Law School Applicants

‘Hmm, which law school should I apply to?’

Law school applications are down by 37 percent since 2010, and it’s growing more and more likely that the class of 2017 will be the smallest one we’ve seen in about 40 years. With a soft job market still at hand, people are finally realizing that it’s not a very good time to go to law school.

In fact, just 385,400 full-time law school applications were received for class that started in Fall 2013 — that may seem like a lot, but keep in mind that the number of applications once topped 500,000. What’s even more heartening is that the law schools that received the most applications were all ranked among the U.S. News Top 25 (and most of them were ranked among the ATL Top 25, too).

U.S. News kindly provided us with a list of the ten law schools that received the most applications. Unfortunately, not everyone can get into a highly ranked law school, so we compiled our own list of the top ten unranked law schools that received the most applications.

Which schools appear on the dueling lists of the cream of the crop versus the cream of the crap?

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Which Law Schools Received the Most Applications For Fall 2013?”

There’s another story today about the soft market for law school applications. According to the National Law Journal, law school applications are down 8 percent this year, and a shocking 37 percent since 2010.

We’ve discussed at length different theories for why this keeps happening.

But one law school is experiencing a boom in applications. It’s a new law school, one that probably shouldn’t exist in the first place. But it is doing one thing right that other law schools still resist: it’s dirt cheap….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Why One Law School Is Bucking The Downward Trend On Applications”

Philip Seymour Hoffman

* From Big Government to Biglaw: Our congratulations go out to Benjamin Horwich, most recently of the Office of the Solicitor General at the U.S. Department of Justice, as he joins Munger Tolles & Olson as counsel. Nice work. [Munger Tolles & Olson]

* The number of law school applicants took a nose dive for the fourth year in a row, this time by 8 percent, summarily crushing the hopes and dreams of law deans praying for a change of their otherwise most dismal fortunes. [National Law Journal]

* Considering the latest slump in applicants, whether a law school evaluates your average LSAT score or highest LSAT score matters little. Admissions officers will jump for joy that you have a pulse. [Law Admissions Lowdown / U.S. News]

* “You don’t have to convict on every count to have a win.” Azamat Tazhayakov, friend of accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, was convicted of obstruction and conspiracy to obstruct justice. [Bloomberg]

* Per documents filed by a lawyer appointed to represent Philip Seymour Hoffman’s children, the actor didn’t set aside money for them because he didn’t want them to become “trust fund kids.” [New York Post]


There’s an outside chance that more people will read this post about the declining number of people taking the June LSAT than will actually sit for the June LSAT.

It’s trite and banal to say that “the media” or “the internet” is responsible for the declining number of people interested in law school. Law school deans want you to think that they are in some kind of losing battle with media sources. And sure, the fact that the “law school brochure” no longer stands unchallenged by “reputable media sources” has something to do with the fact that June LSAT takers are at a 14-year low. The truth is out there, and the ability of prospective law students — and their parents — to just Google “Suffolk Law School” lessens the effectiveness of your average subway advertisement.

But the internet isn’t responsible for people staying away from law schools. Law schools themselves are encouraging people to stay away in droves. They put up flashing “Don’t Come In Here” signs every time they unleash another disaffected class of graduates out onto the market…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Who Is To Blame For Declining LSAT Applications?”

* Alan Jacobs, Dewey’s bankruptcy trustee, says his clawback suit shouldn’t be stayed during the defendants’ criminal cases — after all, he doesn’t want their assets to dry up while they “scramble to defend themselves.” [New York Law Journal]

* Rengan Rajaratnam, Raj Rajaratnam’s little brother, was acquitted in his insider trading conspiracy case. It’s the first defeat in Preet Bharara’s financial crackdown against hedge funds. Tough break, dude. [DealBook / New York Times]

* Sore loser? Andrew J. Weinstock, the public defender who got into a fight with Judge John “I’ll Just Beat Your Ass” Murphy, resigned from his position in protest of the judge’s return to the bench. [WSJ Law Blog]

* There are many things nontraditional applicants should ask before going to law school, including, but not limited to, whether they’ll ever be able to find employment after graduation. [U.S. News & World Report]

* Oscar Pistorius’s attorney closed his defense of his client in the ongoing murder trial, and Judge Thokozile Masipa has adjourned all arguments in the controversial case until next month. [Bloomberg]

Last week, LSAC agreed to pay $7.73 million in penalties and damages to some students who applied for special accommodations on the LSAT and to reform some of its allegedly discriminatory practices. Elie wrote about the story in a post entitled “The LSAT Can’t Discriminate Against the Disabled: So, Time For Everybody To Get ADD.”

I agree with some of LSAC’s past policies and am happy to see others, like the flagging of score reports, go. I think that it’s hard, though, to contribute much to this conversation by worrying about people faking their way through an ADD exam . . . without knowing what an “ADD exam” means in this setting. It’s hard to move the issue forward by insisting that LSAC discourage abuse without being unfair. . . without knowing what LSAC has done in the past and why.

I’ve worked as a clinician administering many of the tests used to assess learning disabilities and difficulties, and I’ve helped individuals whose tests show they need intervention. (My favorite may be the Woodcock – Johnson Battery, just because of its name.) I currently use cognitive science to study how people best learn in law school. I may not be an authority like Dick Woodcock, but you could do a lot worse than me on a legal blog. So, I’d like to fill out the picture in the LSAC story a bit more….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “How Easy Is It To Fake Out LSAC? On The LSAT And Accommodations For Learning Disabilities”

As we previously mentioned, LSAC and the Department of Justice have entered into a consent decree over LSAC’s alleged discrimination against disabled people. LSAC agreed to pay $7.73 million to settle the claims against it, and to make policy changes. Most notably, LSAC will no longer denote when a person has received extra time on the LSAT.

That is great news for disabled people who want to be treated with fundamental fairness when taking this important test and applying for law school. It’s also great news for anybody who can fake their way through an ADHD exam and wants a little more time than everybody else…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “The LSAT Can’t Discriminate Against The Disabled: So, Time For Everybody To Get ADD”

File this one under #firstworldproblems. Today we have a guy who got into the University of Chicago Law School and Duke Law School, and he’s getting money from both.

But he’s getting a little more money from Duke… which is about as close as you’ll ever get Duke to admitting that it’s not “the Harvard of the South” because Harvard wouldn’t give you a dime to draw you away from the UofC (no offense, Brian Leiter).

So what should this guy do, other than be happy and email ATL about his good fortune? Well, you probably need a little more information…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “The Decision: The Conservative Choice”

#Picture #of #Harvard #Law #School

I guess a 171 #LSAT isn’t #good #enough for #HarvardLaw … looks like a bunch of #sniveling #little #whiners had their #mommys and #daddys make #phonecalls and #write #checks…

– An unknown student who, I’m guessing, didn’t get into Harvard Law. He took to Instagram to blast the school in a message that can only be described as hashtag abuse. Seriously, hashtagging “write” and “checks” separately?

(If you were hoping this breathless stream-of-consciousness diatribe was longer, and filled with more inappropriate hashtags, then you’re in luck! A screencap of the Instagram photo is available after the #jump.)

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “This Guy Is Not Pleased He Didn’t Get Into Harvard Law”

Lat here. Tomorrow is a big day. First, April 15 is Tax Day; we hope that you’ve filed your return — and that you haven’t been taken advantage of. Second, it’s the deposit deadline at various law schools. We hope that you’ve made up your mind — and that you haven’t been taken advantage of.

Just kidding. Here at Above the Law, where we are sometimes critical of the value proposition of legal education, I’m the designated defender of law schools. I write stories with titles like In Defense Of Going To Law School and Go To Law School: What Else Are You Going To Do With Yourself? I also compile and disseminate law school success stories. We are not uniformly opposed to law school here at ATL; we just want people to make informed decisions.

Helping people make informed decisions is the goal of our popular column called The Decision. We field queries from prospective law students choosing between different schools, offer them advice, and ask ATL readers to weigh in as well.

Now, on to today’s scenarios. We’ve titled them “Jersey Boys” and “The Book of Mormon,” for reasons that will soon become apparent….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “The Decision: Jersey Boys And The Book Of Mormon”

Page 1 of 3123