Don't see why she points out that they have white attorneys from bad schools. Is she claiming that covington would prefer to hire a white attorney from villanova over a black attorney from GULC? I doubt it. Firms are bending over backwards to hire black attorneys.

Maybe black law students just don't like going to a law firm that doesn't pay bonuses?

serious question: people from T-14s work as staff attorneys? i thought the only people who work as staff attorneys are TTT grads who can't get a better job. can somebody please explain this to me?

What does being diverse have to do with providing legal services? This is just a blatant power grab!!! "My ancestors may or may not have been discriminated against 100 years ago, now give me money"- Diversity Movement.

A fancy pedigree does not equate to intelligence. Her writing supports the staff attorney decision made by C&B. What is a General Council, pray tell?

She makes it sound as though they hired #1 and #2 from georgetown, and because one was white they were made an associate, and the black one was made a staff attorney. What a crock of shit.

If african americans are only 10% of the population, how come we're complaining that they make up 10% of the law firm workforce? Our we supposed to "set aside" 50% of the spots for 10% of the people? And if we do, how on Earth will we succeed without Asians or Indians?

"It's disheartening to then discover that the black student who borrows $120,000 to attend Georgetown will only earn half that of the white associate who's paid $60,000 to attend the University of Maryland."

Can you say "class rank?" I hate to make unfair assumptions, but in an extremely hierarchal profession (whether for good reasons or ill), you can't just make statements like this and have them taken seriously. My guess is that the Maryland grad-turned associates at Covington were rock stars and the GULC grad-turned staff attorneys rounded out the bottom of the class.

Sure enough, the three Maryland-grad associates at Covington DC were all order of the coif, two were articles editors and one was EIC of their Law Review.

None of the matters complained about strike me as particularly terrible. All of the comparative analysis offered is superficial, and if you accept as an operating premise that a law firm wants to hire the best people, and uses grades and school rank as an imperfect proxy for ability, you'll get results that don't square with our visions of proportionate racial utopia.

See, I told you Georgetown really is a top law school.

With calculators, 2:47.

This doesn't seem surprising given the relatively poor performance of most black students in law school, across the board. How many black students are on law review? How many graduate magna cum laude or make order of the coif? I don't think a single black student has made law review or graduated with these honors at my school in the 3 years I've been here. Note: I could be wrong on this; it might not literally be zero. There may have been 1 or 2 black students on law review or graduating magna/order of the coif, but the number is without a doubt tiny.

My anecdotal observations support what has generally been written about this phenomenon: black students consistently perform poorly in law school, relative to the rest of their class. The problem isn't that Covington is discriminating against blacks. The problem is that of the vast majority of blacks who attend law school do not graduate with the qualifications and capabilities to get the "best" jobs. This is the problem that must be addressed.

What causes this? It's not that black students in law school are stupid. But for some reason, they tend to have a very difficult time performing as well as other law students. So it is not surprising that as a whole, the career prospects of black law students appear somewhat stunted when compared to the prospects of non-black students from similar schools.

I'm generally skeptical of race-related claims in the office environment, but this one strikes me legitimate, or worse, horrific. I'll be interested to see how C&B responds.

I'm horrified by the sense of entitlement.

Wachtell was founded in 1965, which i applaud for its success. But, keep in mind Blacks could barely get into law school in 1965. Lots of black firms have started since the establishment of Jim Crow. It takes a few years to build a Vault 100 firm. Give us time.

Oh and btw, many of the most talented black lawyers in the 60's were too busy with the whole equal rights movement thing to worry about starting a firm.

2:48 - Covington did respond (scroll up to see their statement).

It's interesting that the firm's statement highlights referrals from current staff attorneys as a means to getting hired. Skadden also has an unwritten policy of only hiring new staff attorneys that are recommende by current staff attorneys.

As a group, staff attorneys are a mixed bag. If you check the Cravath "discovery attorney" listings, you will see that there are many from top schools; Skadden goes as low as New York Law School to fill the positions. Hughes Hubbard employs as staff attorneys people from St. John's. S & C populates its "litigation analysts" with contract attorneys who have worked at the firm and consequently gets some TTTs. Covington NY's staff attorneys mostly hail from mediocre schools and sit on an unfurnished floor in cubicles alongside contract attorneys.

Cue white anger!

If the staff attorneys are not shown on the website, how can Covington be "using" them to show their diversity?

Wait a minute - I thought Penn Law was part of Penn State University. Am I wrong?

The creditial gap isn't very suprising if you consider the impact of affirmative action in admissions and blind grading. Law schools need to release their admissions data in a way that is disaggregated by race so that we can actually determine how much of a correlation there is with entrance stats and class rank. This is a huge issue because affirmative action in law school admissions seems to significantly hurt the job prospects of minorities that accept the admissions boost.

2:54, Covington's response was a cut and paste of their diversity policy.

2:43,

You are exactly right. She is comparing vast groups at different scales. It would like comparing Wachtell to some firm that is ranked 250 on Vault. Unless, some type of attorney by attorney analysis is conducted there is no way to tell C&B is doing anything wrong or right.

Further, the hiring is completely different for staff attorneys and associates. Her comments also lack a level of sophistication in knowledge of law firms. I would guess she was under some misguided assumption that staff attorneys can get promoted, are on partnership track and get substantive work beyond document review. When that is completely inaccurate assumption since staff attorneys are really just glorified legal assistants.

Granted, she was/is a staff attorney so that certainly allows for her bias.

Further, there are 5 attorneys from Catholic - 2 staff attorneys, 1 special counsel, 1 T&E specialist (whatever that is) and 1 partner. There is one associate from Villanova law who graduated Summa Cum Laude and clerked at the 4th Circuit. There is one associate from UK law - also summa cum laude and clerked on the 6th Circuit.

I would say the basis of her article is completely misplaced and on a comparable scale to Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition actions that work in a similar fashion of screaming racism that lack any factual basis.

they be hidin' all the white women too.

Hey- I went to Villanova. Its not Harvard Law, but if you are LR and top of your class vs. bottom 10% at HLS, what do you expect?

I did okay at Villanova and sit nicely inhouse. And, yes, I am white. But I got the woman thing going for me.

Only from you, 2:58...

And yet, arguably the most famous attorney of our lifetime is Johnnie Cochrane.

Would someone be so kind to explain the role that a staff attorney plays in a large law firm.

disgusting georgetown trolling

Any claim that Covington has some racist hiring policy that places black students into staff attorney positions is pure insanity. Anyone who has had the slightest amount of experience with big firm hiring knows that firms are bending over backwards to hire minority attorneys. If you can't get a biglaw associate gig out of somewhere like Harvard, Georgetown or Duke, the reason is that you finished at the bottom academically, not because you are white, black, or green. The article is entirely crap.

What is actually interesting here, however, is that Covington may be hiring large portions of minority staff attorneys in order to trumpet diversity that may not really exist. IF they are counting these staff attorneys for diversity purposes, that is a bit disingenuous.

There is ONE, count em, ONE girl from Villanova. I personally know her. She is one of the smartest people I know. LR, magna...magna at W&L beforehand. Maybe this chick should meet her before she starts crying racism.

maybe the poor performance in law school is an outgrowth of the whole "stop snitching" thing?

"This includes the innovative benefit of pay for pro bono work, and our staff attorneys average about 70 hours of pro bono work a year." This statement is incredibly ironic. They explain that blacks may be attracted to staff attorney positions by the pro bono opportunities, suggesting that blacks are necessarily less serious private attorneys because of their interest in pro bono work. Way to go Covington!!!

"black staff attorneys (like its black partners and associates) hail from top law schools like Harvard, Duke and Georgetown while several white associates and partners attended schools like Catholic, Kentucky and Villanova (all ranked well below 50). Taken as a whole, the black staff attorneys' average law school rank is higher than that of white staff attorneys at the firm."

This certainly not an issue unique to big law. If you are mildly observant you will notice this phenom throughout biglaw.

I thought Covington sold coats...

(sarcasm to lighten the mood...)

3:04,

She was also a 4th Circuit Clerk, which is kind of like going to to Villanova for undergrad and Yale for law school - it's a sick credential that tops graduating in the middle of the class at georgetown, writing a book and choosing to work as a writer instead of as a big firm associate.

What is the difference between a staff attorney and a regular firm attorney? Lower pay for fewer hours? Do staff attorneys work weird shifts, like overnight? I am just wondering what the distinction is.

I wouldnt characterize anything posted as white anger. In reality, people are upset with an article that lacks any factual basis and doesnt back up assertions...because they dont exist.

Racism? Yeah, it absolutely exists in the real world and the legal world is no exception. Anyone that denies this is living in a fairy tale. That being said, arguing that being African-American is a handicap in getting hired at a big firm, Covington included, evidences a complete lack of understanding of law firm hiring. Similarly, the articles attempt to portray the associates at lower ranked schools as less intelligent than staff attorneys from Harvard (if they even exist) is so wrong its barely worth arguing. Someone in the top 1% at Villanova is smarter than someone in the bottom 1% at Georgetown - just ask the circuit judges that hired them or every other firm that would rather hire the Villanova grad.

2:57

There have been studies on this using LSAC data (though I can't find the link now). There is a very high correlation with LSAT and class rank. When GPA is added to the mix, the correlation is even higher. IIRC, the correlation between LSAT alone and class rank was 0.30.

HA! Blacks complaining that whites get the same job with lower credentials. . . why does this sound so familiar?

From a TTT school to a TTT firm, what a shock...

2:48,
Affirmative action is a major reason why black students perform poorly relative to their classmates:

"[W]hen elite law schools lower their academic standards in order to admit a more racially diverse class, schools one or two tiers down feel they must do the same. As a result, there is now a serious gap in academic credentials between minority and non-minority law students across the pecking order, with the average black student's academic index more than two standard deviations below that of his average white classmate."

http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010522

You lawyer folk seem to be in a profession that equates to a very stressful and unhappy lifestyle. Sounds like many of yall's lives suck - competitive overachievers.

Yes, let's compare the bottom of the barrel at Harvard, Duke and Georgetown (thank you affirmative action) with the top of the class circuit clerks from Catholic, Kentucky and Villanova.

It's ironic that she puts so much faith into law school rankings but has no clue about class rankings.

And what about the blatant hiring racism in the NBA and the NFL? Whites are being shut out of jobs that pay millions.

Tier-2/3 students that go to Big Law are like the last kids picked for kick-ball. If you can’t beat them out for a spot on the team, you’re probably in the special-ed program. So put your helmet back on, go down to that room in the basement with the brown carpet, play with all the toys that have no sharp edges – and stop crying about how Tier-2/3 students are robbing you of opportunities.

And this is news because?

Skadden has a barrio full of staff attorneys who make $.32 an hour.

But thanks to AA a black from Harvard and a white from Maryland have the same LSAT and GPA

I think what many white law associate don't realize is that despite all the BS about loving diversity, law firms fear that black lawyers are one of the following: 1) really interested in pro bono shit; 2) not competent, even if they have the grades; and 3) won't be successful at business development. That bullshit comment about "pro bono opportunities" says it all.

This whole idea of racial proportioning is absurd. The reason some minorities don't get hired or don't get into schools is not because they're black but because they're not competitive with their competitors.

If this continues, the same argument can be made against sports. Imagine that NBA/NFL teams were forced to recruit players by race proportion that represents the general population...

Umm, most blacks I know from Harvard graduate cum or magna from ELITE universities, not U of Maryland. Try again, 3:19.

Affirmative action is not fairy dust for shitty applications.

Jesus Christ, I can't believe some of you lawyers think you are intelligent. Zed you sir, are a moron. For a black firm to hit the Vault 100, it has to be patronized by clients with deep pockets. Racism does not stop with law firms.

While there are good hearted white people in this world who focus on ability and not color, I will guarantee you that if a white client had to pick, he would go with the white guy that looks like him. See, he believe this white guy shares his background, work ethic etc. Nothing could be farther from the truth, but that's how we've been socialized.

More damaging for blacks in America is the notion that they are inferior, even if unproven in any given situation. We leave the gates with that in the back of our minds.

Hard work and ability in America does not always lead to success, especially in our field. Alot of it has to to with relationship building. Using the law school campus as a microcosm of legal society, how many times do you see, white guys hanging out with black students.

So your "pull yourself up by the bootstrap advice" is slightly useless.

And1, if you had read the article, you would have learned that "clients with deep pockets" like Walmart specifically wanted to hire blacks and other minorities and demanded that law firms be more "diverse". And these clients are white.

Sorry brother.

So she thinks that going to "top" school (Georgetown isnt a top school, sorry) and not doing well or being mediocre entitles you to a job more than someone who went to a lower-ranked school and was absolutely dominant over his/her peers? Really? The reality is that if you were mediocre at GULC, you'd have been mediocre at a lower ranked school. Just as any of the 50 students that transfer to GULC every year from lower ranked schools and always end up ranking higher on average than their regularly admitted peers. More importantly, why is someone at a lower ranked school? Even if it isnt b/c of affirmative action, why should an LSAT score (a two-hour exam) entitle you to anything?

And furthermore, the Jews who founded their own law firms had to deal with the Gentile CEOs of the Fortune 500 companies back then. Stop making up excuses.

"black staff attorneys (like its black partners and associates) hail from top law schools like Harvard, Duke and Georgetown while several white associates and partners attended schools like Catholic, Kentucky and Villanova (all ranked well below 50). Taken as a whole, the black staff attorneys' average law school rank is higher than that of white staff attorneys at the firm."

without looking at the staff attorneys, i concede that this is possible. but it's also meaningless. the staff attorneys who went to g-town and harvard graduated at the bottom of their class, while the ones who went to TTT's likely graduated cum laude. however, most of the partners and associates went to very good law schools, so naturally they appear more qualified even if their rank is lower.

comparing the law school rankings of the staff attorneys who went to TTTs to the rankings of associates and partners is like comparing apples and oranges.

Racism as the trump card... it's amazing how every bad thing that happens to blacks is because they're black. Some of them may be, but not all, and definitely not in this case.

"Affirmative action is not fairy dust for shitty applications."

But it sure is for middle-of-the-road applications. It's one thing to have your friends of color get into far, far higher-ranked law schools than you do despite having similar LSATs/grades, it's another thing to have somebody DENY that race has something to do with it.

And1 - I wouldn't have hung out with you in law school, but only because your punctuation and spelling are atrocious.

Speaking of Racism, how about Villanova over Clemson in the first round?

Bank on it.

3:02 who asked what staff attorneys do:

Most large firms have staff attorneys and the positions vary from firm to firm. At some, they do document review alongside contract attorneys (however, they are employees of the firm). At others (like mine), they are not distinguishable from associates and there is a clear path for promotion. It all depends on the firm. There was a post a month ago specifically about this topic--see if you can find it.

3:24

But Jews where viewed as incompetent and were outside of the old boys club when all the predominately Jewish firms started. So either they did "pull them selves up by the boot straps" or, once money is involved, one's personal beliefs tend to go out the door (as shown by the fact that even if lawyers are racist, as soon as clients demand more minorities, law firms run out and get as many as possible. (In fact, this suit shows the firms, even if they think the blacks they are hiring are incompetent, will hire them and use them as tokens, keeping them out of the important stuff, so that their numbers look better))

NYC to involuntary servitude

Just because you go to Harvard or Yale doesn't mean you are a good attorney. You have very well gotten in based upon something other than your merit - i.e. your race. So if you are staff attorney, it might not be racism; but just that you aren't that smart or that good. Sorry the truth hurts, but the facts don't lie.

Just because you go to Harvard or Yale doesn't mean you are a good attorney. You may have very well gotten in based upon something other than your merit - i.e. your race. So if you are staff attorney, it might not be racism; but just that you aren't that smart or that good. Sorry the truth hurts, but the facts don't lie. If you want to be treated equally, then END AFFIRMATIVE ACTION!

What people seem to forget is that while McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (1950) ended segregation in law schools, not all law schools were segregated before then and racial discrimination was optional.

Howard Law School graduated Thurgood Marshall in 1933.

So where are the top-tier Black-founded law firms comparable to the Jewish firms? If Blacks are so discriminated against and their skills are underappreciated, why don't they start a Black-run firm and make all these clients like Walmart happy.

The 5-12 upset is SO going to be W. Ky over Drake. Mark it down.

W.Ky. to 190.

And, let's be honest - the true travesty of large law firms is the ridiculously high proportion of people of color in support staff positions (I don't count staff attorneys as support staff). There's your evidence for a black underclass, not Yolanda et al.

While staff attorney work varies from firm to firm, a consistent pattern is that staff attorneys do not have the credentials to enter as associates at that same firm. If you're good enough to get offered an associate job at another top firm, you don't take a staff attorney job.

Which is why this article is 100% bullshit. It doesn't matter where these staff attorneys went to law school. All that matters is that they clearly couldn't get hired as associates anywhere.

I'll be poster # bajillion to point out that lawschool rankings are only 1/2 of the recruitment equation. Especially at a highly competitive office like Covington & Burling DC, just attending an elite school is not enough. It would be very interesting to see the number of staff attorney's who graduated with some type of honors compared to the number of associates.

NYC to involuntary servitude

Who the hell inserted "ghetto" into the story. That's an unfortunate term to refer to African Americans. Once again, Lat proves to be an imbecil.

George Lewis Ruffin, Harvard Law School's first black graduate, entered the Law School two years after the conclusion of the Civil War.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/2002/08/01_blackalumni.php

NYC to involuntary servitude

I think there is something valid here worth acknowledging.

If you go into the even more "horrible" ghetto of contract attorneys, you'll often find that the majority of those attorneys are minority lawyers.

The truth is, every firm wants the black/Hispanic/ if that lawyer/student has perfect credentials. But if they are middle of the road, everyone keeps looking... often to that really nice kid who, oh swell!, went to Princeton and played lacrosse like me... so I can overlook the fact that he wasn't on LR and is in the bottom third of his class... I mean, he went to a top 10 school, which is good enough... for him.

But not for that other kid you just looked past.

Get a clue people. The game ain't fair.

Wow...I just read her whole post. What a poorly written bunch of badly reasoned dribble. I mean, it doesn't seem like basic subject-verb agreement is that much to ask of someone who markets herself as a "writer."

Of the many questionable points of logic, I am most troubled by the conclusions she makes from her survey of blacks from her law school graduating class. Not so many left at firms? That's completely normal attrition. Only one made partner? If I were to call a sample of, say, 50 people from my graduating class 10 years after we graduated, would I be likely to find more than one made partner? Probably not. Of the one classmate she spoke to who made partner, why did he feel the need to note that the person who got behind him in supporting his quest for partner was Jewish?

Worthless, truly. I'm sorry this is getting so much attention on the blogosphere.

NYC to involuntary servitude!

So we need AA for college, law school, LAW REVIEW (See YLS, HLS, and CLS), law firms, and now partnership at the firms!?!?!

When are we supposed to look beyond race and judge people based on their skills?

3:44 - you are the "imbecil", imbecile.

2:59 with the knockout punch.

This piece reaks of the race card.

associating and profiting from racists isn't exactly prestigious.

The self-serving logic underlying every response offering little more than an ad hominem attack against this HuffPo Post may be summed up thusly:

(1) She's a bitch;

(2) If she's not a bitch, she's a black bitch;

(3) If she's not a black bitch, she's an affirmative action admit to a T14 school;

(4) If she's not an affirmative action admit to a T14 school, she's an affirmative action admit to a crappy school;

(5) If she's not an affirmative action admit to a crappy school, she graduated in the bottom 1% of her class;

(6) If she's not a bottom-1% graduate of her class, she's a liar because every BigLaw firm is bending over background to hire all of the other affirmative action admits and bottom-1% graduates (to work in the photocopy room);

(7) If she's not a liar, every one of her claims is patently false;

(8) If every one of her claims isn't patently false, so what? Look at -- deep breath for the most tired cliche of all-time -- all those black men in the NBA and NFL! Now, that's unfair!

To 3:10 - "black staff attorneys (like its black partners and associates) hail from top law schools like Harvard, Duke and Georgetown while several white associates and partners attended schools like Catholic, Kentucky and Villanova (all ranked well below 50). Taken as a whole, the black staff attorneys' average law school rank is higher than that of white staff attorneys at the firm."

This certainly not an issue unique to big law. If you are mildly observant you will notice this phenom throughout biglaw.

I would think that all of America would finally agree that merit/ability trumps race as the next president of America might very well be Black. Clearly, white people are no longer trying to keep a brother down...
Wake up and stop whimpering.

pleasantly surprised with the semming consensus that using race is a bad thing...

To 3:10 - "black staff attorneys (like its black partners and associates) hail from top law schools like Harvard, Duke and Georgetown while several white associates and partners attended schools like Catholic, Kentucky and Villanova (all ranked well below 50). Taken as a whole, the black staff attorneys' average law school rank is higher than that of white staff attorneys at the firm."

This certainly not an issue unique to big law. If you are mildly observant you will notice this phenom throughout biglaw.

I would think that all of America would finally agree that merit/ability trumps race as the next president of America might very well be Black. Clearly, white people are no longer trying to keep a brother down...
Wake up and stop whimpering.

To 3:10 - "black staff attorneys (like its black partners and associates) hail from top law schools like Harvard, Duke and Georgetown while several white associates and partners attended schools like Catholic, Kentucky and Villanova (all ranked well below 50). Taken as a whole, the black staff attorneys' average law school rank is higher than that of white staff attorneys at the firm."

This certainly not an issue unique to big law. If you are mildly observant you will notice this phenom throughout biglaw.

I would think that all of America would finally agree that merit/ability trumps race as the next president of America might very well be Black. Clearly, white people are no longer trying to keep a brother down...
Wake up and stop whimpering.

3:44,
While I think Lat is somewhat racist, the "ghetto" term comes from Ms. Young.

7 Georgetown JDs as staff attorneys. None with honors. None on journals.

2 Harvard JDs. No honors, no journals.

No JDs from Duke, but a guy who graduated from Duke in 1971 and got his JD from (snort) University of Missouri, Kansas City School of Law in 2003.

3 from NYU (one of which is an NYU LLM and Syracuse JD). No honors, no journal.

1 from Cal Berkeley. No honors, no journal.

1 from Penn. No honors, no journal.

I'm sensing a pattern.

What a half assed argument. This type of racial wolf calling just makes people turn a blind eye to real instances of racism in the workplace. Her article is racist and elitist, not Covington & Burling.

lol at 3:50. I don't know if you've actually read the responses, but some make a good case that she's comparing top of the class at lower ranked schools with possibly bottom at "top" schools...

I don't see how calling her out on her limited and biased "analysis" comes out as "she's a black bitch"

What about Georgetown JDs who aren't staff attorneys?

Mostly cum laude or magna, and mostly Georgetown Law Journal.

3:50 - you tire me. There isn't a single ad hominem attack posted here - everyone has posted criticisms of the (absurdly faulty) logic in Young's post.

3:54: As did the historically-accurate Jim Crow comparison. She's quite gifted.

Since when is GTown a "top" school? That place = no good.

Seriously 3:50, how is pointing out the flaws in her argument an ad hominem attack? If anything, the majority or responses have been anything but an ad hominem attack because they are attacking her argument and not her character.

For your future reference:
An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.

how many pigeons do you think it would take to lift a 150lb human off the ground?

4:08 -- Are you saying Georgetown is a TTT? What's your cutoff?

And furthermore . . . , try going to Maryland (or anyplace in the tier one law schools) for $60,000. That won't get you through the second year.

Sadly, the original complainant is whining and has a somewhat roseate view of reality. Examine the differences in numbers (LSAT and GPA) between white and black admittees to any American law school, as well as their respective law school performances, and you will find the the same disparities that Young criticizes in her original post. Blacks and whites have the same relationship as lawyers, it turns out, that they had as law students, college students, high school students, and in every other cohort of comparison all the way to the ground. The pattern Young criticizes is precisely what one would have predicted if past performance is any indication of future performance. Individuals break out of these patterns to be sure (Obama is the most obvious example but there are many better ones in academia), but it will be several generations before an entire class does (though there is good evidence that eventually will happen). Complaints like Young's are useful since they keep the issue of racism on the table for discussion, but as with most hyperbole, what gets your attention often doesn't help you think.

4:08: I'd say about 200

why are white ppl so angry about "diversity"? - if they looked at things even semi-objectively they'd notice that they have it pretty nice in this society

Villanova is NOT "well below 50" in the rankings. It is slightly below 50.

Also, I guarantee the median white LSAT at Villanova is higher than the median black LSAT at GULC. I seriously would bet my life on that. Personally I don't have a problem with AA, but her not acknowledging it in her argument about school A vs. school B is a joke.

Villanova is also in the Big 5. Suck on that GULC grads.

No. It's not a TTT, it's just not a "top" school, 4:08. I would probably say the cutoff would be Mich or Penn Law. (Penn State Law? I get confused.) Most everyone I know used GULC as a safety.

4:11, some people dream that their children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

how many pigeons do you think it would take to lift a 150lb human off the ground?

If Covington is hiring associate-level minorities as staff attorneys instead of as associates, why on earth would one agree to work there as a staff attorney instead of walking down the street to Hogan & Hartson et al. to work as an associate?

I can think of only two reasons:

1. The person wants to be a staff attorney instead of an associate for whatever reason (lower hours, increased flexibility, etc) in which case Young's story is a non-story.

2. The staff attorneys in question aren't considered viable BigLaw associate candidates by other BigLaw firms. The first reason for not being considered viable may be race-neutral characteristics, e.g., took 5 times to pass the bar / isn't a strong writer / started as an associate but did not perform well and is now a 5th year / whatever. In this case, as well, Young's story is a non-story. If, however, the reason for not being able to get an associate job isn't apparent from the face of one's resume / references (i.e., minority candidate from good school with decent grades and journal/moot court experience who is generally likable can't get a job), then it is an indictment of the legal hiring system generally and we're looking at a far, far bigger problem than just Covington.

Look, this hack openly and publicly called a well respected law firm a bunch of racists because they can't find enough qualified black people to put in their associate ranks. She should be strung up, you don't make your point by calling people racists, you make your point by going to another firm and kicking their asses. She only demeaned herself by her cowardly and lazy attack on what are very respectable people.

GULC's LSATs and GPA = Penn's.

GULC's LSATs and GPA > than most (or close to all) of t6-14.

Please explain those numbers and why GULC would be a safety? Everyone at GULC I know used Cornell and Duke as safeties.

If blacks get into schools they really shouldn't attend, odds are, they will underperform their white counterparts. That's not racist, its reality. I mean, if a white person with a 155 LSAT score gets into Yale, odds are, he will underperform against BLACK students who got in without AA.

Thus, it is no wonder how blacks could end up as staff attorneys from schools like Harvard, etc. If you're at the bottom of your class, it will be difficult to get a full-time position at a top firm. Period. This is true regardless of one's race. Bottom line is most firms would rather have top 10% from Kentucky, than bottom third from GULC (I think most would still rather have bottom of Harvard's class but I could be wrong). If there were no AA, I truly believe that while FEWER blacks might attend prestigious schools, those who did would do as well as their white counterprats.

4:17, I didn't say Cornell and Duke were "top" schools either. You've posted some stats, which are interesting, but you miss the basic point. If you get into Penn, Mich, NYU or Chi and GULC, you don't go to GULC. It's that simple. Stats don't tell the whole story.

4:10: Have you ever seen a Roseate Spoonbill? Truly beautiful birds. I don't know how many it would take to lift a 150 lb human off the ground (seems like a moot point since no one in my firm weighs that little), but I'm sure its less than the requisite number of pigeons.

The Kentucky grad only has that job because KENTUCKY IS GOING TO DOMINATE MARQUETTE IN ROUND ONE!!!

4:26 - thanks. however, I need to stick with pigeons as they are the only freely available birds in NYC. I'm just a little over 150. I need to train these pigeons to fly me around the city so I can avoid rush-hour subway and sidewalk traffic.

Can you tell that I'm doing doc review today?

Not necessarily - and I don't mean that GULC is better than Duke or Cornell - I'd say they have somewhat equal reputations. But I think many underestimate the credentials, at least, of GULC students. While most (but not al) people do chose Penn/Chicago/NYU over GULC, numbers indicate that many students do chose GULC over Michigan/UVA/Duke/Cornell.

Regardless, I am ashamed of myself for wasting my time with this, but GULC is certainly not a TTT.