not the exception in the legal "academy," he is the norm. Most "professors" only care about their own paychecks, and could not care less about the plight of their students.

  5. It's on like Donkey Kong!!

  6. "I like beating down my opponents relentlessly with facts, charts, graphs, stats, and industry statements - before I take a few shots at them"

    Not really Nando. You usually call someone a "vile piece of trash," "cockroach" or say that they live in their parents' basement before you bring out your facts on them.

  7. Christopher Nolan should give Leiter a monocle and cast him as the next Batman villain, i.e., the Penguin. Leiter has the baldness, the bad crooked and yellow teeth along with a depraved smile.

  8. Is this real? Absolutely amazing. He needs to get punched in the middle of his butter yellow teeth.

  9. How does this ugly fuck get so much money? Seriously, what the fuck does this piece of shit contribute to our American society? And you wonder why our country is dying?

    Down with ugly old geezers. They've ruined this country for long enough.

  10. Nan-doo-doo is at it again. No argument here, just stupid, unsupported nan-doo-doo ego. Physical stature is more important than intelligence? Yeah, the Koch brothers and Warren Buffet are so physically tough, aren't they?

    Let me add another word to my nan-doo-doo description (it goes along with: hypocrite; self-important; and coward): bully. Nan-doo-doo is a hypocritical, self-important, cowardly bully.

    And so you know, I am not "anal vapor" or "linden guy" and I don't care about them. I've read enough of these entries to know they're all just copy-pasta text, they have nothing unique or interesting to say, and nan-doo-doo doesn't have the experience to write most of them. He only took out $38K in loans and then didn't take the bar. You fans get that he decided not to be a lawyer on his own, right? He never took the bar = he'll never be a lawyer. Why not take it? Because he's too stupid to pass, would be my guess. So, he's dumb, he got a chance, blew it (what was that GPA, nan-doo-doo? I'll bet it was pretty crappy), and then blamed his school for all his woes. Then, he starts this piece of crap blog and pretends he has some stake in the whole game. Ego trip. Simple.

    Something interesting may happen here, but not just yet. Wait for it for a bit. And remember, it's all for the lulz.

  11. "To the vile, piece of rotting trash who posted at 12:24...Listen bitch, I know you're posting from you mother's basement and you have no girlfriend..."

    That's how Nando's response will probably begin. Nando is a hypocrite; he calls out law professors who verbally attack others, but does the same thing to his readers who dare to disagree with him.

    Nando is a quitter, plain and simple. He knew it was going to be tough after graduate, and he gave up. I've talked to lawyers of all ages, whom have graduated in recessions in the past, and had to get creative to find jobs. Granted things are more difficult nowadays with tuition skyrocketing, but nevertheless these challenges have been faced and overcome in the past. I wish more "scam"bloggers would post more for us lawyers trying to succeed despite the challenges, instead of endless attacks over and over against anyone and everything associated with law school. But I guess that's what you get from a bitter quitter like Nando.

  12. August 25, 2011 1:11 PM :

    What I enjoy most of all, 1:11 PM, is how this very scamblog keeps you here, time after time, again and again, whiling the hours away. Have you ever calculated the time of your life you spend here? I bet it's quite a bit.

    Keep up the good work. And, welcome back!

  13. fuck this motherfucker. Good job profiling this bitch nando

  14. Stop whining!

    Venerable professors like Mr. Leiter perform an immensely invaluable service to society with their painstakingly-researched law review articles such as "Gender Roles and the Pastoral Remunerative Effect of the Rule Against Perpetuities".

    "Oh the horrors of actually teaching kids how to practice law. Such an infatuation with practicalities reeks of anti-intellectualism. Who do you think we are, some kind of trade school?" shrieks the effete Professor Leiter. "Next thing you know, these brutes will want us to actually teach these kids how to DO something, like in medicine. How pedestrian!" he says further with a roll of the eyes.

  15. Nando:

    Great job. Keep up the good work!

  16. Leiter thinks it's pretty neat
    to gobble on that lending teat
    and ride that gravy train on tracks
    laid across poor debtor's backs.
    And know that half the student body
    n'aer will buy a pissin potty.

    So it's clip...clip,clip clop
    Klippity Klop!

    Get off your high horse Leiter
    and deal with all the plop!

    Then pack your bags
    and put em in the celler
    and go hang out with Rockerfeller.

  17. What I love are the professors who responded to Campos and/or Leiter about the "hard work" they do.

    Okay, for someone who's been through the basic, run-of-the-mill law school courses and done full bar review and maybe read some supplementary materials, teaching a law class would be akin to teaching high school alegbra to gifted students. You teach black letter rules, do a lot of application in different settings, and bring in a little creativity to get around roadblocks.

    I'm sure the Wills and Trusts, Criminal Procedure, and Torts professors want to believe they're more like philosophy professors, but I'm sorry, they're just not, nor should they be. Assuming that "thinking like a lawyer" is what's done and is worthwhile, it's radically different than "thinking like a philosopher" or any other academic subject.

    I'm sure the socratic method is just gruelling to prep, but in contrast to the high school algebra teacher - who probably teaches 5-6 classes a day, 45-60 minutes a piece, 5 days a week - the law school professor teaches 1-3 classes a week for grown adults lasting 45-120 minutes, rarely more.

    Law professors also, generally, have support staff and only grade 80-100 assignments at a maximum per class. Most have limited office hours and can interact with students whenever they want.

    So whatever you think of high school alegbra teachers, they're at least 3 notches ahead of law school professors on the "hard work" scale. And do NOT give me this crap that voluntary "research" is "busting your ass." Give me a break. Publication standards for law professors are ridiculously low (pick up your local TTTT 2ndary journal and start reading) and there's so much complete crap out there, it's almost impossible not to find a decent topic. So far as I know, law professors never even have to go before a dissertation committee or do anything similar.

    "Busting your ass" is not sitting in an air-conditioned office 30 hours a week reading books under no or little pretense of pressure or necessity and teaching a whopping 5 hours a week.

    Is it a great job with lots of perks? Yeah. Are the salaries great? Yeah. Is it "hard work"? It's probably in the upper 5% of cushy, comfortable, low-stress jobs.

  18. Look at how hard this douche-clown works!

    Brian Leiter: Publications

    Journal Articles
    "Legal Formalism and Legal Realism: What Is the Issue?". Review of Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide, by Brian Tamanaha. 16 Legal Theory 111 (2010).

    "Rorty and the Philosophical Tradition: Comment on Professor Szubka." 25 Diametros 159 (2010).

    "Foundations of Religious Liberty: Toleration or Respect?" 47 San Diego Law Review 935 (2010) (with commentary by Connie Rosati and a lengthy reply by Andrew Koppelman).

    "Why Evolutionary Biology Is (So Far) Irrevelevant to Legal Regulation." 29 Law and Philosophy 31 (2010) (with Michael Weisberg).

    "The Radicalism of Legal Positivism." 66 National Lawyer's Guild Review 165 (2009).

    "Explaining Theoretical Disagreement." 76 University of Chicago Law Review 1215 (2009) (also published in Spanish in Analisis y Derecho).

    Review of Nietzsche's Political Skepticism, by Tamsin Shaw. Notre Dame Philsophical Reviews (2009).

    "Why Tolerate Religion?" 25 Constitutional Commentary (2008).

    Review of Beyond Selflessness: Reading Nietzsche's Genealogy, by Christopher Janaway. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews (2008).

    "Nietzsche's Theory of the Will." 7 Philosopher's Imprint 1 (2007).

    "Science and Morality: Pragmatic Reflections on Rorty's 'Pragmatism'." 74 University of Chicago Law Review 929 (2007).

    Review of Justice in Robes, by Ronald Dworkin, and Exploring Law's Empire, edited by Scott Hershovitz. 56 Journal of Legal Education 675 (2006).

    "How to Rank Law Schools." 81 Indiana Law Journal 47 (2006).

    "Why Blogs Are Bad for Legal Scholarship." 116 Yale Law Journal Pocket Part 53

    "The End of the Empire: Dworkin and Jurisprudence in the Twenty-first Century." 35 Rutgers Law Journal 165 (2005).

    This is a mere sampling of his arduous academic “work.” Does anyone think that this tripe has helped train lawyers, in practical matters?


    Conference on Why Tolerate Religion? Faculty of Law, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy, October 2011.

    “The Boundaries of the Moral (and Legal) Community.” Meador Lecture, School of Law, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, September 2011.

    “The Law of Religious Liberty in a Tolerant Society.” Keynote Address, Summer Workshop on Law, Religion & Culture, Law School, University of Colorado, Boulder, July 2011.

    Discussion of Why Tolerate Religion? Law and Religion Rountable, School of Law, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, June 2011.

    "The Demarcation Problem in Jurisprudence: A New Case for Skepticism." Keynote Address, legal philosophy conference, Department of Philosophy, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, May 2011.

    “The Law of Religious Liberty in a Tolerant Society.” Leon Green ’15 Lecture in Jurisprudence, School of Law, University of Texas, Austin, March 2011.

    Participant, Conference on "Metaethics and Legal Judgment." Institute for Law and Philosophy, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, March 2011.

    “The Circumstances of Civility.” NEH-sponsored conference on “Civility and American Democracy,” Washington State University, Spokane, March 2011.

    “Moral Skepticism and Moral Disagreement in Nietzsche.” Department of Philosophy, Graduate Center, City University of New York, February 2011.

    “The Law of Religious Liberty in a Tolerant Society.” School of Law, Fordham University, New York, February 2011.

    Why Tolerate Religion? Chapters 1-3. Legal Theory Workshop, Columbia University, New York, N.Y., October 2010.

    Why Tolerate Religion? Chapters 1-3. Law School, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., October 2010.

    "The Radicalism of Legal Positivism." Mary Olive Woods Lecture, Department of Philosophy & Religious Studies, Western Illinois University, September 2010.

    “The Demarcation Problem in Jurisprudence: A New Case for Skepticism.” Conference on “Jurisprudence and Value-Neutrality.” Faculty of Law, University of Girona, Spain, May 2010.

    You can see why this rat holds onto his reputation as an academic so fiercely. “Law professors” such as Leiter do not want to practice the “noble profession” of law. To be fair, what firms would want to hire such gerbils?

  20. And let's face it, the typical lower tier "Law Review" is, by and large, a cheap house organ, full of half-ass interdisciplinary scholarship, and nothing more.

    An academically low level publication at which, in a true scholarly sense, the real deal, and really learned academics, in whatever disciplines, must surely laugh.

    Especially at the overpaid law professors who want it both ways, and fail at both, calling themselves a scholar in a a field unrelated to Law, and also calling themselves a professor of law.

    The Law, as far as being a field of study, moves very slowly and incrementally over the decades, and there is really not much to add to it to warrant a lot of the BS that these house organs tout.

    What is the most monstrous, in the end, is the fact that the teachers of Law have evolved to a point where they consider it beneath them to even teach, and even seem to gloat as they throw the deeply indebted students out into the world without any trade skills or wherewithal to pay off the government handout debt.

    A great sin. A societal sin, and, in effect, a hypocrisy unparalleled in human events.

    The founding father's must be spinning in their graves.

    And along comes a Leiter, to add insult to injury.

    All I can say is that Leiter must be Salvador Dali's love child.

    Which would make the most sense of all in this surrealistic world of usury, and despair.

  21. For fucks sake, if these law professors want to jerk each other off over what Nietzche might think about positivism, or what HLA Hart might have thought about postmodernism in the context of giving yourself a Dirty Sanchez, just let them join one of the departments in the main university and take the downgrade in pay that goes with it.

    In simplest terms, almost no one goes to law school to learn about this arcane, esoteric, theoretical horseshit. Anyone really think that the guy whose DUI case you will be taking will be impressed that you took a "law and whathefuckever" seminar? Will the slave driver at doc review look at you differently knowing that you read something by Ronald Dworkin? Will the judge who is ripping you a new asshole because you don't know what the fuck you are doing in court soften his tone because you took a class Brian Leiter taught? NO!

    At some point, law schools are going to have to figure it out that no one goes into 200k of debt to listen to some ugly windbag opining about something he knows little or nothing about. If they are going to charge these obscene amounts of money, at least they need to give the students what they actually came to law school for - which is to learn how to be lawyers and make money doing it, not listening to Professor Onan Jagoffski playing his little socratic games, and ending his sentences with "Ahh but that begs the question."

    You could replace most of the academic types with adjuncts who actually know what law practice is about and no one would mind in the least. I think most people would be happy to see them go. The academic types are there only because the current system allows them to be there. I seriously hope that enough pressure will be created by the scamblogs and by eternally indebted graduates to do something to tear down the system as it exists now and replace it with something that gives students what they actually want and need for a price they can afford.

  22. Nando, I know you like to post pictures of truly disgusting pieces of shit to emphasize your point, but that picture went to far.

  23. *too - sorry, it's hard to type with vomit on your keyboard.

  24. I hereby nomimate 6:09 as the comment of year. Funny and insightful.

  25. another thing - JDpainterguy is truly the Woody Guthrie of our movement. I really enjoyed reading his poems, and I bet a lot of other people did too. God bless you, sir.

  26. Why is it that these douchebag professors you post on cannot seem to afford hairbrushes, toothpaste, toothbrushes, crest white strips, and basic hygiene tools. I graduated from a TTT shitwipe school and make signifcantly less than this douche. Yet I manage to keep my appearance clean and attractive. I brush my hair and my teeth. I am well groomed and dress nicely. This pompous slob is disgusting on the inside and out!

  27. p.s. He looks like Pigpen from Charlie Brown and I bet he smells like it too. He looks like he may fling poo.

  28. Yeah, but see, guys like Leiter and our buddy Olivas from a few days ago would then lose their "image" of being the aloof, above-it-all "academics" they see themselves to be. They cultivate it.

    IOW, these guys see themselves on a par with Einstein-types who are soooo esoterically into what they do they forget to eat, shave, etc. Like they're the guys cracking into the Enigma machine to save the world or some shit, when in fact they are writing articles for "scholarly journals" with titles like "Seventeenth Century Cuckolding and its Effect on the Rule in Shelley's Case".

  29. 'Why is it that these douchebag professors you post on cannot seem to afford hairbrushes, toothpaste, toothbrushes, crest white strips, and basic hygiene tools. '

    You know, I was starting to wonder that myself. Shit, if these guys are making ~200K-300K per year, they can obviously afford to get their teeth cleaned every 6 months. They can afford to get their teeth fixed. They can probably afford a fucking haircut and a decent suit. I mean, have these guys just reached the point where they just don't give a shit how they look?

    Oh but they'd make it in biglaw, they'll tell ya. Well, you actually have to produce memos, bring in business and handle transactional matters. And rich clients like to be represented by professional looking people with the same values and background they have. Plus, the big one: you pretty much have to work 80-100 hours a week.

    (Hear that? That's the sound of these academic blowhards running and locking themselves into the nearest closet.)

  30. I hate to sound anti-intellectual, but Leiter spends his time writing books and articles such as “Nietzsche and Morality” and WTF does that have to do with training young lawyers?

    Leiter’s esoteric scholarship is of no more assistance to fledgling lawyers than Etruscan love poetry. In fact, the whole brutally inefficient caselaw/Socratic method of teaching legal doctrine is, basically, wasted years that could have been devoted to clinics and externships under the tutelage of actual practitioners.

    Leiter should lower his head in shame and gratitude towards the students whose misplaced trust made him rich, and join with the handful of honest souls among his colleagues, such as Prof. Campos, in acknowledging the systemic problems in legal education and seeking ways to reform the system from within.

    Instead Leiter avoids the debate, opting instead to issue shrill taunting little challenges to scholarly-dick measuring contests, essentially saying: “How dare you, Campos, suggest that there is anything scam-like in my work as a law professor? Don’t you know how many essays I have written about Nietzsche?"

    Those of us who have been in a courtroom, as Leiter apparently never has been, know the proper two-word response to Leiter’s alpha-chimp posturing. “Objection. Relevance.”

  31. I read Brian Leiter's Curriculum Vitae. This was the line I found to be the most interesting.

    Litigation Associate, Kaye, Scholer, Fierman, Hays & Handler, New York, NY, 1987-88 (admitted to the
    New York Bar, 1988 [now inactive]).

    Yes, for one glorious year in 1988, Brian Leiter was actually a lawyer. Why didn't he go for two?

    (The other law professor lampooned on these pages (The one with the raggedy beard) seems to have had much more actual practical experience than Brian Leiter)

  32. @7:29...yeah really! I could be on welfare and foodstamps and look more presentable than these pompous windbags. Come to think of it...I have seen people on welfare and foodstamps that manage to look quite presentable. My TTT law school (Tulsa) had a few of these type as professors too. Damn...this one female prof looked like a hippie and hadn't brushed her hair in 20 years. She also had a "crazy" eye. I know it is terrible, but I purposely avoided her because my eyes would wander looking at her rat's nest hair and crazy eye. She kind of reminded me of Gilda Radner's character on SNL back in the day. I think it was Lisa Loopner. Runny nose. Bad fro. Crazy eyes magnified with big glasses. I know the woman made 200k+ at the TTTulsa College of Law.

  33. Another interesting point from Leiter's CV:

    •Faculty Advisor, Student Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, 2000-present

    I guess to make it in academia, you need some lefty street cred. However, when it comes to his own and his colleagues' entitlements, our NLG sympathizing philosopher does a quick human-to-werewolf-like metamorphosis into a reactionary defender of class privilege and oppression.

  34. Brian Leiter making fun of someone's sex life is like war fucking for virginity.

  35. Faculty advisor fo' da student chapter of da prestidjus Nashunal Lawwwwyers Guild? Well, why's didn'tcha say so earlier? Gotdamn, ya sumbitch. You's tryin' nots t' get hired by mah ass?

    Shit, he jus' mebbe qualified t' work at one o' mah chickin 'stablishments. If hes can pontifimacate 'bout da philosophocologicalexpealidocious undahpinnin's a muthafuckin' legal realism 'n Dworkin 'n shit, he oughts t' bes ables t' man da fuckin' grease traps. And das all's I's be's carin' 'bout, ennyway.

    Jus' lemme say dis reals quick. I's can'ts believes I has mo' hair in mah beard than dis them there here over there professor o' law has on his entire head. Teh-heh-heh. Oh shit. I just cracked a fuckin' rib laughin' so hard 'bout dat shit. Pour some gravy 'n biscuits over dat. There there. Now what's waz mah ass sayin'? Aw fuck it. I'm gonna grab another piece of fuckin' grilled chickin. I's outta here.

  36. Paul Campos is my hero.

  37. Quick Question, Suppose that in some sense Brian Leiter and other law professors are correct; That producing legal scholarship is in fact the highest best use of a law professor's time.
    Suppose also that we still need to appraise the worth of legal scholarship (But we can't rely solely on its use to actual lawyers or judges because appealing to mere practicality is of a trade school mentality, anti intellectual, and in a sense special pleading since we do not require natural science research to be immediately useful)
    However despite what Brian Leiter and other law professors would like, we cannot simply argue that law review articles are useful for their own sake or for the sake of other law review articles. Law professors are given by society remunerative and cushy positions and exist at the detriment of law school students the position and the work should be justifiable somehow.
    I feel that the method to appraise law review articles would then be their use by the rest of the academy. Professors of other disciplines would need someone who is an expert in law when their research or teaching intersects with the law, They would be a population that would interested in taking their knowledge in academic journal form, and they would have sufficient expertise to filer what they don't need and sufficient specialization to not desire every law review article.
    So the question is, Do other academics actually use legal scholarship for anything?

  38. Colonel Sanders: Why are you even talking about hiring Leiter? Don't you have any respect at all for your chickens? Frank or Jim Perdue would never subject their chickens to the likes of Leiter!

  39. Anon 10:14--You asked the question of the day. To my knowledge, they rarely, if ever, do. A scholar of one period or place or another may need to know about the laws, but being researchers, they could find those laws for themselves. So I don't see how much use they would have for legal scholarship.

  40. Remember that show "ALF"? Leiter looks like he could play the dopey cousin to the patriarch of the Tanner family (the boring whitebread clan the puppet lived with.)

  41. Here is an example of how slow moving the Law is in terms of change and scholarship:

    I had a bar review class a while back, and the instructor one day happily announced that it was the birthday, or rather anniversary of the Statute of Frauds.

    The four hundredth birthday, that is.

    Oh, I suppose someone like Leiter could take tha ball and run with it, and spit out a 10 volume essay about something like:

    "The Statute of Frauds and Religious Angst, and how it pertains to riparian water rights between federal and private lands during the winter solstice."

    But who the hell is going to read it, let alone refer to it when they have a client who wants to get out of jail?

  42. From his faculty profile:

    "Brian Leiter was a visiting professor at the Law School in the fall of 2006 and joined the faculty July 1, 2008, simultaneously founding the Law School's Center for Law, Philosophy & Human Values. Prior to that, he taught for more than a dozen years at the University of Texas at Austin, where he was the youngest chairholder in the history of the law school. He has also been a Visiting Professor at Yale Law School, University College London and the University of Paris X-Nanterre, and is Visiting Professor of Philosophy at Oxford University for portions of the 2011-12 academic year.

    His teaching and research interests are in general jurisprudence (including its intersection with issues in metaphysics and epistemology), moral and political philosophy (in both Anglophone and Continental traditions), and the law of evidence. His books include Objectivity in Law and Morals (Cambridge, 2001) (editor), Nietzsche on Morality (Routledge, 2002), The Future for Philosophy (Oxford, 2004) (editor), and Naturalizing Jurisprudence: Essays on American Legal Realism and Naturalism in Legal Philosophy (Oxford, 2007). Naturalizing Jurisprudence was the subject of a special symposium issue of the journal Law & Philosophy in 2011. He is presently finishing a book on the moral foundations of the law of religious liberty, as well as working on projects in moral psychology and meta-ethics (often in relation to Nietzsche) and 'realism' as a theme in political and legal theory.

    Leiter has given named lectures at universities throughout the world, including the 'Or 'Emet Lecture at York University, Toronto in 2006; the Dunbar Lecture in Law and Philosophy at the University of Mississippi and the Fresco Lectures in Jurisprudence at the University of Genoa in Italy, both in 2008; the Leon Green '15 Lecture in Jurisprudence at the University of Texas and the Meador Lecture at the University of Alabama, both in 2011. He was editor of the journal Legal Theory from 2000 to 2008, and is the founding editor of the Routledge Philosophers book series and of the annual Oxford Studies in the Philosophy of Law (with Leslie Green).

    AB, 1984, Princeton University; JD, 1987, PhD (philosophy), 1995, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor."

    Wow, Brian Leiter was the youngest chair-holder in the history of UT-Austin’s law school. That is certainly douche language.

    In addition to all of his legal “scholarship” - which was NOT PEER REVIEWED, as is the case with legitimate scientific and medical journals - he finds time to hold chairs. Does he hold chairs for the women, or does he also do this for the men? One wonders if Brian Leiter serves as doorman, as well. Does he park cars at some of these events? Lastly, could anyone here imagine sitting next to this ass-hat, at an academic function?

  43. "Why Blogs Are Bad for Legal Scholarship." 116 Yale Law Journal Pocket Part 53

    I believe his thesis for this one is - "because they occasionally contain pictures of me"

  44. [Got-dam, the Coin'el showed up and I didn't see it! Daamn!]

    You brought up all the places that Uncle Fester taught at and the University of San Diego sticks out....USD is a private Catholic college on a hill overlooking the Hotel Circle part of Mission Valley (the most important part of MV being the east-west 8 Freeway at the bottom of the valley.) The school is mostly known for how it is confused with UCSD, the tech-oriented university in La Jolla, a beach community 15 miles to the north. I notice that leiter also taught in the UC system, but you didn't say where....UCSD has been kicking around starting a law school (to go along with their rediculous campus overconstruction); hopefully the fact that American Law is an eight cylender motor runnning on 3.5 cylenders is discouraging that plan.

  45. Leiter is like a friggin' Rasputin character, with lots of bells and whistles.

    But, unlike Rasputin, Leiter decided to change careers in mid stream and become a top notch Usurer, or at least an implied advocate of Usury.

    What a creep.

  46. Doesn't Leiter understand that law professors are failed attorneys and failed academics? Good job ripping into this ass.

  47. Have anyone here met Brian Leiter in person? He is the sweetest natured, nice, mild-mannered (some would even say aspie) person in the room, always; that is, until he is left alone in front of a computer. He's a big-talking prick so long as he's typing on a keyboard all by himself.

    Judging from his rage and spite filled posts and his obsession over "power" (Nietzsche, etc.), "presTTTige" (e.g. his own inane version of law school ranking), bullying and humiliation, he was probably picked on a lot growing up because he is so peculiar looking and likely had an annoying personality.

    Leiter launching ad hominem attacks on Campos is no more legitimate than me attacking his handsome looks (out of jealosy? lulz):

  48. OK, now we see the source of his rage. I mean the goofy bastard has it made in academia. Looking at his CV, he's gotta be making a ton of money for producing bloviating bullshit. Like many effete men in the Ivory Tower, his measures his manhood not by his strength, looks or length of his penis, but by academic accomplishments.

    What makes him a bastard is he can't let go of the fact that he was shut in HS lockers, never dated, and was not included in the cool kids' activities. Look at that picture above. How can anyone take this asshole serioiusly?

  49. Leiter is the epitome of classless, godless, vulgar baby boomer trash. He should be carted to the dump with the rest of the garbage.

  50. He looks like he took about 25 xanax, a box of laxatives, and smoked a joint in that pic. I am sure he beats off every night reading his own materials. And for fucks sake, when was the last time this stinkpile flossed and brushed. I bet he has assbreath that smells like stale coffee and cigarette butts. gross.

  51. ^^ Godless?

    Atheism is noble. This ugly piece of garbage isn't. And neither is christ-insanity. Christ-insanity is what got us into this epic mess in the first place. Now here we are saddled with 200k worth of student loans. Let me tell you, "praying" ain't gonna solve SHIT. Got it?


    Yes, the site caters to mindless douche-bags and prestige whores. However, this specific page is both funny and interesting. There is no specific date listed, but from the image we can see that Brian Leiter was a white Steve Urkel, at a younger age.

    “The guy on this IP spends a lot of time here. Or at least an alter ego who uses the same computer does. Just in the past two weeks (we didn't check earlier than that), he's been here almost every single day. And he's become one of the site's most proficient users of the search box.

    For one, he likes to search for "Leiter." A lot. In these same past two weeks, this user has searched for "Leiter" no fewer than 14 times.

    He also has apparently taken to searching for bathroom, racist, and anti-semitic language in thread titles. It's a veritable rainbow of colorful language!”

    After listing several examples, the entry continues:

    “In his spare time, he enjoys clicking on links to Hotornot pages of students from UT, learning more about Paris Hilton, and reading threads about Leiter (such as this one ).

    One can only wonder what other activities this man takes up in his free time. Perhaps long walks on the beach?

    Finally--yesterday, an anonymous "lawprof" wrote to Eugene Volokh's blog about offensive terms like "jew" and "nigger" appearing on this site. Only one person on the board searched for those terms before the article was posted in the blog, and that person happens to have the same utexas IP as that of the mystery individual.”

    Remember that Leiter was a “law professor” at the University of Texas-Austin, before heading to the University of Chicago. Keep in mind that this does not prove that Leiter was the one who researched the terms. The chronology of events indicates that he - or someone at the school - did so, and then informed Volokh of the search results. With all of his extensive blogging and online activity, we can be certain that MUCH of this is done during normal “work” hours. (“Law professors” have cushy jobs. Even at Third Tier Drake, I knew tenured “legal academics” who spent countless office hours reading articles, the New York Times, and watching Youtube videos.)

    By the way, Leiter’s alleged activity on the site does not absolve AutoAdmit of the content on its site. The fact remains that many AutoAdmit posters are pigs and ass-clowns. You can find the same thing at JDU or Above the Law. Between those two sites, ATL users are much nastier cockroaches. (Just look at the racist comments regularly directed at Elie Mystal. Keep in mind that typical ATL denizens are supposed grads from “elite“ law schools. Many claim to be current or former Biglaw attorneys. I suppose one should not be surprised that many corporate lawyers are hostile to Jews and blacks - especially when they can remain anonymous.)

  53. Brian Leiter has so much outrage and venom as he gets into fights over nonsensical trivial and purely philosophical matters. He gets so upset when someone calls his profession a scam (even though they're not even talking about U of Chicago).

    His feelings when he sees a poor, indebted tier 2/3/4 graduate who had his life destroyed? "Meh."

    Has he ever written one, just one, blog post on an indebted and un/underemployed law graduates? Has he written one post on fraudulent career placement numbers and the Cooley/NYLS lawsuits? Has he written one post on high tuitions at tier 2/3/4 schools?

    No. He'd rather spend his time on a mix of philosophical bullshit, and on attacking those who are actually trying to solve the problems with legal academia.

  54. What's funny is he's not even really contributing anything great in academia. Does anyone give a fuck about Dworkin's veiws on jurisprudence? Some academics research and give lectures on meaningful subjects that relate to the here and now. Look at medical ethics, economics and similar disciplines for some examples. If I wanted to be knee-deep in philosophical bullshit, I would've majored in Latin or Greek and then gone on to some PhD program in philosophy. Like most people, I went to law school to be a fucking lawyer. Not to listen to my professors go off on shit that is not even remotely related to practicing law. How much of our tuition dollars go to this shit anyway.

    Someone earlier mentioned legal scholarship is not even peer reviewed. That's right. The shit articles are reviewed by fucking law students, people who have no real understanding of the law. They are also merely checking for grammar, footnotes and accuracy. Could you imagine if medical and scientific journals were edited by second year medical or biology students?

  55. "If I wanted to be knee-deep in philosophical bullshit, I would've majored in Latin or Greek and then gone on to some PhD program in philosophy."

    Great point here. If you look at Leiter's CV, he is basically a philosophy professor. Nothing wrong with that, but if he was teaching philosophy somewhere to undergrads he would be making 25% of what he makes teaching in a law school. Even U Chicago probably has a significant pay disparity between the law school and the liberal arts departments. He'd also have more classes, more students, more grading, and he would have to teach football players, frat boys, and semi-literates. This d-bag has it made - teaching esoteric philosophical principles to top notch students for a bloated salary in a law school.

  56. ^He has his pick of the litter where he's at. No undergrad students who're taking the class because they simply need some credits in liberal arts before they can graduate. No jocks who are there because they need an easy A with the help of tutors, and to get head from sexy co-eds.

    He took Campos's very valid critique (which was directed at US law schools as a whole) and he took it personally. What a crybaby asswipe. Here he is making a killing teaching philosophical babble to top rate law students. And he has a fucking stroke because another law professor had the unmitigated nerve to state the truth about law school education in America?

    Now that his identity is no longer concealed it is time to address Campos's critiques, point by point. If not then shut the fuck up Brian Leiter. And stop spending your students tuition dollars looking up 'nigger' and 'kike' on internet law school chat boards.

  57. This Chicago deep dish turd has a lot in common with Jonathan Cainer, the newspaper astrologer. Both propel their careers through rhetorical flatulence. That said, I award Leiter more points because he produces enough hot gas to launch a satellite.

    They even look related:

  58. At 6:46 someone said this "Someone earlier mentioned legal scholarship is not even peer reviewed. That's right. The shit articles are reviewed by fucking law students, people who have no real understanding of the law. They are also merely checking for grammar, footnotes and accuracy."

    This makes me ask the question, How does a law school student decide what to publish in their school's law review?
    I am sure that law review editors get more articles than they can print so they have to use some sort of process to determine which ones they print and which ones they do not print. But what is the process?
    Law review editors are basically second and third year law school students. So it is not like they have large amounts of legal experience to draw from. Nor do most of them have large amounts of academic experience beyond the work on their Bachelor's degrees. So how can a student decide which law review article is a good one and which law review article is a bad one.

    From PrawfsBlawg we learn here --> ( of law professors 'Priming the Pump' to mean sending a letter to a law professor at their law review destination a letter to ask for a recommendation of their law review article.

    On Constitutional Daily, with help from PrawfsBlawg here --> ( we learn about 'Cite Pimping' which is the practice of law review editors sending cites for a law professor to include on the revise and resubmit of their law review article. Constitutional Daily opines that law reviews do this because the administration of the law school (Who are the chief beneficiaries) ask them to. PrawfsBlawg also talks here --> ( about tenure track professors citing every tenured professor at their school, in order to more easily win a vote for their own tenure.

    I recall reading somewhere that law reviews even ask for Curriculae Vitae from professors who submit articles to them. But I can't find where that has been said right now.

  59. They DO look related! Oh shit.


    Head to the August 21, 2011 entry, where Jeffrey Harrison, who teaches at University of Florida College of Law, rips into emotional midget Brian Leiter. The entry is entitled: “The Prissification of Law Profs: Leiter, the Scam-man, and Commentators.”

    Admittedly, Harrison comes down hard on LawProf and Leiter - as he wieghs in on the controversy. Here is one meaty excerpt:

    “But Brian Leiter takes the cake in this prissing contest. Evidently he is deeply offended and, thus, has launched an extended ad hominen attack on poor timid Mr. Scam-man. Oh, my goodness! For example, according to Mr. Leiter, Mr Scam-man is "notorious in the legal academy." Ouch, now that is big. It's about as important in the scheme of things as being notorious in a Denny's kitchen. And he notes of Mr. Scam-man's accusations, which admittedly are exaggerated, " "None of this warrants the absurdly offensive description of American legal education as a "'scam.'" When was Mr. Leiter appointed the protector of the virtue of American Legal Education. Where was he when Hester needed him? And then, we find that Mr. Scam-man is a "failed academic." I have never actually followed the logic that a "failed academic," even if that is true, cannot observe and report on what he sees. But, if Mr. Scam-man is a failed academic and his record is the standard, he joins 95% of the other law professors who few people know and even fewer people give a rat's ass about what they write or say.”

    On January 10, 2011, Ass-Hat published this entry, in response to David Segal's NYT piece:

    "Several readers sent this silly piece which, like most scares pieces in the genre, omits any real discussion of the different prospects available to students depending on the reputation of the school. One would have to agree that it is not prudent to borrow a quarter million dollars to get a law degree from Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, but does that really warrant a story in the NY Times? (The issue about accurate data reporting by law schools, which the story also mentions, is a real one [about which we have written ad nauseam], but that issue should be detached from silly stories about students who made manifestly imprudent decisions.)"

    Yes, what great insight and "analysis," right?!?! Look at the deep thought he gave to this momentous entry.

    Apparently, this "philosophical and academic giant" is unable to recognize that there was more to the story than Dumbass Michael Wallerstein. This "towering intellectual" attempts to dismiss this NYT article as "silly." He also refers to it as "another scare piece."

    Brian, your afro is silly. And your ugly, brown teeth are DEFINITELY scary.

  61. All that vitriol suggests Leiter is a deeply unhappy and insecure man. Sad, really. That said, it appears he wears wooden dentures. Lulz.

  62. On Law review "Peer Review"
    I am wondering how Law Review Journals even decide on which articles from professors they publish. I mean, these ladies and gentlemen are second and third year law school students. For most of them, their only previous academic training was their undergraduate degrees.

    How do they appraise article quality? How much do CV related matters (prestige of school the professor works at, prestige of school the professor went to, whether they hold a named chair, or are well known)?
    Citation related matters (Cite Pimping, agreement with prestigious or well known law professors)? How influenced are they by their own professors when deciding?

    Is there anyone who has worked on a law review who can talk about it?

  63. Leiter is a "retired attorney" who apparently never practiced law, with a PhD in Philosophy who cannot find a job in a philosophy dept. He has no business wasting student's tuition and state money purporting to teach students to become lawyers. His scholarship is irrelevant to lawyers, and his tirades speak much of his own insecurities.

  64. Brown toothed ugly piece of trash, raking in 500k per year for doing NOTHING. On the backs of debt surfs.

    Why hasn't there been a revolt in this shitty slime of a pathetic country? That's my question.

  65. @Nando....what is even more hilarious (or offensive) to me is that Brian denies he is attacking other "ad hominem." He then goes on to define the meaning of ad hominem in his blog. I am sure that ONLY Brian understands the true meaning of ad hominem.

    How many fucking blogs does douche have anyway? Looks like he spends most of his time blogging.

    And don't forget to read "Brian Leiter's Philosophical Gourmet Report." This masterpiece is definitely on my bucket list.

  66. Nando:

    You should do a piece praising Campos.

  67. Look at how this sissy responds to online detractors:

    “Thursday, March 30, 2006

    Brian Leiter, Academic Thug

    That's the appropriate title of this blog, which has moved to a new location. Proprietor Keith Burgess-Jackson explains:

    As if to prove that he is a thug (should anyone have doubted it), Brian Leiter has threatened PowerBlogs with a lawsuit if it doesn't change the URL of my blog devoted to exposing his abusiveness. I don't care what the URL is, and I don't want PowerBlogs to risk liability, so I changed it. Here is the new address. Please reset your shortcut, bookmark, or favorite, and spread the word. This thug—Leiter—needs to be shown that he can't control others.

    My take on Leiter (thus far) is at these posts:

    Brian Leiter Is an Idiot
    Through the Looking Glass with Leiter
    The Illogical Left, via Leiter

    P.S. Here's the threatening letter from Leiter -- as reprinted at Brian Leiter, Academic Thug -- which prompted Burgess-Jackson to change the URL of Brian Leiter, Academic Thug:

    Dear Mr. Landsown [sic]:

    I am writing to put you and your company, American Powerblogs Inc., on notice that a user of your service, Powerblogs, has engaged in tortious misappropriation of my name in order to advertise and draw attention to his web site. Keith Burgess-Jackson, who runs the site in question (, has not received my permission to register my name, or any variation of my name, or to otherwise utilize my name, or any variation of my name, in order to promote or otherwise identify his site. Please close down that particular URL immediately. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

    Very truly yours,
    Brian Leiter
    Joseph D. Jamail Centennial Chair in Law,
    Professor of Philosophy, and Director of the Law & Philosophy Program
    The University of Texas at Austin

    It's the sort of sissiness one would expect of an "intellectual" bully whose stock in trade is abuse, not logic and facts. Leiter's abusiveness is probably an attempt on his part (subconscious or otherwise) to compensate for a felt inferiority.”

  68. I agree, based on his bio it seems like Leiter wanted to be Philosophy academic, but couldn't do so because it's hard to get such a job and they don't pay well. So he became a "Law and Philosophy" academic, where he gets to do the Philosophy study he likes, but get paid like a law school professor to do so.

  69. Sounds like Brian Leiter is a "failed academic" with a chip on his shoulder. Brian, if you're reading this, take note: you are a loser.

  70. That buffoon is the "Joseph D. Jamail Centenial Chair in Law"?

    Fire Leiter's dumb ass and invite Joe Jamail to teach a class. Jamail was won over $10 BILLION dollars in judgements and settlements. Make a Jamail a fully tenured part time professor (so that he can actually practice law).

    I would pay anything to learn from Joseph Jamail, or lawyers like him.

    Who the fuck is this Brian Leiter?

  71. Ugh, we feel your pain -- Leiter is also widely considered to be a complete embarrassment to academic philosophy. I think at this point most academic philosophers have quietly distanced themselves from Leiter and are just watching him unravel. This would be sad if Leiter weren't such a nasty person. Hopefully he is nice to his family. Oh, and you can bet that he will read these comments. The guy is addicted to managing his online persona.

  72. I agree, based on his bio it seems like Leiter wanted to be Philosophy academic, but couldn't do so because it's hard to get such a job and they don't pay well. So he became a "Law and Philosophy" academic, where he gets to do the Philosophy study he likes, but get paid like a law school professor to do so.
    abbigliamento da tennisit support

  73. Leiter's grip on philosophy is in doubt. Check out the following discussions:

    Perhaps you folks will want to use this opportunity to weaken the jerk's influence in your neighborhood?


Web Analytics