Please decide what you want. Either be critical or not. In other words, at the very least, specify what your problems are. No, not anonymously, but in your own name. This half-way position does nobody any favours. How do we know that you aren't some spiteful LLB kid from a T2 NLU whose own prospects are hopeless, and who hopes that a bit of trolling of NLSIU will work something in their favour?

Hey. I'm glad some of what I said got through. Just dont let the world define and limit you this way. Theres nothing about you thats more abnormal or less abnormal than anyone else. And you can speak about identity- it sometimes matters- just dont make it your whole life or assume thats the first thing people encountering you will care about.
Go to a cognitive behavioural therapist or read Feeling Good by David Burns. Its the first CBT book I read, start from there and work your way through this.

Court will take cognisance of a lot of cases. Maybe theres even merit in it that has not become apparent to me through this conversation. But for your own well-being- move on. Do other things you can be good at.

I’m glad that, for the first time, I’m having a discussion with someone who actually scolded me. Otherwise, people usually choose not to engage in such a direct manner.

After reading your comment, I’ve started to believe that maybe you’re right. But I still will not withdraw my case from the Court, which had taken cognizance of it. I’ve taken note of your advice-going forward, I will no longer speak about identity.

It seems like we’ve all been shouting about retaliation, airstrikes, and “teaching lessons,” but no one’s asking whether our Constitution even permits war:

https://theleaflet.in/governance-and-policy/this-constitution-does-not-permit-war

The article says even defensive action requires Parliamentary procedure under Article 352.
Is it possible that we’re cheering for something that’s legally impermissible?
Can the Executive just decide to go to war and we clap along?

That’s not new. Harassment and bullying aside, no one in that college cares. In the senior batches, at least two (could be more) convicted sexual harassers feature in the rank lists which makes them eligible for convocation awards and internships offered by the college- absolutely no punishments for their actions. Worst of all, the professors are chill with them, the admin doesn’t give a fuck and the students treat them like they never did anything wrong. This isn’t a one off anti-woman incident- it’s just the expected standard at this place.

Thanks to the UK trade deal, tariffs on luxury car imports are all set to drop to record lows. Range Rovers can be purchased under 50 lakhs. Aston Martins and Bentleys would be within the ballpark of a couple of crores. But the real deal-- Rolce Royce models, for the first time, can be affordable for equity partners at major law firms. Are we going to see a shift from traditional German brands like Audi, Mercedes, BMW etc to British ones? Personally, I'd drive a Rover over an entry-level German car anyday.

1. Does India have a perfect track record of no anti-Semitism?

2.

(a) Whatever policy positions India may have advocated in the past, it is far friendlier to Israel now. And frankly, I think that common enemy logic is a good place to start.

(b) Aren't you forgetting common history? That both of us had a common thorn in our side to deal with after World War II - the ever-interfering, colonially-minded British? Or perhaps you just don't trust Jews very much?

3. Regarding your last point. If that happened, I would very much like for us to support them. The consequences of previous foreign policy fuck-ups we (that is to say, India) has made in the past would have to be dealt with (as those would make it difficult for us to support Ukraine openly), but that would be the honourable, morally upstanding, right thing to do.

1. Israeli people were never India's supporters, it is the government of israel that unconditionally supports India. Previously, there have been various reports of how israeli people have discriminated against Indian citizens.

2. The support is purely motivated because of the existence of a 'common enemy'. They have no other motive to support India, India has long been an advocate for a free palestine.

3. Logic behind "they support us, we too should support them" has fallacies. What if Ukraine comes in support of us tomorrow, should we support them too?

As a preliminary: You really don't get to argue in the apex court of any nation over any old issue you are unhappy with. You need to cross a public interest barrier and show that you are raising a genuine problem with the law as it is right now.

However, setting that aside (assuming you can demonstrate why you are raising a novel issue), here's my opinion, for what it's worth. I attended university in a country which has three and four-year law degrees, reading law right after high school. Frankly, from that experience, I don't think it's a good idea to shorten the law degree. It just doesn't give you enough scope to study and specialise in as much depth as you might be able to, otherwise. I did a three-year LLB myself, and frankly, there was so much stuff in terms of the electives my uni offered that I wanted to study, but just didn't have scope or time for. Alright, you can do a master's if you want further study, the argument will go. And yes, I am doing a master's. But still, I think more time and scope to specialise more deeply in an undergraduate degree would be better preparation, not just for legal academia, but for legal practice, too.

Frankly, I think the designers of Indian undergraduate law degrees are making the same mistakes as many of their counterparts in other countries. They take up so much space in the curriculum with core courses and/or non-law courses, that even in the five-year system, a lot of time gets wasted. So perhaps if you don't like the idea of being forced to use scope to specialise further, but are happy to argue about why the Bar Council of India (which regulates Indian law degrees) should be less prescriptive (prescribe fewer core courses, therefore offering students more scope to specialise and therefore shortening the law degree), you may actually have a point.

As someone who'll join law school this year, I'd love to listen to the opinions of more experienced people on this.

A lot of countries already have 3 or 4 year law degrees straight out of school, should we thus have the same?

Also,

Will the Supreme Court even entertain the plea?Or will they brush it aside?

I personally am for the proposition.

Hi, there is a new job opening at this office. (job opening available https://x.com/ideepakjoshi/status/1920720104771203524

1. any feedback on him as a lawer ?

2. his office, size, kind of matters is it only tax or mix of corp-comm, temperament

3. remuneration he is offering is 25,000/- pm (for A0-A1). is this market standard

4. i am not keen on doing tax advsiroy work like DT/GST structuring, memos, etc. I want focused litigation experience

A lot of people have gone to Oxford, Harvard, Cambridge, are partners in tier 1 firms, partner at Kirkland, co-founder at Vidhi Centre, but how would their success help this kid?

There are people in every batch who don't get place despite being good. Don't worry you'll reach where you are meant to be in 1 year, just keep trying

As a GNLU student who has been to NLUJ, go for NLUJ unless you want to join GNLU for it's proximity to your hometown.

Though NLUJ is significantly more rigorous academically (even after the change in VC) and more stringent with respect to attendance, it does offer better placements if you look at the size of their batch.

Having said that, you won't be making a blunder even if you opt for GNLU so you're in a pretty comfortable spot.

As an older person, I would like to offer some sincere advice to my young friends. One immediate impact of the war is that left-wing students and faculty at our law schools will have to lie low for a bit on social media. The national mood is one of immense anger, so if you post anything criticising the army or government, or supporting the Pakistani position in Kashmir, you will get into trouble. Already one left-wing humanities professor at SRM University has been suspended, after she posted on X criticising Operation Sindoor.

https://www.deccanherald.com/amp/story/india/tamil-nadu/chennai-professor-suspended-for-anti-india-comments-over-operation-sindoor-against-pakistan-3531403

https://www.freepressjournal.in/amp/education/srm-university-professor-loras-suspension-letter-goes-viral-amid-allegations-of-anti-india-posts-after-operation-sindoor

If you are woke and post a lot on social media, best not to post anything at all for the next few days. In fact, it might be better for your own mental well-being to go on a holiday for a week to the hills: Lonavala, Ooty, Shimla, Darjeeling etc. Come back and post when the mood is calmer. I am sure the conflict will end by next week, as the US, Saudi and Iran are making phone calls.

I, for one, am not particularly shy of asking questions. But the intelligent kind.

Also, one should definitely hesitate to ask queries, because more often than not, the facts at hand along with the larger context of the transaction will answer all your queries. Queries should be limited to factual aspects, anything else is plain dumb to ask and you will end up looking stupid in front of the client.