This review is long overdue. This Professor emulates everything wrong with liberal arts education in the modern-day. I enrolled in this class expecting to learn a great deal about separation of powers, only to tune into a Professor that showed up late and went thirty minutes over our allotted time to go on tangents about her political beliefs. I made sure to attend office hours every week and was dismayed by the responses I got. I recall asking her about how to understand Scalia's view on the semantics of the 2nd Amendment, only to have her tell me that what he says is mere "embellishments" and mean nothing. I asked her about William Brennan's writings, only to have her give me a short gruff response and continue to rant about politics, which was exactly what comprised of every office hour with her. I made sure to come to class asking her questions to try and apply outside material to course content only to get her to say "don't bother my train of thought!" After I took her course, I felt I had learned barely anything about constitutional law and that maybe this wasn't my interest after all, since she made the material so dull. However, several months later, after doing my own reading on cases we "learned" about in class, such as the Zivotofsky case, I learned about how incredibly interesting and fascinating separation of powers can be. The role of a good teacher is to guide students into learning about a new topic and channel passion towards the topic. Lebow did the complete opposite. If it wasn't for my ability to ignore my experience in her class and study material outside, I would have been tricked into thinking that separation of powers was a dull topic. I am ashamed that UCLA has allowed this to continue, and strongly advise any student who is genuine curious about the topics she is teaching to STEER AWAY!

Like the other students in my class, I had read Prof. Lebow's middling reviews on this site but still decided to take her class. I thought it was best to give her the benefit of the doubt.

Holy s*** was that a mistake.

I've never been so disrespected by an instructor in my entire life. Halfway through the quarter she doubled the length of the class, and when the class had issues with this she stated "you guys aren't busy." Mind you, her reasoning for extending class was because we had fallen behind schedule, something she openly blamed the class for even though her lectures were painfully droning and unorganized. Asking questions would usually lead to verbal beatings for disrupting class, so we all caught on pretty quickly and learned to not participate. The only one to blame was herself, but of course she didn't see it that way.

She doesn't answer to emails, and in the rare instance that she does it is weeks late. She is often 10 minutes late to her own Zoom lectures, and when she finally admits students into the lecture she would hassle students for also being late-- but they had been in the Zoom waiting the whole time. We don't receive any noteworthy feedback on essays. It's often a single strange semi-related phrase, or as I received twice, nothing at all. Again, emailing her for feedback is useless as she doesn't respond.

Somehow, the most astonishing thing about the whole course was that I genuinely didn't learn a single thing of importance, except to never take a course with Lebow again.

Save yourself from her impossible amount of unprofessionalism. Don't make the same mistake that I did.

DO NOT TAKE PROFESSOR LEBOW! She is a horrible, inconsiderate, ill mannered professor. She doesn't care about her students grades or how much they learn at all. Her lectures were horribly boring and unengaging, and she was rude to everyone who tried to talk- even those asking completely reasonable questions. She uses no slides and is ridiculously unorganized. It feels as if she wakes up and decides what random monologue she will go on for class that day. The only reason I learned anything at all was because of the textbook required for this course, which was very informative. The weekly reading was also insanely heavy, even though her lectures only actually covered a small fraction of what we were suppose to read about. She has the weirdest method of grading, and it is very difficult to know what she wants from you. She gives little information and gave us only the weekend to write entire essays for her- which she then graded incredibly harshly. She does not respond to emails, but then doesn't answer questions in office hours or in class. She is more than willing to go completely against the things she establishes as fact in her syllabus. She didn't care about the individuals in my class, and I doubt she'll care about anyone in yours- I strongly discourage everyone from taking her. I really disliked this professor and I don't understand why she even works at UCLA. Being my first semester, this experience really leaves a bad taste in my mouth regarding UCLA all together.

BY FAR THE WORST PROFESSOR I EVER HAD IN MY ENTIRE COLLEGE CAREER. Professor is extremely rude and not helpful at all! When a student asked if she would be able to meet up with her to improve on her essay. She said, "your asking too much from me." She extended class to over an hour and it was just her rambling and not really giving a lecture. In the beginning of the quarter in the syllabus it was no harm final and she wanted to change it but luckily the students convinced her to stick to what she had originally said!

PLS DO YOURSELF A FAVOR AND DO NOT TAKE THIS CLASS. YOU WILL HATE YOURSELF IF YOU ENROLL IN IT.
Any comments below that say this was a good class. That is a straight up lie!!!!

I was so eager to take this class, but it turned out to be the biggest disappointment of my time at UCLA, mostly because of Professor Lebow. Lebow was flat out rude, condescending, dismissive, and confusing, and expected students to make up for her errors.

She was incredibly disrespectful of our time, both holding us after class for an extra 45 minutes for the last 3 weeks due to missing class for Thanksgiving break because "we were doing nothing at home anyways", and assigning essays according to her (delayed) grading schedule--meaning we would get them assigned not according to what was outlined on the syllabus, but rather on a random Friday and have them be due ~72 hours later. My fellow classmates in other reviews have already touched on how the final went this quarter, so I won't go into it.

She would discuss readings weeks after they were assigned, and blamed us for "holding up the class with our questions."

Her audio quality was so bad during class that it sounded like she was underwater, causing the class itself and any recorded lectures/transcripts to make no sense at all.

To top it all off, the assignments in this class were graded without explanation, and she refused to meet with students to discuss areas of improvement for the future.

If you're a student reading this review and thinking about taking this class, save yourself and don't do it--it's not worth your time and energy. Professor Lebow, if you're reading this, do better. Seriously.

Prior to taking this class, I read her reviews but I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt; this was a huge mistake. She was unorganized to the point where she held us up to an hour overtime for the last three weeks of class. She was unresponsive to emails and when she did respond, she was rude and unhelpful. The little feedback I received on the assignments did not help me to improve as a writer or a future law student. Students were afraid to ask questions in class and when they did, she often lashed out and overreacted to totally reasonable questions. She also changed her grading scale one week before the final, leaving many students confused and frustrated. Many times she belittled us, minimizing our experiences during Covid 19. Once she said, "it's not like you are doing anything except lying around at home". Avoid at all costs.

Easily the worst professor I've ever had. Terribly disorganized to the point where she would be discussing readings in lecture that were assigned weeks ago, not to mention the amount of reading assigned was just ridiculous. She told us that instead of a course reader, she'd post the readings on CCLE, but then would always post the readings late (she eventually posted the course reader that still charged us $$ to access it). Would get passive aggressively angry when students were asking to be let out of the waiting room into the zoom lecture, which made absolutely no sense considering she would usually start the lecture late herself, and then go way overtime since apparently none of us are taking other classes or have any other obligations. The plan initially was to assign us 4 essays to be done every other week in the place of a midterm, but because she lagged in grading the first one, she pushed the deadline of the second essay back, lagged in grading that, and now the class is in limbo wondering whether she'll actually try to assign us 2 more essays before the quarter ends. Additionally, she took back our initial grades for the first essay and regraded them, causing many of the students' grades to lower (unnecessarily, I have no idea what kind of grading criteria she uses, but it's arguably way too harsh). No use asking her about the essays during office hours because she won't talk about it, and she isn't responsive in her emails. I've never had a teacher like this and I used to think it was hard to beat out my high school trigonometry teacher. Super disappointed because I really was eager to take this class. The assigned textbook reading is interesting, but she was absolutely no help in breaking down the material/actually teaching. Do yourself a favor and do not take this class, or any class she teaches for that matter.

This class is a great educational experience. The topic is incredibly dense and you will be expected to read close to 500 pages on relevant cases, but this subject matter really speaks for itself. I know a lot of people mention how going to office hours will help your grade, and while it's true I also want to point out that you can get a perfectly good grade without doing so (I went twice and she did not remember my name). I kept on top of readings and an ongoing study guide from the start, which helped immensely for the midterm. You don't need to know all the little details (especially facts of the cases), but make sure you understand the "holding." If you can say why a case is important, you're golden. It's going to be a lot of work, but don't freak out-- you can do it if you put in the time. The final papers were interesting to write as well. They're basically "research" papers that test how well you can talk about patterns/arguments for case law surrounding specific topics (ex: commerce clause, presidential power, etc). You get 10 days to write the paper starting on the last day of class. I struggled with timing because of other finals I had to study for, but I managed an A+ and A after 4 nonstop days of writing. Start early for your own health and sanity.

One criticism I have for the course structure is that it's a very all or nothing kind of thing. We had about 30% of people in our class score A- or above on the midterm, and 20% with failing grades. That's concerning for me because it shows how big the gap in understanding was. You really do have to take things into your own hands, and bad time management at the beginning of the quarter can really hurt you. Still, don't give up if you don't do well on the midterm. She's very understanding and fair to people who put in the effort.

As much as I liked the class material, I wasn't a huge fan of Professor Lebow. I can tell she is very passionate and I respect her for her intelligence and how hard she works. However, she can be condescending and didactic about what she sees is right. She speaks in an elitist manner, emphasizing how her class is the most important class you could take and talking badly about professors who teach politics in other departments. I get the feeling this gives some students a sense of self-importance for "knowing" more than others, but I urge you to keep an open mind when you take this class and don't fall into the trap of thinking that whatever Professor Lebow says is correct. She's a very smart lady with a good heart, but she has her biases.

Regardless, see for yourself if you like what she has to say in office hours and whether or not you see her as a mentor. If you don't care either way and just want to learn more about Separation of Powers, take this class and get learnt.

What an amazing class. Challenging, but very cool. I took this course right before Trump's impeachment, so the second half of the quarter was a lot of info on Trump's presidency and how actions were and were not constitutional according to different interpretations.

Prof Lebow tells you how to do well in the class: come to lecture, come to office hours, and make a study group. I always went to lecture, went to office hours/conlaw in the park 4-5 times, and joined a study group right before the midterm, and I got an A- in the class. I was honestly expecting a lower grade, so I think attending office hours helped.

Ugh the midterm though. I don't get stressed before tests, but this one was different. We were required to be familiar with, I don't know, thirtyish supreme court cases? And Prof Lebow does not provide a study guide. Once I took the test, I agreed with Lebow saying how she is "really not trying to trick you [on the exam]". I felt like the exam was very fair. I appreciated in lecture when Lebow would point out which specific topics would be on the exam. However, it would have been extremely helpful (and far less stressful) had we known what would NOT be on the exam. I got a B.

Last, the reading. In the first half of the quarter, I did almost all of it before each corresponding lecture. The second half of the quarter I maybe did 20% of the readings? I read whatever (posted to ccle) articles looked interesting and short. I slacked off because there wasn't a set class plan for each lecture – the plan was to talk about whatever new impeachment news there was.

So, when finals week rolls around and I have to write two final papers for this class, I hadn't read the 2 books we were supposed to cite throughout the paper. So, I basically skimmed the books while writing the final papers, finding quotes and paraphrases as I went. Then, I pulled quotes and paraphrases from that 20% of readings along with the readings from the first half of the course. There is a lot of reading, but you don't need to cite everything [read: read everything] to get an A- on both papers ;)

I highly recommend 145B with Lebow if you're considering law school and have an interest in learning the basics of legal reasoning and Constitutional interpretation. Be aware, it's extremely important to stay apprised of class material and at least skim the readings before lecture so that you understand what's going on. Electronic devices aren't allowed, so be prepared to write at least 5 pages of notes by hand for each class. Participation in class (demonstrating knowledge of the readings and current events) and attendance at office hours are also a good idea, especially since she reserves the right to adjust people's grades if she feels they've put in substantial effort during the quarter.