Despite my consistent exhortations that people should do as well as possible on the LSAT, I don’t think the LSAT is a particularly useful test. The LSAT, like all other standardized tests, is really an examination of past performance and learned ability to take the test. It doesn’t measure “raw” intelligence, however you want to define that term. It measures your ability to take the LSAT.
I had thought that your ability to do well on the LSAT would be predict your ability to do well on the bar exam. Again, not because of any intelligence measuring, but just because people who are good at standardized tests tend to continue to be good at standardized tests.
But perhaps I’ve been wrong. A new study suggests that LSAT performance isn’t the best indicator of future bar passage. Instead, passing the bar has a more direct correlation with your law school grades…
Our readers love nothing better than law school rankings, so it was kind of the National Jurist to roll out its first-ever list of the Best Value private law schools. This new ranking comes in addition to its regular ranking of Best Value schools (which is usually dominated by public institutions of learning). These lists are usually released in alphabetical order, but this time, National Jurist assigned letter grades to each school due to a post-publication error. We’re off to a great start already.
The Best Value ranking typically takes into account the following criteria: tuition, cost of living, average student debt, the percentage of graduates employed nine months after graduation, and bar passage rates.
When the National Jurist created the Best Value rankings to “honor schools that took the cost of legal education seriously,” why choose to highlight private law schools at a time when tuition is higher than ever?
We’ll explore possible answers to that question, as well as reveal the rankings, after the jump…
Sergio Garcia (not the racist golfer) has lived in California most of his life. He worked his way through law school and then took and passed the California bar exam on the first try.
Yesterday, the California Supreme Court heard argument on whether Garcia could be admitted to practice law.
Sergio Garcia was brought to the United States when he was 17 months old. The California justices must decide whether an undocumented immigrant can be admitted. The State of California says yes. The Obama Administration says no.
The news coverage of the case implies that California has the equities on its side while the Obama Administration has the law.
It’s a tidy narrative for a story, but the media hasn’t really focused on the briefs, because when you actually unpack the statute the administration cites, it requires tortured mental gymnastics to support rejecting Garcia’s application….
It’s been a little more than a month since the administration of the July 2013 bar exam reached its conclusion, and the most epic of waiting games has begun. Test takers are anxiously biding their time until their respective state bars decide to tell them their fates.
Some people have already received their results. Over the long holiday weekend, we received several emails about the results for the North Carolina exam — which is impressive considering that last summer, the state board of law examiners couldn’t even keep the lights on during the exam. North Carolina usually has the quickest turn around time on bar exam results, averaging about four weeks between the time the exam ends and the reporting of results.
But unfortunately, not all test takers are so lucky. Some states take months upon months to get their results out to bar examinees, and the wait is torture. Why the hell does the grading process take so long?
The day after the July 2013 bar exam concluded nationwide, we broke the news about a young woman of Muslim faith who was taken to task by a proctor over her religious headwear, a hijab. The proctor didn’t approach the examinee before testing on the Massachusetts exam started, or even during the lunch break — instead, the proctor passed her a note during the morning session of the exam, instructing her to remove her headscarf (even though the examinee had already received approval to wear it).
To interrupt someone during the bar exam and break their concentration over something that could’ve been taken care of when testing was not in session is not only incredibly rude, but also incredibly stupid. This is a professional exam that will determine if and when a person will be able to start their legal career. Why do something that could put their chances of passing in jeopardy? On top of that, why do something that could make it look like this was religiously motivated? This was a bad move on many levels.
* Most folks think the police overreacted by issuing a civil disobedience warning for a 3-year-old girl, but those people need to watch Children of the Corn. [UPI]
* Speaking of the Brits, authorities detained Glenn Greenwald’s partner (interestingly, Greenwald’s partner is named Miranda) for nine hours and “confiscated his computer, phone, camera, memory stick, DVDs and video games” while passing through Heathrow. Wow, this is the sort of thing that might make Greenwald mad at the surveillance state. [ABA Journal]
* A detailed analysis of confidential sources. I’m pointing this out to publicly clarify that ATL keeps its tipsters confidential unless they specifically ask to be cited. So feel free to tip away! [Talking Biz News]
* Tales of Ted Cruz as a young man. So we’re calling parliamentary-style debate “debate” now? OK. [Daily Beast]
* Professor Rick Hasen examines North Carolina’s new voter suppression law and how it proves that the country still needs the Voting Rights Act. [Slate]
* Maybe bar exams should write better questions that actually cover all the material candidates have to learn. Personally, I was just fine not having to memorize a lot about New York commercial paper law. [Ramblings on Appeal]
* The tale of a wealthy couple evading the law. The article describes the story as an “arthritic version of Steve McQueen and Ali MacGraw in The Getaway, perhaps, moving at nursing-home speed.” Hollywood just found a plot for Expendables 4. [Seattle Weekly]
* The government’s obsession with FCPA enforcement has bit JP Morgan over hiring the children of Chinese officials to woo business. [Dealbreaker]
* Chief Judge Michael P. Mills of the Northern District of Mississippi weighs in on a copyright suit between the estate of William Faulkner and Woody Allen. The judge is apparently not a fan of Sharknado because he has no soul. Video of the quirky conflict after the jump…
* Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is definitely one of our favorite judicial divas. When asked if she thought the Supreme Court’s work was art or theater, she mused, “It’s both, with a healthy dose of real life mixed in.” [New York Times]
* According to the Citi Private Bank’s Law Firm Group report on the first half of the year, the legal industry should count itself lucky if it manages to meet last year’s single-digit profit growth. This “new normal” thing sucks. [Am Law Daily]
* Howrey going to celebrate these “monumental” settlements with Baker & Hostetler and Citibank? The failed firm’s trustee might throw a party when he’s finally able to file a liquidation plan. [Am Law Daily]
* Uncommon law marriage? A man stuck in an inheritance battle who lived with his late partner since 1995 now asks the District of Columbia to declare him common-law husband. [Wall Street Journal (sub. req.)]
* The ABA’s Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar proposed a major overhaul to its accreditation standards. Action, of course, likely won’t be taken until next year. [National Law Journal]
* Despite the fact that these measures could help struggling graduates, law deans are at odds over the ABA’s proposed changes to tenure requirements for professors. [Capital Business / Washington Post]
* “Sooner or later you’ve got to make a choice, because you need enough revenue to cover what your expenses are.” Cooley will weather the storm by introducing a massive tuition hike. [Lansing State Journal]
* “How would you feel if you spent well over $100,000 on law school, only to have to spend an extra couple of thousand dollars on a course to get you to pass the bar?” You’d probably feel like everyone else. [CNBC]
* Requiring porn stars to wear condoms might not be sexy, but a federal judge says it’s constitutional. Don’t worry, unlike its actresses, the adult film industry won’t go down without a fight. [Los Angeles Times]
[O]n its face, the [bar passage] information is factual and uncontroversial. Prospective students are free to draw their own conclusions about its relevance. That [Southern California Institute of Law] may not like those conclusions is irrelevant.
– Judge James V. Selna (C.D. Cal.), in a tentative order dismissing the Southern California Institute of Law’s (SCIL) free speech suit against state bar officials, with prejudice. SCIL argued that having to share information on its website about its bar exam passage rates would force the school to adopt an “ideological belief that a law school should be judged by the passage rates of its graduates.” In the past five years, SCIL’s graduates have passed the state bar exam just 7 percent of the time.
(Keep reading to see Judge Selna’s full First Amendment smackdown.)
* The DOJ and a number of state attorneys general are suing to block the merger of American Airlines and US Airways. American and US Airways weren’t fazed because they expected lengthy delays. [Courthouse News Service]
* The Consumer Product Safety Commission is going after a CEO individually. Craig Zucker, the CEO of the company that makes the office toy BuckyBalls, has really gotten under the CPSC’s skin in resisting their efforts to get BuckyBalls off the market. First they came for the BuckyBalls and I said nothing, then they came for the drinking bird and there was no one left to speak for it. [Overlawyered]
* Here’s a look at law school applications for top schools charted over time. Spoiler alert: if these schools are playing a Ponzi scheme, they’re failing. [Associate's Mind]
* More Americans fled overseas to avoid taxes this year. If we make it so the traitorous ninnies can’t come back, this sounds awesome. [Wall Street Journal]
* Judicial Clerk Review asks how Shon Hopwood disclosed that whole “convicted bank robber” thing in his application. [Judicial Clerk Review]
* Professor Robert Anderson has a new bar passage calculator. Take it for a spin to figure out whether or you much you should be freaking out. [Witnesseth]
* Is this the worst job listing ever? Perhaps not. Definitely the most honest in being a bad job listing though. Check it out after the jump (click to enlarge), via the University of Houston Law Center…
Jiminy jillickers! ATL editors are going all over the place over the next month or so. Or at least all over the Eastern Seaboard. If we aren’t heading to your neck of the woods on these trips, never fear, we may hit you up on the next time around. We’ve already hit up Houston, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco, and Los Angeles in the past year.
Kinney Recruiting’sEvan Jowers is currently in Hong Kong for client meetings and still has a few slots available through October 22. Evan will also be in Hong Kong November 14 to December 15. Further, Robert Kinney has been in Frankfurt and Munich this week and is available for meetings with our Germany based readers.
One of our key law firm clients has referred us to one of their important clients in the US, Europe and China – a leading global technology supplier for the auto industry – in order to handle their search for a new Asia General Counsel and Asia Chief Compliance Officer.
Kinney is exclusively handling this in-house search.
This position will have a lot of responsibility and include supervision of eight attorneys underneath them in the Asia in-house team. The new hire will report directly to the global general counsel and global chief compliance officer, who is based in the US. The new hire’s ability to make judgement calls is going to be as important as their technical skill set background.
The position is based in Shanghai and will deal with the company’s operations all over Asia and also in India, including frequent acquisitions in the region.
It is expected that the new hire will come from a top US firm’s Shanghai, Beijing or Hong Kong offices, currently in a top flight corporate practice at the senior associate, counsel or partner level. Of course, the candidate can be currently in a relevant in-house role.
The JOBS Act created new tools for companies to publicly advertise securities deals online. As a result, thousands of new deals have hit the market and hundreds of millions in capital has been raised, spurring a wealth of new business development opportunities for attorneys.
Fund deals, startup capital raises, PIPE deals and loan syndicates are just a handful of the transactions benefiting from the JOBS Act. InvestorID FirmTM is a platform designed to help attorneys equip their clients with the workflow, marketing and compliance tools to publicly solicit a securities offering online. By providing clients with the tools to painlessly navigate the regulatory landscape of general solicitation, InvestorID FirmTM helps attorneys add value above just legal services.
The Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (JOBS Act) went into effect in 2013 and permits Regulation D offerings of securities to be advertised publicly. This means that funds and companies can now use social media, emails and web sites to market transactions to new “accredited” investors.
However, with these new powers come new pain points. InvestorID FirmTM provides a secure, fully hosted, cloud-based platform with a breadth of tools for your clients, including: