Based on 73 Users
If you are anything other than a very liberal person, taking a class with this professor will be extremely tough. She is very biased and makes it very clear that opinions other than hers are not acceptable. The class is very interesting but has a hard workload. I’ve learned more about why she doesn’t like republicans than I did about the class during lectures. Thankfully, the readings are thorough.
Professor Lebow is by far the worst professor at UCLA. Not only is she INCREDIBLY racist she is also rude, unhelpful, and condescending. She does not at all respect her students or their time. It is unfortunate that such a terrible professor is teaching such an important class, but if there is a piece of advice I can give you it is to avoid this class at all costs and any class with Lebow. She will not respond to your emails, she will not offer you any guidance, and given that she is teaching a class on civil rights and civil liberties, her moral standing is incredibly disappointing. I don't understand how she is still teaching at UCLA. When she accidentally posted our Midterm the night before the test, dozens of students emailed her to let her know and to ask if this was an error. She responded that we were "barraging" her with emails (how rude of us to let her know she made a mistake right?) and said that the Midterm has been deleted but that the test was still on. That meant half the class that had realized her mistake prior had access to the test before the midterm and could spend over 24 hours figuring out the answers. The other half did not, and correspondingly did terribly on the Midterm. Pretty sure if this had been reported to UCLA department, she would have gotten in a lot of trouble for the complete unfairness of the test. In summary, she is the worst professor I've ever had. Do not take her.
I hated this class, I have taken 2 courses with Professor Lebow and she is the absolute worst. She is so draggy and there is SO MUCH MATERIAL TO MEMORIZE for the midterm. She is also a really hard grader.
If you have taken this course and need the Course Reader and Textbook by Bloch I am willing to negotiate prices. Text me at **********
Prof. Lebow frequently comes off as condescending and completely tonedeaf. And that is on a good day. However, her true colors were shown in her response to students requesting leniency and accommodations on her 16 page final exam in light of the tragic murder of George Floyd by the police and the anguish, pain, and protests that have arisen across the country as a result. She dismissed students' accounts of police misconduct and brutality as unbelievable or impossible -- after a week of evidence to the contrary from across the country. She classified students asking for a shorter exam or a no-harm final as looking for "excuses" and claimed that writing her final was a great way of fighting racism. Most offensively, she somehow suggested with a straight face that George Floyd would have wanted us to take her final.
Don't take this class -- or any others with Lebow -- unless you want to watch a professor use their position of authority to hurt and demean students, especially black and brown students. Don't take her classes if you value respect, empathy, and common decency from a professor. Don't take her classes, period.
Look imma be as real as can be, I see a lot of people saying "she can hard but its worth it", nah in all honesty this women needs to be cancelled. She had the audacity to tell our class that "if he were here (George Floyd), he would say you gotta take the test,” instead of getting “tangled up in all that’s going on.”. Um, well I can't speak for George Floyd but I guarantee I can say he would have wanted to be at home with his six year old daughter who doesn't have a dad because of a system of racial inequality and a cop committing a public lynching. Furthermore, her final that she gave us is not only "separate and unequal" , those who chose p/np for the class are required to do an 8 page essay while those who chose a grade are required to write 2 8 page essays for a total of 16 pages. Theres also some questionably racist content on the final, plus she not only had the audacity to use George Floyd's name for a question, in the same paragraph she comments BLM burned flags and "hispanic gang members" were behind the looting in Santa Monica. Maybe she's from a different time and standards, but she's completely forget the morals America was founded on and shouldn't be anywhere near a political science class, let alone teach one. Her class is not more important than Covid, Civil unrest and change or any other of the crazy things that have happened this year. 10/10 did not sit right with my spirit and if it's with her as a teacher imma pass
One midterm (40%) and one final (60%). The final would normally consist of two 8 page papers. However, in Spring 2020, Professor Lebow made accommodations, permitting students to take a no harm option, which required one 8 page paper. The midterm was fine. Just take good notes. If you've taken 145E with her before or 145B with Professor Orren, this class should be a breeze, particularly in the former case since both classes cover the same material for the first two or three weeks. Overall, it was very interesting. Would recommend.
The accusations of racism below are frankly ridiculous. Students asked for accommodations. They got those accommodations. Students expressed their concern about police violence. And to make the exam more pertinent to current events, Professor Lebow made it so that students could apply what they've learned to their concerns.
A student below asserts that "[Professor Lebow] comment[ed] [that] BLM burned flags and "hispanic gang members" were behind the looting in Santa Monica." This is plainly false. In the context of a hypothetical, Attorney General Barr and local police authorities expressed such sentiments. Is the Attorney General known to be honest? I don't think so. Are local police authorities known to be honest? I don't think so. In the context of a hypothetical, those sentiments were used as a pretext to pass a patently unconstitutional law that cracked down free speech. Clearly, those sentiments were stated, in the context of a hypothetical, for students to disprove. Indeed, the prompt asks students to "prepare a short memo as to the possible constitutional problems with the act relating to the First Amendment." Therefore, it is most likely that Professor Lebow holds the view opposite to what some posters here have suggested.
Professor Lebow's class is more of a "civil responsibility" class focused on Separation of Powers than . She really wants to have students engage with the material and understand how cases that were decided decades or centuries ago still have an impact on the lives of everyday people. Because of this, she also really puts a lot of emphasis on class participation. Which means: 1) Do the reading, or at least the important parts. You don't need to have every case memorized before you come in, but know the basic concepts; 2) Sit near the front, and raise your hand often. It will make a big difference when she's grading your final; 3) Talk with her. Doesn't even need to be in office hours, a brief question after class will show her that you're interested in the material.
There's a lot of reading, but not all of it is entirely necessary. You should still get a study group for the mid-term though, to make sure you understand all the ideas. On the mid-term, there were no questions about court cases that were not addressed in class (WHICH MEANS GO TO LECTURE; yes it's long, but it is valuable). The final allows you to pick 2/4 questions to write 8 page papers on. I wrote mine pretty last minute, still managed an A. Make sure you focus on the ideas she discusses in class, and you'll be fine.
Overall Grade: A+
She is one of the best professors I have ever had. I have no idea where people get the idea from that she has a big ego. She is actually pretty down to earth compared to some professors at UCLA. Her class is pretty cool, as you actually study great legal work.
Her midterm is %40 and is actually pretty difficult, ranging from very specific questions like the Art. Section and Clause of something from the Constitution to extremely broad problems. DON'T WORRY THOUGH. Her final is %60 (2 take-home essays) and it is actually pretty simple, easy, and straight forward.
I got a B in the midterm and did well on the final and got an A in the class. Just take as much notes as you possibly can in her class and ATTEND EVERY SINGLE LECTURE. If you have great notes, you don't even need to read the book. I had more than 90 pages of notes typed up and had to barely read the book for the final.
ONLY TAKE HER CLASS IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN LAW as it would be a living hell otherwise (based on some of my classmates' experiences).
40% Midterm (short answer). 60% Take-home Final (2 essays). Go to class, take good notes, get an A. Don't go to class, no notes, get an F. It's as simple as that for all her classes. Personally, she was the best I ever had. Highly recommended.
Lebow just started teaching last year and it shows. There is no cohesiveness to the course, and her grading scale is arcane and misleading. There is no homework, long, boring lecture about otherwise interesting Supreme Court cases ( I came in as a pre-law student interested in the course) that make you fall asleep.
Most of the front of the class is comprised of suck up pre-laws more interested in getting a letter of rec than actually learning anything.
There were a few moot court activities that could have been fun but no one really knows what they're doing the whole time and basically made idiots out of themselves the whole time.
All in all I got a C in this class that killed my 3.8 GPA, and it was a big mistake. As the previous poster mentioned, Lebow grades harshly and doesn't tell you what she expects, she had a psuedo-TA that didn't show up to half the class grading our papers, and he basically failed everyone for every quiz, I had to argue about my quizzes to get credit for them because she couldn't explain why he graded it the way he did.
The quizzes are often testing mundane and redundant memorization skills (Like the 10 amendments in the bill of rights) or what federal circuit court is, but the issues on the final and midterm are all conceptual short answers that you can expect to totally bomb otherwise.
DO NOT take this class if you are worried about your GPA. Teacher with great law credentials, but no actual teaching experience