ASSOCIATION FOCUS MS. JD
WHEN ELIZABETH PEDERSON DISCOVERED, DURING HER SECOND YEAR IN LAW SCHOOL IN 2006, THAT THERE WAS NO NATIONAL ORGANIZATION CONNECTING FEMALE LAW STUDENTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO EACH OTHER, SHE CREATED ONE. Fast forward six years and the nonprofi t she created, Ms.
42
JD, is strengthening links between female law students and legal professionals across the country and around the world. As a student at Stanford Law School, Pederson had
no intentions of launching a nonprofi t organization. She simply wanted to create a dynamic online forum for female law students anywhere on the map to compare experiences and share best practices. Fueling Pederson’s
fervor to launch Ms. JD was the idea of connecting
female
the law review in greater numbers. Data about the status of women in the legal profession
paints a more troubling picture. Findings in a recent law review conducted by Ms. JD
show that female law students constitute only a third of law review editors-in-chief in the nation’s top 50 schools, although they have comprised nearly half of the student body in law school for more than two decades. Moreover, only a third of full-time law professors are women. Despite the prevalence of women in law schools, there
law students. But her larger aim was to nar- row the achievement gap between genders in the legal profession and trailblaze a pathway of success for female law students fi nding their niche in the legal industry. Pederson’s “each one teach one” strategy for success is empowering female law professionals across the country. “T ere was, and still is, a women’s law organization at
“WE WANTED A SUPPORTIVE WAY TO INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER AND TO MOVE
FORWARD TOGETHER.” — ELIZABETH PEDERSON
are breaks in the professional pipeline. According to Ms. JD’s law review, women only represent 15 percent of equity partners at major law fi rms. T e statistics for women attorneys of color are even more sobering. Catalyst, a research fi rm that focuses on women in the workplace, found that minority women comprise only 2 percent of partners and just 11 percent of equity partners.
T ere is a lot of speculation as to why women are falling
Stanford Law, but there wasn’t a line of communication even with women’s organizations at nearby schools like Boalt Hall—let alone law schools in other states,” Pederson says. In law school, Pederson noticed that male students
spoke up more often in class and seemed more comfortable building relationships with professors. Men were also snagging top clerkships or leadership positions on
DIVERSITY & THE BAR® MAY/JUNE 2012
behind in the legal industry. One theory is that women still take on most of child care responsibilities in a family and the 60-hour workweek of a lawyer doesn’t bode well for women when combined with familial responsibilities. “For many women who want to have careers and families,
there isn’t a means to that successfully,” Pederson says, noting that unconscious biases are still a factor in the legal industry. “Women are perceived negatively if they attempt to
negotiate their salaries while men are respected for the same behavior,” Pederson says. “A judge cut off one of my colleagues at the District Attorney’s offi ce by complain-
MCCA.COM
BY MICHELLE J. NEALY
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52