Philosophical Justice - Harvard - Law school admissions essay help

Law school admissions essay help

I have always been determined to study subjects I am passionate about for the sake of the intellectual journey itself, rather than merely as a means to securing a place in the working world. That is why as an undergrad I decided to study philosophy and art, much to the dismay of my parents who had always pressured me toward the hard sciences. A desire to professionally combine my academic and creative interests had previously led me to pursue internships in entertainment law. Although I enjoyed the thrilling, fast-paced environment of working in the underbelly of popular culture, I was not completely satisfied and wanted philosophy to play a more significant role in my work. 

Humanitarian law possessed the more direct link between theory and utility I desired. One goal of philosophy is to seek maxims of morality that can be understood across state and cultural lines, and at my current job our case work centers on globally acceptable behavior in the area of human rights. Moreover, my work at the firm frequently gives rise to debates that provide an opportunity for further application of my philosophical knowledge. These debates, inspired by current events or hypothetical situations, often go beyond the content of our case work and generate themes for op-eds or other writing projects.

When the recent conflict between Israel and the Gaza Strip prompted international attention and accusations of war crimes, my boss, Allan, a survivor of religious repression, felt compelled to say his piece. Unfortunately, the first draft I was given to review contained the same flaw as other articles I had read. It was a biased analysis with no reference to actual tenets of international law. How could anyone attempt to confirm or deny accountability for war crimes without discussing the law itself? Research and papers I had compiled for a class on “Just War Theory” during my senior year provided me with a plethora of resources and knowledge with which to supplement the article. It was easy for me to give merit to Allan’s claims by finding relevant citations in primary sources of international law. The challenge was convincing him that his preconceptions were clouding his interpretation of the conflict. But after much deliberation and rewriting, we produced a coherent and more impartial analysis worthy of publication.

After “Proportionality and Disproportionality: A Guide to Arguments about Gaza” appeared in The Huffington Post, Allan was invited to a live discussion on the Arab news network Al Jazeera. I thought he did a great job of effectively communicating our argument; if you interpret the law to hold Israel accountable for war crimes, then you must acknowledge that Hamas is guilty of similar violations, if not more. But from my position off-camera, where I simultaneously watched the live broadcast, I could see what he could not. The once blue backdrop now featured a bold red title, “WAR ON GAZA,” and image of the actual interview was replaced by a video of Israeli-imposed devastation and destruction. Instead of providing a credible counterargument, Al Jazeera, having already decided Israel was the aggressor, attempted to dilute our appeal to reason with a showcase of bloody circumstantial evidence.

The Al Jazeera interview, combined with the public’s discomfort with the increasing disparity of civilian casualties, inspired us to expand our article to focus on the moral issues complicating the legal analysis of proportionality. Together we worked through the difficulty of assessing which values are to be measured against the loss of civilian lives. This time I was able to contribute even more of my theoretical knowledge as I helped Allan revise the article from a philosophical perspective he was unaccustomed to. For instance, I reminded him of the crucial distinction between jus ad bellum and jus in bello, ultimately providing a new structure for the article. “Gaza and Proportionality: When Do the Numbers Embarrass the Values?” was published in Justice Magazine, spring 2009.

The challenge of collaboratively writing this article taught me the importance of recognizing both the distinction and interaction between theory, law, and empirical context to avoid a politicization of the legal process that would inflame, rather than defuse, a conflict. It is thrilling to approach a challenge from multiple angles and I am proud to be able to use this skill to benefit the public by contributing to the publication of well-thought-out and reasoned articles. In addition to providing an invaluable foundation for my career, my time at AG International Law has given me the confidence that I can and will create my own niche in the legal industry, perhaps one that is new and innovative, where I can express my interests and talents. I want to be an advocate for justice, which requires an in-depth understanding of the values from which the law originates as well as its function within society. Having fully enjoyed my intellectual journey thus far, I eagerly await the new challenges I will face in law school and beyond.

Analysis

Claire Hankin’s personal statement is effective because she not only elaborates on her passions (art and philosophy), but more importantly, she explains how these interests have been applied to her career and shaped her interest in law. It is extremely appealing for admissions officers to see that the candidate is simply studying what she loves, and that being a lawyer will simply further these passions. This essay does a great job expounding on the experiences that helped her discover and focus on the field of law that she wants to practice.

Hankin seizes the opportunity to show the admissions officer the genuine person behind all the listed credentials. Different accomplishments and publications are mentioned in one’s résumé, but résumés do not explain the hardships or experiences behind these achievements. Hankin references her published articles, but more importantly, she demonstrates to the reader the obstacles that she faced when reviewing the articles. She also explains how her educational background assisted her in tackling these issues. Moreover, she connects how following her love of philosophy significantly helped her with her job—it allowed her to “approach a challenge from multiple angles.” This essay is well-thought-out, for it shows the admissions officer her strengths as a lawyer, and that she will be a great asset to her classes and peers. She strongly indicates that her studies have made her distinctively qualified to work within her legal framework. The most salient aspect of Hankin’s essay is that she showed that she is able to apply what she has learned in her education to her career. Furthermore, she states what she wishes to do with her career in law, indicating that she has a clear goal in mind and is sure of the direction that she is headed in.

From 55 Successful Harvard Law School Application Essays, edited by the Staff of the Harvard Crimson. 
Copyright © 2014 by the authors and reprinted by permission of St. Martin’s Publishing Group.