About the Review

In August 2015, the Thurgood Marshall Law Review celebrated 45 years of publication. Since 1970, the Law Review has served as a medium through which new legal thoughts and opinions are presented to the legal profession. The Law Review was extremely honored to interview The Honorable Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt for Volume 40-2. Judge Hoyt is a founding member of the Thurgood Marshall Law Review and Senior District Court Judge for the Southern District of Texas. Judge Hoyt's interview provides the prelude for the Law Review.

In this interview, Judge Hoyt provides a rich history of the Law Review's distinguished beginnings. He honors the leadership of its founding members and early editorial boards, traces the journal's scholarship objectives over time, and chronicles the name changes that the Law Review underwent. Judge Hoyt also shares the impact that his own board editorial experience had on his career and rise to judgeship. True to his legacy, he offers encouragement to law students waiting to join a law review board.

How did the Law Review begin at Thurgood Marshall School of Law?

Let me say that I am honored to give this interview on behalf of the founding members of the Thurgood Marshall Law Review. The journal's 45th anniversary presents an ideal occasion to acknowledge its former names: the Texas Southern University Law Review (1972-75) and the Texas Southern Intramural Law Review (1970-71). As far as I can recall, the Intramural editions were the first of our efforts to demand of the student body and faculty intellectual discourse on timely topics important and relevant to the general community and in particular, the Texas Southern University Law School. The Intramural editions were exactly what they were projected to be: writing experiments within the confines of the Law School and University, designed to determine whether enough interest, determination and intellectual fortitude were present to support a law journal undertaking.

Obviously, the intellect was there, but I could not say for sure that the student body was ready for the work it would take to launch the publication. Texas Southern University, specifically the Law School, was the child of an illicit relationship between the state legislature and Jim Crow. In 1947, the Fiftieth Texas Legislature established the Texas State University for Negroes. The sole purpose was to prevent Black students from attending the University of Texas Law School. Heman Sweatt, a Black man, brought suit against the State of Texas seeking admission to the University of Texas Law School. Texas State University, and later Texas Southern University, was the legislative solution for educating Blacks seeking to enter the legal profession. At the time the practice of creating, "separate but equal" schools made perfect sense from the perspective of non-Blacks.

What were the initial challenges of forming the Law Review?

The class of 1969 was the largest in the Law School's history at the time. Over 30 students from across the country were admitted. Right away, you see the challenge for commencing a legal journal-a small student body and faculty. The compromise, out of necessity, was the Intramural Law Review that we published in 1970-71. The journal was born with the enthusiasm of a core group of law students and committed faculty members. In that academic year, 1970 to 1971, the Law School's student body increased from 40 to 50 students to over 100 students by the Fall of 1971. New faculty members were added and a new Dean of the Law School, Otis H. King, was installed. I had the pleasure of serving as his research assistant before moving over to the law review staff.

The Intramural Law Review consisted of three editions totaling some 250 pages of writings. There were eleven Leading Articles, three Notes and Comments, one Recent Development, one Guest Article written by Dr. Jesse E. Gloster from the school of Business and Economics, and one Book Review. Compared to established law reviews, however, our editions were rather meager. Since we had neither structure nor reputation to guide our efforts, significant time and resources were spent recruiting authors, editing their writings and going to print. Bibiano Rosa, our formidable Editor-in-Chief, met these challenges with assiduity.

What was your editorial position?

I joined the Law Review in 1971, and became Comment and Case Notes Editor for Volume Two published in 1972-73, under the editorial leadership of Editor-in-Chief, William H. Sheppard. Volume Two consisted of three editions in two publications - editions 2 and 3 were combined. However, neither of the three editions had as much content as the inaugural editions. For the first time, we published as the Texas Southern University Law Review.

Who were the other founding members that were instrumental in the Law Review's formation?

William Sheppard was also supported by Managing Editor Daniel Maeso, Articles Editor Leslie D. King, four Associate Editors, and 11 staff members and candidates. Professors Isaac Henderson and William K. Kimble graciously agreed to serve as Faculty Advisors. The teamwork and commitment of these early editorial boards would no doubt be instrumental to the success and longevity of the journal going forward.

What topics or issues were highlighted in the early journals?

As we attracted scholars to write for the Law Review, we determined that the direction of the scholarship should tend more toward empirical issues of the times than simply legal, doctrinal ones. The objective, Sheppard envisioned, was to "[determine] the functions, systematic methods and applications of the legal process by collecting and analyzing empirical data ... [in order] [that the legal process may better] serve the [community] in an equitable manner . . . [focusing particularly on] disparities in [ ] individual lives, communities, politics [and] government."'

Therefore, the early focus of the Law Review addressed the shortage of Black lawyers, legal assistance for low-income groups, the right to counsel and the standard of proof in juvenile cases in Texas. There was also a healthy appetite for civil rights issues focused on the impact of welfare and public housing on minority neighborhoods, and the use of illegally obtained evidence in prosecuting minorities. By 1976, the scholastic pendulum of the journal started to swing back toward doctrinal issues. It may be said that early articles focused on civil rights legislation passed in the 60's that was being tested in federal courts. After 1976, a greater balance emerged between doctrinal and empirical scholarship. In one issue, for example, an article about equality in the employment arena appeared alongside an article that examined executive privilege in the wake of Watergate.

When I reflect on my experiences at Texas Southern University Law School, now Thurgood Marshall School of Law, and what the Law School means to me and the social and legal communities of my day, I am "awe-struck" by how successfully the Law School and the Law Review have navigated both external and internal tumultuous waters to reach a new and enviable plateau. In the late '60s and early '70s, the student body and faculty expended considerable energy and time fighting with the State Legislature over the continued existence of Texas Southern. Although "separate but equal" started out as a good idea in the mind of Legislature, implementing the concept produced a far different outcome than they had envisioned. It would cost a considerable sum of money to fund the needs of the Law School. In spite of the obstacles, the Law School has endured and prospered.

How did your experience on Law Review shape your legal career?

As I have climbed the ranks from attorney to state court judge, and now federal judge, I give credit to the many rigorous hours spent on the Law Review Board.

What advice would you offer to law students wanting to join Law Review?

Somewhat like the law clerk experience that I offer to law students, the Law Review experience is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Whether a student becomes an editor or not, he or she should embrace it for all that it is worth. It is intellectually challenging and creates a hunger for a deeper understanding of the law, more so than what a classroom has to offer. The Thurgood Marshall Law Review is our legacy - it must be engaged, improved and passed on.