Although debate has subsided since campus-wide protest last month compelled the prestigious Harvard Law Review to modify its controversial policy of selecting half of its editors solely on the basis of first year grades, the recent episode no less reflects the prominent position the Review occupies in the minds of students and in the legal

Nearly three-quarters of the Law School's first year class threatened to boycott the 97-year-old student-run journal of legal opinion, charging that grades were an arbitrary criterion for selection. Perceived by many as a stepping stone to lucrative jobs and elite academic appointments, the Review looms large before aspiring first year students (ILs).

Through a two-track selection process, the Review elects roughly 40 editors each year from classes that average 540 members. Under the current system, those whose grades miss the mark compete for remaining spots in a writing competition.

Partly in an effort to alleviate the pressure of the IL paper chase, the Review adopted a new system to take effect next year whereby writing performance will also account for 30 percent of the score in the grades track of the competition.

"The Law Review affects ILs in a big way," says Susan E. Keller '83, a coordinator of the IL protest. The weight it attaches to grades compounds the already considerable academic pressures of the first year, she adds.

It's something that's at least in the back of everyone's mind," says Robert L. Jones Jr. outgoing managing editor of the Review. "There are some people who before they every walk in the door, their one thought is to make Law Review," he adds.

Student concern about Review selection is understandable: aside from the satisfaction of contributing to its publication, editors can expect a wealth of other benefits. Editors and professors generally agree that the Review provides a significant advantage in the competition for judicial clerkships, faculty appointments, and, to a lesser degree, high-paying corporate jobs.

"It's a big boost--but I don't know if its's an automatic ticket," says newly elected Review President Robert D. Fram.

Nor is is a necessity; Law School Placement Office figures show that a multitude of positions are open to Law School graduates. From lasty year's graduating class, 124 went on to clerkships and 338 joined private firms.

"I don't think that there are many people who explicitly and cynically manipulate the Review for their own ambitions," says Scott L. Nelson '81, outgoing Review president But, he adds. "The problem of mixed motives is one that does detract from our ability to do what we're supposed to.

The greatest advantages fall on Review executives, Jones says. "There's no doubt that [the presency] in particular and other masthead positions carry a lot of prestige and open a lot of doors."

"Almost every Harvard Law Review president has clerked on the Supreme Court--its's almost automatic. If you're the president, and that's what you want to do, it's extraordinary that you wouldn't get it," he adds.

True to form, Nelson next year will clerk for Supreme Court Justice Byron R. White, and if past years are any indication, he will be among several Review alumni currently clerking at the high court.

The Harvard Law Review is perhaps the most respected law school journal in the country, heading the ranks of similar publications at Yale, Michigan, Stanford, and Chicago. "Harvard has had the reputation of being the number one review," says a Yale Law Journal editor who asked not to be named.

Frequently cited in court opinions and briefs, the Review is an influential fixture in legal circles.