Friday, December 28, 2012

Looking back

The end of the calendar year is traditionally a time for reflection on what has happened over the course of the last twelve months.  For the law school reform movement, it's been an eventful and on the whole very successful time.

When looking back to the beginnings of this blog, it's striking the extent to which its central propositions -- that the contemporary American law school is based on an unsustainable economic model, which is producing something from seriously unacceptable to genuinely life-wrecking results for far too many law graduates, and that law schools have blinded themselves to this, and hidden it from the outside world -- have had their status transformed from outrageous and irresponsible exaggerations, to something approaching conventional wisdom.

Consider this recent post by Dan Rodriguez, dean of an elite law school, on Prawfsblawg.  Note how it accepts implicitly that the status quo is in some fundamental way unacceptable, and that, tellingly, it references unambiguously radical critiques of legal education in a non-pejorative way.  (When the word "radical" is used in a non-pejorative sense by reformists, the radicals have won a very important semantic battle).  The point here is not to agree or disagree with Rodriguez's specific recommendations, but rather to recognize the extent to which the implicit narrative frame within which those recommendations are put forth is one that takes it for granted that law schools, even elite ones, cannot carry on with business as usual.

How and why has this happened?  The obvious answer is that Dean Rodriguez can read both balance sheets and memos from his admissions staff (I don't know anything about Northwestern's situation in particular, but with law school applications year over year down 40% from where they were just three years ago, the particulars aren't what's important).  In a remarkably short time, culturally speaking, the assertion that law school is a risky and too- often disastrous gamble has gone from a radical warning, spread via Internet samizdat by disaffected scambloggers, to something even (some) law school deans are beginning to accept as a starting point for discussions of reform.

A lot of people have helped make this happen, and I want to mention just a few of them here, in no particular order (apologies in advance for many unjustifiable omissions): 

On the blogs:

Scott Bullock
Loyola 2L
Nando
JD Underground
Matt Leichter

In the media:

David Segal
David Lat
Elie Mystal
Bruce MacEwen
Ashby Jones

In legal academia:

Brian Tamanaha
Bill Henderson
Deborah Merritt
Deborah Rhode
Paul Caron

Edit:  The problem with tossing off lists like this is the danger of a truly absurd omission, i.e., I failed to mention Kyle McEntee, Patrick Lynch and Derek Tokaz, aka Law School Transparency, who ought to get some sort of category all to themselves.

Feel free to use the comments to point out similarly egregious oversights.

Although in a sense we are only at the very beginning of the law school reform process, in another sense we are at the end of the beginning -- since the first and most crucial step in any such process is to make the need for serious reform no longer a seriously contestable question.  That step has been taken, and it's something to celebrate.

197 comments:

  1. First! I can't help it I'm so surprised.

    Also I was coming to post the article ATL has on the difference between medical school reform and law school reform.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well? We're waiting.

      Delete
    2. http://abovethelaw.com/2012/12/medical-schools-make-reforms-while-law-schools-make-excuses/


      NYU medical school has a pilot program to cut a year from medical school.

      Delete
  2. Not sure why you included David Lat. He was at worst one of the defenders of the status quo. At best, he was somewhat ambivalent of the situation.

    Or perhaps that was his schtick - being Elie's anti-law school foil.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Law Prof,

    I agree. Now it's time for law deans everywhere to put a Band Aid on cancer, for they will never, never, ever make structural or financial reforms voluntarily.

    ReplyDelete
  4. you left out paul campos...oh wait.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Really miss reading Small Law/Big Debt, Scott Bullock's blog. If anyone made me laugh when I should have been crying over how I ruined my life, he did. If anyone knows where to find his posts online please post link. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thank you for your help, Professor Campos! You are a main contributor to the cause and legitimized our message.

    ReplyDelete
  7. David Lat absolutely does not belong on this list. If anything, he belongs on a list of villains. I don't think Ashby Jones belongs here either.

    Some additions:

    Angel and Hardknocks of BIDER
    Tom the Temp
    Frank the Fly
    SubprimeJD
    Rose, Esq
    Demosthenes of America
    Knut
    Jobless JD

    The scamblogs laid the foundation for widespread belief when there started to be a volume of them. Then, it wasn't about one or two whiners (a very common critique leveled at Nando and L4L), it was about an entire class of people and their shared experiences. When the second wave of scambloggers hit, they gave the ideas credibility, even if they were still rejected into the New York Times told the elites it was okay to critique law school. Begrudgingly, I'd also have to give a nod to Kimber Russell, her once-readable blog, and her role in Segal's first article.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd take down Demon-semen of America from your list. His posts are mostly obtuse banter and his visuals are seizure-inducing.

      Delete
  8. The Small Law/Big Debt posts, sans comments are available at:

    http://www.docstoc.com/docs/50830877/Big-Debt-Small-Law-blog

    ReplyDelete
  9. Can we thank the lawyers and the plaintiffs fighting schools openly in court? This law school litigation is going to turn into a new version of the cigarette litigation. I can't wait for law schools to have to post a warning label.

    Firms in New York have to post a weight watchers warning. Schools should have to do the same thing- results are not typical for most students. With results being "practicing as a lawyer."

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thank you for your work, and for the recognition, Paul. Before you and Tamanaha, critics would put their fingers in their ears and shout "These guys are all unemployed losers who couldn't find a job if it was placed in their lap."

    The scamblogs did a good job of bringing this situation to everyone's attention. We relied heavily on the data that was available, such as BLS projections, state bar websites, NALP summary charts for graduating classes, etc. Also, we employed strong visual rhetoric and some well-placed vitriol. (I still laugh when the industry shills fail to understand why I use images of sewage pits, landfills, Dumpsters, trash cans, filthy toilets and vomit piles when I profile ABA-accredited schools. People now have a strong visual when they think of TTT.)

    In my view, David Segal's NYT piece "Is Law School a Losing Game?" really was a game changer. Once that article was published, and Tamanaha and other concerned academics started expressing their thoughts on this shrinking job field, the law schools were on the defensive.

    In the end, the law schools do not have the facts on their side, if they want to argue that a "legal education" still constitutes a wise, financial decision. Perhaps, these men and women are smarter - although I am not sure about that, by any stretch. I have seen several weak arguments put forth by "law professors," deans and ABA officials.

    The schools were overwhelmed with reality. The job market is GLUTTED, and hence shrinking - with the use of automation, outsourcing, Google, legal zoom, affordable or free online legal resources, predictive coding, Biglaw clients dictating that they do not want to be victimized by the billable hour scheme, etc.

    In addition to that, the law school swindlers were facing a dedicated opposition. Think of it as a solid, veteran chess player being overwhelmed by a committed opponent, who simply had better strategy and material, plus stronger coordination of pieces.

    I am thrilled that I was able to play some small role in flushing these turds down the commode. When I think of how many thousands of young people that they have FINANCIALLY RUINED - knowing that the job market was glutted, but continuing to take in FAR TOO MANY students and charging them obscene levels of tuition - I don't have any remorse about punching the law school pigs square in the balls, stomach, and snout.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I honestly do not understand why anyone would go to law school this year. There is no reason to go now . Next year will only be better for reduced applications and more aid being spread around.

      The kids who get into top schools this year should defer, work hard on figuring out a better career and then decide what to do.

      I'm including YSH in this grouping. If you can get into the best law schools ( even though Harvard is too big) you can figure out another career.

      Give it at least another year to see what is happening and what other options you can find.

      Delete
  12. Don't forget that northwestern has a model to build employment stats based on admitting students with past work experience which may make them easier to market.

    And the cost of attendance at northwestern?? For the 9 months of school?? Just shy of $80,000 for first years.

    How does Rodriguez sleep at night? Tuition alone is $50,000.

    http://www.law.northwestern.edu/admissions/tuitionaid/tuition/studentbudgetJD.html

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thanks for the link! I have looked through the posts there. I have been hoping to find a website where I could print and send links. And, some of the best posts from L4L are missing. God, I love the Solo Practice University post. That one was comedic gold. Scott Bullock, please, come back... depressed indentured students need you.

    ReplyDelete
  14. We also need to thank the people at LST. They have worked tirelessly without much support and have created a great resource that is light years ahead of what had been previously available.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I also thank B1lly for being a T6 grad willing to step forward with the reality of losing biglaw after the crash.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Scratching my head about including Lat as well. He has been, at best, a neutral facilitator for discussion and dissemination of these issues, and I'm sure he deserves a measure of credit for that. But the overall tone of his posts suggests somebody unconcerned about - or more accurately, unaffected by - the status quo to have to see anything particularly wrong with it. I don't recall him ever weighing in on the matter himself, and the one time I heard him address a group of out-of-worker JD bearers, the best he could do was cheekily insist that they think only happy thoughts and read only happy news; it was a lot of schtick without a whole lot of substance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True- lat has no debt from Yale and he can't really understand what six figures of debt means. He is at best neutral .

      Delete
  17. Fully agree that Mystal belongs on the list, while Lat does not; the latter is a lightweight, status-quo-defending inside-the-box thinker.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The former, by contrast, is a self-pitying moron.

      Delete
    2. I can't decide which law bog is more insufferable, AboveTheLaw or LeiterReports.

      Delete
  18. Lastly, "Exposing the Law School Scam," BDSL, BIDER, Jobless JD, JD Underdog, and my site - as well as most of the other scamblogs - did not take a "Woe is me" approach. We simply proved that MANY recent grads - even those from elite law schools - were ending up unemployed, under-employed, or working in non-legal jobs that do not require a law degree. Before this movement, pretty much every aborted lawyer internalized his failures. Now these same people realize that there are much greater factors at work, i.e. strong connections, the right family name, wealth, access to those in power.

    Perhaps I am being too logical, but spending three years in law school and taking out $100K in non-dischargeable debt to make $45K as an insurance adjuster is a terrible investment. Furthermore, when supposed "institutions of higher education" that rely on federally-backed student loans publish false and misleading data, they should be held to account.

    Falsifying article III placement, overall employment rate within nine months of graduation, incoming LSAT and UGPA scores, and/or median starting salary info constitutes blatant, collective dishonesty - at a minimum. Simply put, it is fraudulent conduct. Of cour$e, the culprits always claim that this amounts to nothing more than simple "error." The fact that the taxpayer is ultimately on the hook in the event of mass defaults, these pigs should CLEARLY be audited and regulated by a separate, independent entity. I am not holding my breath on that, since I do not see a political solution to this political problem. Politicians in black robes and Congress do not have the will or gonads to intervene.

    However, even mighty U.S. corporations care about their image. They realize that customers may leave if the product or service is garbage. In the end, the only thing these people understand is money. Due to one hell of a collective effort - among a diverse crowd - people are catching onto the nature of the law school scam. Thank you to the intelligent, ethical commenters on this site, as well as those who post messages to this effect on economics and mainstream news articles. Thank you to those who came before the scambloggers, as well. Have a happy new year!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Before this movement, pretty much every aborted lawyer internalized his failures."

      I think it's difficult to overstate the importance of this point. To use Goffman's stigma frame, the scam blogs provided a third option, beyond passing and covering, for dealing with spoiled legal identities -- they made it possible to flaunt, which eventually shook the complacency of the "normals."

      Delete
    2. Oh shut up, you are the leaders and one of the biggest enablers of the whineblog movement.

      Delete
    3. And you, 12:15, are an enabler and figurehead of this massive, taxpayer-funded scam. You could have left that role to someone like Jackass Marshall, but you never have been able to resist internet trolling (which by the way is an odd "cyber hobby" for someone who regularly accuses Campos of not working).

      Delete
  19. FYI, you can find the deans' bar memberships on their CVs on their law school's website.

    ReplyDelete
  20. How about JD Painter Guy?

    And, in a sense, thanks probably should be given to Brian Leiter. You don't need Superman if there's no Lex Luthor.

    "The end of the beginning" - the final season of Smallville.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, I needed a good laugh. He hasn't had anything coherent to say in forever. With failing the bar 3 times and giving up, what possible outcome did he think that would result in? And he said that someone told him that the A students go to teach and the B students work for the C students. It would have taken any normal person less than a second to properly put that in context. I mean where were the A students from Touro going to teach at? Cooley? And the C students would only be employing the B students if the C students came from wealth and had connections.

      Anyway I don't know what he is complaining about. He is on ICR, which is basically a form of chapter 13 bankruptcy, so he is getting his loans discharged. What he is complaining about is that taxpayers are not bailing him out of his situation faster. He is very annoying.

      Delete
    2. I don't think he qualifies for ICR.

      Anyway, why is it ok with you that a biglaw firm like Dewey can stiff hard working janitors and food vendors on their bills but you object to helping individuals who simply will never be able to pay their debt?

      I don't understand why corporations can get away with canceling health benefits and pensions, but an individual is a dishonest crook if they can't repay students loans.

      Delete
    3. First of all, there's a big difference between (1) not giving something to someone and (2) taking someone else's money away from him and refusing to return it to him. You, for example, haven't given me anything all day, and yet I don't believe that that fact makes you a "thief."

      Secondly, Paintroach isn't even TRYING to pay off his debt. He is an economic predator.

      Delete
    4. @December 28, 2012 3:51 PM

      According to him, he is on ICR.

      Delete
  21. Truthfully, I've got nothing at all against Lat (it was a post he authored on ATL that introduced me to this blog), but I wouldn't describe him as leading the way on this issue. I get that ATL has to be appeal to a wide range of segments of the legal profession, including the more flourishing among them, but he rarely has anything of value to say that doesn't pertain to how much BIGLAW lawyers make, the houses they eventually buy, and the judges they clerked for.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Please remove David Lat from your list. Lat's inclusion on your recognition list sullies the true contributions of the other notables. Lat is a law school shill. A few months ago, he wrote a counter-point opinion to Elie Mystal in which he stated that law school is a great investment, even today. Remember, this is a guy who was born into two physician doctors (plastic surgeons) and did not have to pay or finance his education.

    Scott Bullock in my opinion had the best skill to describe the law school scam. I miss his posts. BigDebt, SmallLaw was comedy gold while it exposed the true ugly aspects of law school and this "noble" profession.

    ReplyDelete
  23. David Lat is an interesting psych study. Confused gay Republican, born of immigrant parents from an upside down culture where race, exploitation, and colonialism have played a prominent role. I think his sister committed suicide at a young age, which must have been hightly traumatic for him. Despite all the carnage and destruction that the law school scam has caused, the notion of "prestige" and psychological validation that it provides to a select group of winners, can be very alluring.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Not that it matters, but in the early 2000's, there was a blogger who went by the name "PhilaLawyer" who predicted most of the scam blog message as well.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I'm not gonna couch trip somebody I don't know and have never met simply because I don't agree with how they frame (or, maybe perhaps in Lat's case) choose not to frame an issue. That being said, there's an air of the Hallway Gossip to much of his writing and it appears anchored in the experiential privilege of high achievement. Much as I hate to say it, there *is* an audience for this type of narrative in the legal profession, but it's a much, much smaller segment of the profession than he (or his audience) probably realizes.

    ReplyDelete
  26. So I could barely make it through the article that Lawprof linked to. I commented twice on that article.

    It is jarring to see people who are ruining young lives with massive debt debating the merits of legal writing programs.

    While we are celebrating what has been achieved, let us not lose sight on how far we still have to go in reform.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Dean Z, for her hilarious justifications.

    ReplyDelete
  28. What's with all the premature back patting around here?

    The class action lawsuits went down in flames, and there is still no bankruptcy reform, and the only way out of this kind of toxic debt is a miraculous lottery win or similar financial windfall, or death or suicide.

    IBR does not provide a fresh start and the credit score is still ruined for life (debt to income ratio. Fuck, I have four credit rejection letters that say my debt to income ratio is the reason why.

    Congress is going to slip the new Petri bill past us and no one seems to have noticed that after discussing IBR until blue in the face.

    I don't wish the quiet desperation and soul destroying unhappiness of hopeless debt on anyone, but I think that there are damn few people in the peanut gallery of commenters around here or in the so called hall of fame list cobbled together by lawprof that really know how it feels.

    And here is a sweeping generalization for you, since sweeping generalizations can be effective: You are mostly all a bunch of pompous, self serving, self centered asses that love to view a problem from afar but would never step up to the situation and put your own money up, or really try to do anything about any of the "crisis level problems" you all drone on and on about so well.

    Hell, even Leiter would agree with the last paragraph :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. to quote Cedric Daniels of the Wire:

      they'd rather live in shit than work a shovel

      Delete
    2. There are two aspects to the scam: those who have been victimized and stopping more from being scammed.

      I agree : no progress has been made to help those already in debt for education that gets them nowhere.

      Delete
    3. "but I think that there are damn few people in the peanut gallery of commenters around here or in the so called hall of fame list "

      Oh, you're SOOOOO right - you ARE a special little snowflake, ain'tcha?

      Delete
    4. The only thing that keeps these kids alive is the patting themselves on the back. Most of these people are marching towards suicide, slowly but surely. They exist only because of these filth rags. There is nothing else in the world for them. Nothing at all.

      Delete
    5. Re: Terrified Law Student and all his Jazz:

      True the failed class action lawsuits took the stuffing out of the scamblog movement, for 2012 was to be the great year for the suits.

      But people should still be aware of what they are really getting into with the debt etc.

      Do you know I graduated from a 4th tier law school with seven D grades?

      Four were D+ grades, and three were a plain D.

      I think kids about to get their first semester grades should seriously consider if it is wise to continue to borrow money if their GPA's turn out to be marginal.

      I pushed on, and some of my D grades came in the 2nd and 3rd years.

      I mean some of those classes, like Trusts and Estates, were really really hard!

      Some people say that a grade of D in law school is not like a D anywhere else, and that it is a good and friendly D. A chuckling and jolly D that will poke you in the ribs with his elbow and slap you on the back and not so bad.

      But what would a client think if they ever saw?

      Delete
    6. @ 12 31

      Did you read the Appellate Division decision on the lawsuits? A Pyrrhic victory for the school if ever there was one.

      Delete
    7. The cases in California proceeded to discovery.

      Delete
    8. "The cases in California proceeded to discovery."

      And there is nothing stopping new cases proceeding with new causes of action and/or new parties.

      The law schools have screwed many different parties (students, taxpayers, guarantee agencies, investors in securitized student loan debt, etc.) in many different ways.

      The only thing stopping wave after wave of cases occurring is the willingness of plaintiff side firms to take a flyer.

      And with there being hundreds of thousands of the JDamned, I don't think there will be a shortage of enraged lawyers (each successive series of suits profiting from the results of earlier generations of cases).

      And each wave of suits will bring more and more publicity to the problem - further ruining the reputation of law schools that long ago prostituted themselves - but in *secret*...*then*.

      The schools have made legions of mortal enemies and the blogs have assembled them into an angry army.

      Delete
  29. And this seems like success as well:

    http://tinyurl.com/d2t7fr6

    ReplyDelete
  30. It would be really interesting to get *an inside scoop* on how much of what is happening in law schools is happening in higher education more broadly.

    I know, for instance, that psychology graduate programs are having numerous problems, including an oversupply of graduates given the number of jobs available.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Yes, Campos, whining on the internet is working for you all. Pat yourselves on the back. You are just wasting your lives here. You are getting your 15 minutes of fame though. Ha! It's all good for you though. You'd never have been special otherwise as just a regular ol' law professor.

    Whine on brothers, whine on!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just wondering to what you attribute the drastic decline in law school applications the past two years? Me, I attribute it to schools being proven to have lied about employment in just about every way possible.

      The scam movement is the force behind the schools having to begin to be truthful about employment.

      Delete
    2. @12:17

      What planet are you from? The LS scam movement has had enormous success in changing perceptions.

      Delete
    3. Still blogging, Infinity?

      Delete
    4. I see you're very active today, Leiter. Posts on your site, this site and lawschoolfail.

      Delete
  32. What about JD painter? He has shown us that this movement is plain ol stupid. You have to mention JD Painter. he's like your mascot and comedy relief all in one! you just gotta mention painter!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again, STFU Leiter. No one cares about Painter except for you. And clearly you are obsessed with him.

      Delete
    2. Painter doesn't have anything to do with this movement.

      Delete
    3. Painter doesn't have anything to do with this movement........ despite the fact that he thinks he does. He's a mental midget. A poster child for loserdom and IMO not the typical unemployed law graduate. I guess every movement has to have a freak.

      Delete
  33. Re: Terrified Law Student and all his Jazz:

    True the failed class action lawsuits took the stuffing out of the scamblog movement, for 2012 was to be the great year for the suits.

    But people should still be aware of what they are really getting into with the debt etc.

    Do you know I graduated from a 4th tier law school with seven D grades?

    Four were D+ grades, and three were a plain D.

    I think kids about to get their first semester grades should seriously consider if it is wise to continue to borrow money if their GPA's turn out to be marginal.

    I pushed on, and some of my D grades came in the 2nd and 3rd years.

    I mean some of those classes, like Trusts and Estates, were really really hard!

    Some people say that a grade of D in law school is not like a D anywhere else, and that it is a good and friendly D. A chuckling and jolly D that will poke you in the ribs with his elbow and slap you on the back and not so bad.

    But what would a client think if they ever saw?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Some people say that a grade of D in law school is not like a D anywhere else, and that it is a good and friendly D."

      Painter, honestly, who are these people that are saying things like that? You do realize this is the reason that you failed the bar 3 times?

      Delete
  34. I see this a-hole is at it again:

    http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leiter/2012/12/the-case-against-law-schools.html

    Funny how even he is willing to admit that law school isn't all it's cracked up to be.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought he always did actually with regard to TTTs. Aside from the fact that he dislikes LP and is a douche (although really most law profs are) I'm not sure why everyone rails against him.

      Delete
    2. "I'm not sure why everyone rails against him."

      His obsessive trolling?

      Delete
    3. My favorite part of Leiter posts--the reason I know he is a sad, sad, man, even though I sometimes agree with his arguments--is how he feels compelled to pretend that he is only alerted to Campos' writings or whomever's writings that he pretends not to read because "someone" told him about them. If I ever doubt my interpretation of his general patheticness I then remember that wonderful AutoAdmit disclosure, possibly the greatest thing on the internet.

      Delete
    4. Might as well post it for those uncertain about the real Leiter:

      http://www.autoadmit.com/leiter.html

      Delete
    5. Jesus fucking Christ. That almost makes me feel sorry for him.

      Delete
    6. I almost felt sorry for him when he and Campos went at it last year, not only because Campos entirely destroyed him, but also because all of the "colleagues" Leiter kept quoting were clearly him.

      Almost.

      Delete
    7. And yet he's a law prof at one of the very top law schools.

      That's very telling.

      Delete
    8. Leiter ignores this place, and he does not post in the comments here. Campos knows this, yet fails to quash that rumor, because this is the silliness that keeps this scamblog in business.

      It's sad that every time someone posts something here that doesn't fit with the "scam" message, they are bombarded with responses claiming "Professor!" and "Fuck off Leiter!"

      How sad that Campos lets this shit happen simply to maintain the illusion that there are hundreds of people interested in this blog, when in fact there are probably ten people, Nando acting out five of them, and Painter the other five.

      Get over it, losers. There are many arguments against this bullshit not being a scam. It's fucking pathetic that they are met with the shrill cries of pathetic losers and psychopaths who really think that law professors are out to get them.

      Except Campos. He's the *good* professor. The "insider" who has never given any inside information.

      Delete
    9. Leiter's childish insults are self-descriptions. Projection, it is called.

      However, I appreciated Leiter's never-say-die scamming, via this misbeggoten effort to rebut Prof. Campos's statement that the only reason to go to law school is to become a lawyer:

      "Certainly the best reason to go to law school is to become a lawyer, but it's not the only reason. What the facts are about the versatility of a law degree is a worthy question, but Campos has no information on this score. I've known JDs both here and at Texas who went into consulting firms by choice, not by necessity, and where the JD was an essential credential, though they weren't doing primarily legal work. What we need to know is whether this is common or uncommon."

      http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leiter/2012/12/the-case-against-law-schools.html#more

      Yes, it is a real puzzler as to whether the situation he describes is "common or uncommon." How could we have overlooked the legion of recent grads who are hired to "consult" on unspecified non-legal matters by employers who regard the JD as an "essential credential"?

      n: "essential credential" is a rhyme! Perhaps Leiter can incorporate it into the hysterically atrocious poetry he routinely publishes on his Philosophy blog under the name "Maurice Sevel."

      See e.g.
      http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2012/12/friday-poem-dawn-determines-us.html

      n2: In support of Leiter, there IS at least one good reason to go to law school other than to become a lawyer. Just ask the unqualified Michael Sevel, Ph.d. in philosophy, who enrolled in law school in order to obtain a lucrative law professorship, and never bothered to practice law for a single minute. Why, if the unqualified Michael Sevel wandered by mistake into an actual courtroom, he would probably think that it was some oddly designed faculty lounge. Of course, not just every philosophy student can go straight from law school graduate to faculty member. You need a powerful, indulgent, and loving patron. You need a Sugar Leiter.

      dybbuk

      Delete
    10. "Leiter's childish insults are self-descriptions. Projection, it is called."

      So that would apply to Nando too? Because I think we can all agree that he's a bigger piece of shit than those shown in his pictures.

      Delete
    11. "Leiter ignores this place, and he does not post in the comments here."

      1) This is complete and utter bullshit, as demonstrated by Leiter's blog posts about this site (including his post today) as well as the time Campos called Leiter out for trolling and sock puppeting in the comments here.

      2) Every time Leiter is called out for trolling any site, an anonymous poster (who, needless to say, isn't Leiter) always shows up and talks about how Leiter doesn't frequent the site, has better things to do, etc. Who is this person, why do they always defend Leiter, and how do they know what Leiter does or doesn't do with his time?

      3) We know for a fact that Leiter has trolled here. So the notion that Leiter is still trolling here isn't ridiculous. The idea that there are only a handful of posters here, on the other hand, is a bullshit fantasy that you created to make yourself feel better.

      4) Care to list any of the "many arguments" for law school not being a scam?

      JFC you really are a loser, you obsessive little freak.

      Delete
    12. Why are you so obsessed with Nando and Painter? It's really fucking creepy, BriAnon.

      Delete
    13. "Leiter's childish insults are self-descriptions."

      Correct. Like when Leiter got all butthurt and started calling Campos "Scamprof" and Nando "Nan-doo doo" (hilarious, Leiter!).

      It's because Leiter is a scamming piece of shit.

      Delete
    14. BriAnon is the biggest piece of shit on the entire internet. Big accomplishment there.

      Delete
  35. I'm sure posts like this one drive Leiter nuts. More than anything, he'll hate to see Campos take any credit for forcing reform. He'll insist that it's "market forces" doing it. But of course, one of those forces is the information that Campos has helped to make public. Campos deserves the most credit. Take that Leiter!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did you see him talking to himself in the comments over on lawschoolfail? Lulzy as always.

      Delete
  36. I discovered this blospot in the late summer of 2011, shortly after it was begun. I was then and remain today so grateful for the truth that has been posted and disseminated from this blogspot. As a very near tip top of the class graduate of a solid t2 from the early 1990s, I have watched the misery inflicted upon my fellow graduates and later law firm colleagues from the law school scam over the last 20 years. I might say I have done relatively well in comparison to the vast majority only because I got into a field that was at the time not glutted, but is now extremely glutted with high levels of unemployment and very limited opportunities for new entrants other than a 2-5 year biglaw gig. I have watched largely helplessly as the field became more and more supersaturated with ever more and more unneeded graduates.

    I have looked upon law schools and the law school industry establishment with disdain, disgust and pure hatred for 20 years, somewhat embarrassed that I fell for the scam without seeing through it or knowing better at the time. I entered the law field having no clue what the truth really was, trusting in the educational establishment in general, believing in ideals of justice, and at a time when few if any were willing to tell the real truth. I was so incredibly naive and believed all the rhetoric that a law degree opens so many doors, and that there is always room for those who are good in a field. I treasured education and learning, believing education was always valuable.

    Until recently as LawProf hightlights "Before this movement, pretty much every aborted lawyer internalized his failures." This served as an impediment to disseminating the real truth, the whole truth about what happens to law school graduates both short term and long term over decades.

    I have watched as many of my colleagues, many very talented and bright, fell out of legal employment altogether through no fault of their own. I have suffered my own few months of employment through no fault of my own, simply the result of the politics, hypercompetitiveness and cut throat environments of biglaw. I have researched and determined that a huge percentage of my fellow graduates 20 years ago never have had real legal employment for which a JD was required. Yet, I have also witnessed the tuition at my t2 more than triple over 20 years and watched as that law school moved from already very nice and more than adequate facilities to even more palatial and unneeded facilities. After several years of having removed my name from the alumni list, my t2 found me again after I registered in the online alumni directory, and I once again started receiving the quarterly glossy color alumni magazines expounding all the wonderful things graduates were doing and advising of the ways to make an alumni contribution. The stories told therein were always so far from the harsh realities experienced by the vast majority of the graduates.

    I have thought for years that this scam has to end. It has destroyed too many lives already. It has been based upon fraud, misrepresentation, lies, omission, incomplete disclosure, failure to obtain meaningful long term employment and salary data, etc. for at least 20 years. In short, it has been built upon hype, inertia and illusion. I am so glad that just perhaps if we all keep up the discussion, broadcast what the real truth is, and keep up the pressure on the law school industrial complex as well as on our Congressmen, just maybe the scam may end....and not a day too soon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder how many legal practice areas are just as you describe - supersaturated and most jobs are in the 2-7 year Biglaw gigs. Mine surely is.

      There has not been a single full-time permanent job opening in my practice area in the entire city and suburbs of my major city in the last 6 months save for one that pays less than paralegal rate unless one has less than 7 years of experience. Of course, there are Biglaw firms advertising for more junior people.

      In my practice area, one particular search firm stands out as complying with law firm demands that job applicants be limited to those with under 7 or fewer years of experience - BCG Attorney Search.

      BCG Attorney Search will not submit more experienced and thus older applicants who otherwise meet the qualifications for the job.

      BCG Attorney Search is furthering the law school scam with age discriminatory practices - posting jobs with experience caps like 5 or 7 years, and then refusing to submit the resumes of more experienced and hence older applicants.

      BCG Attorney Search opens up jobs for the newbies, you know, and keeps the older lawyers out of work.

      Delete
    2. Good - the older lawyers had their chance.

      Delete
    3. Dude - 5 to 7 years is nt older. That is the end of the line for biglaw work.

      But it isn't age discrimination to only send resumes of those that ha e certain qualifications requested temployers. They aren't going to hire you anyway- so it is just awSteof everyone's time.

      Delete
    4. Everyone talks about getting Biglaw. In fact Biglaw is a ticket to unemployment for many lawyers 5-7 years down the road. Some lawyers get a stop at an in house job after Biglaw for a few years after that and then lose that job.

      Anyone who thinks age 33 or 45 is too long from now to think about is delusional.

      The point is that the law degree, even Columbia, NYU and top of the class Fordham and then Biglaw has a high likelihood of not getting you a real long term legal job.

      You have a high likelihood of unemployment with a Columbia, NYU or top of the class Fordham law degree a few years down the road. These schools do not publish longer term employment statistics going out farther than 9 months because the statistics are bad. The statistics are much worse than for first years - a much smaller percentge of the class in full-time permanent legal jobs, much lower salaries than the $160,000 advertised for major cities and a much bigger percentage of the class in temp work or unemployed.

      So if you think 32 or 45 is too ancient to worry about, and you are a OL contemplating spending three years in law school, taking on six figure debt, and foregoing learning another useful trade until a time when you will likely be too old to learn a new line of work that may actually get you a job, good luck.

      Maybe you will be the special snowflake for whom time stops and you will never get old.

      Delete
    5. 6:44 That will be you in 7 to 15 years if you are top of the class Fordham or Columbia or NYU and worked at BigLaw. You will likely be long-term unemployed. Then you can say:

      "Good - the older lawyers had their chance."


      The point is that the current BigLaw system feeds a huge oversupply of lawyers. Too many lawyers are trained in each specialty.

      That will be you - unemployed and dying for temp work when you can get it.

      I am sure you will think this is a good system. You had your few years in BigLaw and maybe in house and now you have a spouse, kids, a mortgage and no employment prospects. No one needs you. There are 50 of you applying to each open legal job.

      Delete
  37. Regarding law school grades, my experience is that the grades themselves are irrelevant.

    You are either in the top 10% of your class and are able to get a good job while still in school (such as via OCI). In which case, you are put on a good path moving forward, and nobody will give your grades a second look.

    OR (for 90% of graduates), you are NOT in the top 10%, meaning you are CUT-OFF from the truly prestigious law jobs. So you are either looking at jobs in (1) a small-ish firm, which does not place that big an emphasis on grades, since these jobs are obtained mostly by way of who you know, or (2) you apply for a job that does NOT require a law degree, in which case nobody cares what grades you got in law school.

    So in summary, my experience tells me that you either have a 3.5+ GPA, OR it does not matter. A 3.1, a 2.8 and a 2.5 will all take you to the same frustrating place.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One can be in the top 10%, or even the top 1%, but still not get a job.

      Delete
    2. Sure, if one is a moron.

      Delete
    3. Oh, yes, of course: morons are ever so common at the top of the class.

      Delete
    4. Social IQ Moron, that is...

      Delete
  38. I find this site to be very interesting and informative and will look forward to more in 2013. A law degree should not send anyone into poverty and employment prospects should not be that horrendous. This site, and many others, are simply a warning...and I am glad it is being heeded. Keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete
  39. Hardly worth this Oscar acceptance speech by Campos ("I couldn't have done it without you!"), nor Nando's uninvited "best supporting actor in a fucking nutcase role" speech in the comments above.

    For 2013, here's a goal. Find a leader who is neither (1) a law professor, or (2) a mentally disturbed laughingstock.

    Then in 2014, you might have a shot at actually getting noticed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good idea. I nominate you Anon Tool

      Delete
    2. If scamblogs aren't currently having an effect, what's going to happen when they "actually get[] noticed"? Will law schools have zero applicants?

      I guess you had better hope people don't start paying attention to the scamblogs the way you do, you obsessive little freak.

      Delete
    3. Like McEntee and Lynch at LST?

      Delete
    4. Yes. McEntee and Lynch would do just fine, if psychopath Nando could stop attacking their "nice" way of doing business.

      LST has done more for this movement than anybody, Campos and Nando included, but Campos couldn't even be bothered to name them in his post above (preferring to name Nando out of fear of getting ripped to shreds).

      Wow. A movement based on fear of being attacked by a fat, shit-pic-fetish, baby-bearded chump.

      Nando is the Grover Norquist of this movement - his undue influence stops it really taking off.

      Delete
    5. There are many people who would prefer that this movement be reserved to "nice" people like McEntee, Lynch and Tamanaha. Those people generally work at law schools.

      Delete
    6. Let's not overstate what LST has done. It's a good venture, and they'd qualify as good leaders who avoid the pitfalls of being Campos or Nando, but they have not spread the word or given the movement credibility in the way Nando, Campos, ATL, or David Segal have. To speak specifically to what you claim, this blog here has several times the traffic that LST does.

      Delete
    7. LST helped force transparency. They also have the brilliant fact of no one responding to their initial request to compare to where we are now. That difference lays the scam out.

      Also, do not underestimate how many applicants are looking at LST for data. To me the scam is about exposing the lies so that people can make better decisions. Then it is about dealing with people who have non-doschargeae debt because they believed the scam.

      Delete
  40. http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcneal/2012/12/28/misleading-study-of-big-law-partners-criticized/


    Forbes blog discussing the previously dissed "study" of law firm partners with a study that actually corrects for population size.

    Also mentions the idea of ethical charges against deans for publishing lies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BUT NO ONE IS PAYING ATTENTION TO THE SCAMBLOGS!!!!!!

      Delete
    2. The Great and Powerful LeiterDecember 28, 2012 at 3:26 PM

      "Pay no attention to the scam behind the curtain!"

      Delete
    3. Harvard law is offering its first free online course: subject: copyright.

      Also law.com has a premium access story on the daily report about 2012 being the year law schools woke up to a new reality.

      Delete
    4. http://www.dailyreportonline.com/PubArticleDRO.jsp?id=1202582763179&The_year_law_schools_woke_up

      Delete
  41. I know I know, this post is kind of like the purple fingers that were once all over the news after the elections in Iraq.

    Remember that stuff?

    If Leiter wants a volunteer to wave peacock or Ostritch Plumes over his head as he reads some or other dense passage from Nietzche and tries to connect it to space law, I am the man to do it!

    But while painting one day a number of years ago, I had a walkman with a tape cassette in it. The tape was an abridged audio book for the blind and read by a young Christopher Reeve and before his accident. Reeve read this last passage so well, and it really choked me up as I was listening to it, and I think this is a good year end cap and finally an exit for the blogging.

    "And as I sat there brooding on the old, unknown world, I thought of Gatsby's wonder when he first picked out the green light at the end of Daisy's dock. He had come a long way to this blue lawn, and his dream must have seemed so close that he could hardly fail to grasp it. He did not know that it was already behind him, somewhere back in that vast obscurity beyond the city, where the dark fields of the republic rolled on under the night.

    Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgiastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that's no matter-tomorrow we will run faster, stretch our arms farther. . . And one fine morning---

    So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.


    Happy New Year, and may we all never stop dreaming of happiness, and of a happiness that can be made through our own efforts within a fair and humane world that we will be allowed and be able to create one day, perhaps far into the future.

    It ain't now.





    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Paintroach,

      Stop posting here! Keep your promise.

      If you had the same accident as Christopher Reeve, it wouldn't reduce your work output one bit, would it?

      I stopped "dreaming" of happiness a long time ago. I went out and found it.

      Y'know, Paintroach, I have several friends who actually do work for the government, and are going the PSLF route even as I type this. Admittedly, they are employed as attorneys, but still. I guess you must know something that they don't. Or - LOL - perhaps their parents would kick them out of the house if THEY refused to take jobs. LOL at my latest "attack" on your parents.

      If I owed as much money as you do, I would consider PSLF my only way to get back to even. I don't like the fact that the loan is discharged at the end, but at least the write-off would reflect 10 years of interest instead of 25.

      Don't you have any dignity left? Or are you planning to prey on your parents until you're f**king 80?

      Delete
    2. Again, only qualifying jobs get PSLF. Again, I don't think that applies if you have been in default.

      You need to understand the realities of these programs. I don't care about one specific person, but try not to post incorrect information.

      There may be a time limit involved as well, but I am not sure. You might have had to go into public service within a certain time after graduation.

      Delete
    3. SPEAKING of "incorrect information" ...

      No, there is no "time limit." How'd you dream that one up?

      ***ALL*** full-time government employment qualifies. All of it - except for Congressman (srsly). So don't become a Congressman.

      A past "default" DOES NOT MATTER.

      Just take the job already. What will you have after 25 years of IBR/ICR? Won't you be like 100 years old then?

      Obviously, PSLF is not a reason to *go* to law school. But someone who has already graduated with huge debt and no (law) job would be an idiot NOT to take advantage it.

      Delete
  42. LawProf,

    Maybe you should also make a list of the enemies of law school reform. People like Brian Leiter, William Robinson, that Anon poster over at taxprof blog (oh wait I already listed Leiter), Jack Marshall, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Deborah Rhode of Stanford Law should NOT be commended. I saw a video on YouTube where she gave a talk with Prof. Campos. All she did was take the party line of ... if we "just" make things more "practical" and offer more clinics, all the problems facing law students will dissolve. Keep drinking the Kool Aid you elitist pig.

    ReplyDelete
  44. That thread on lawschoolfail made me hurt. In the brain.

    So do Leiter's posts. That man is in a category all by himself. He would rather spend a lengthy post making fun of Campos' professorial abilities than talk openly about the scam.

    I quit reading his most recent post after seeing this: "Law schools charge what they charge because the market can bear it." Uh, what market? You mean the one with the demand curve distorted by guaranteed student lending practices? You mean the one where deans and professors have misrepresented the possible returns from the purchase?

    High tuition isn't the product of the market working, it's the product of the market NOT working. For Leiter to ignore this is either ignorance or academic fraud.

    Of course, he wouldn't let me post this at his blog because he has no interest in engaging in discussion that show him to be mistaken. LawProf seems to allow whatever people post. Ask yourself who has more to hide: the one who engages in ad hominem and closes his comments, or the one who speaks to substance and encourages open discussion?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Leiter has never permitted comments. It is kind of irritating for people accustomed to being able to provide feedback, but as Leiter says, hey, it's his blog.

      What was that song? Oh yeah, it's my potty and I'll cry if I want to... cry if I want to...

      Delete
  45. Hey Campos. Do all your Ivy League friends get a gold star for their contributions? My feeling is that this movement isn't defined by one or a handful of people, but many, many individuals. Why is it that Ivy League jag offs always have to pat themselves on the back? Be happy you have a cushy little academic job Campos.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought Campos went to Michigan ?

      Delete
    2. Someone is really confused.

      Delete
    3. I know he wen't to Michigan, but that doesn't mean he doesn't act like an Ivy League puke.

      Delete
  46. Was this High School for Future lawyers in Chicago already discussed?? Wow. http://www.pantagraph.com/news/state-and-regional/illinois/new-chicago-high-school-grooms-future-lawyers/article_7719a841-0da2-551b-b231-ec1edf62fa23.html

    ReplyDelete
  47. You forgot to mention the Great One, The John Bungsolaphagus, Marianna, John Doee.

    As far back as 2007, John Bungsolaphagus broke down and exposed the lawland billable scam and predicted the falling of the house of cards that was built upon it..the entire legal so-called profession. The Great One detailed the stranglehold that certain classist, racist and elitist folks had a strangle hold on the profession to the demise of most others within.

    The Professor mentions the uncle tom Ellie Mystal who until recently was a lawland shill who blamed tier II grad victims for not gettting into Ivy schools and acted as though it were their fault and that there was no lawland scam. F him.

    He also left out the writer at the WSJ who helped Scotty Bullock fire the toileteer shot heard round the world in September of 2007: Emir Efrati.

    There was also The Slumbering Dogamatist, Life's Mockery, Mata Hairy, DSE (with her stories of working at shystain LLC) and many many more.

    The Great One spoke truth to lawland power and lemmings as far back as 2006 inspired by the great Scotty Bullock who accurately described the goings on in shitlaw and doc review and made me feel that I was no alone.

    Often times we were reviled by even our own co-victims for indentifying the devils who make law a living hell and for calling them out on their devilry. Now the truths that we were stoned for in 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 are taken damn near for common knowledge far and wide. We made it so that one has little excuse for falling victim to the law land scam.

    I am quite sure that there are many more that I should list here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. agreed, JB. Thanks for the tip of the hat, both you and nando. I am very proud of being the first scamblogger to advance the numerical analysis of the law school stats as a scambusting tool.

      And that WSJ writer was indeed a pioneer, and it was not only scotty who was brave enough to speak out in that WSJ article, but also a houston lawyer by the name of matthew fox curl. When I tried to be a solo right out of school, I wound up sitting next to him at a table in the galveston county courtroom, both of us being appointed counsel that day. I thanked him.

      Yes, law prof and DJM have done very work here, and LST, great work.

      But the biggest kudos must go to all those who have posted comments on mainstream media articles and blogs online over the past few years. All those comments got our message into the media mind.

      -unperson/matahairy etc of ETLSS

      Delete
  48. Oh, so much mutual mastubation between the scambloggers. Excuse me while I wipe the sperm from the inside of my screen.

    "You're the best!"
    "No, you're the best!"
    "Couldn't have done it without you! Kisses!"
    "It's nothing, really! You inspired me!"
    "Don't be modest. You are awesome!"

    Yuck.

    Expose the scam, not each other's penises.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not nearly as bad as BriAnon's multiple personalities masturbating over on lawschoolfail.

      Delete
  49. http://www.lawschoolfail.com/#sthash.bdSHVND8.dpbs

    More garbage from BriAnon:

    "In fact, I don't want to even acknowledge that such a "scam" exists or doesn't exist. The word scam and law school don't go together at all."

    "Why I don't want to be a part of this 'movement' any longer. Take from it what you will.

    1. The scamblog movement is a Godless movement.

    2. It is self-destructive.

    3. There is nothing to be gained from the movement.

    4. Law, as a profession, will not die as long as there are laws. Laws will exist far longer than any of us will.

    5. It's literally a wasted existence.

    6. It's depressing.

    7. Scambloggers are, in large, the laughing stock of society.

    8. I want to give my wife a good life.

    9. I know that with my outlook on life, I can never fall as hard as those who knew failure was imminent.

    10. I don't want to end up like the other bloggers.

    11. There are jobs out there. Even for those with JDs.

    12. Money is not the sole reason for my existence.

    13. I have options.

    14. I may die at any time.

    15. Life is what you make of it."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Holy shit is that site elaborate BriAnon flame? I wouldn't put it past him. And the post you reference above reads like a fluffed up summary of every argument he makes while trolling.

      E.g.: "Those who are successful literally laugh at these blogs. Most law students and graduates know that scamblogs are the trash of the internet."

      Delete
    2. Ignore this guy. Don't visit his site altogether. Once the author sees his site hits plummet, he will stop.

      Nando and others, you know that the author of that blog is the "World Traveling Law Student", right?

      Delete
    3. A.K.A. Mr. Infinity, the blogger who formerly wrote the late "Go to Law School" blog.

      Delete
    4. What vengeful, hate-filled pieces of shit you are.

      You cast JD Painter out into the cold. You advocate not reading other blogs.

      This scamblog movement is selfish, just like those who support it. Selfish little kids who can't bear the thought of success, who can't bear the idea of anyone getting over their past and moving forward. And you go out of your way to stifle any sense of positivity.

      I look forward to 2013 being the year that the scamblogs destroy themselves through this continued selfish infighting, this obsession with who this movement belongs to, who is in charge, who calls the shots, and who should reap the publicity of its dubious successes.

      I personally look forward to a happy 2013. But feel free to wallow in self pity while being used by Campos and Nando to further their own selfish little agendas.

      Delete
    5. LOL, "selfish little kids who can't bear the thought of success?"

      Sounds more like a description of the Paintroach than anyone else on this site.

      Delete
  50. For those who miss Scott Bullock, you should check out this TLS thread - look for posts by "areyouinsane". Can't confirm it is him but the hilarity is familiar.

    http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=157855

    ReplyDelete
  51. How is the TLS forum not one of those who helped make this past year successful in terms of law school reform? I, as well as I'm sure many other readers here, came to this very blog from that forum; in fact, the TLS consensus very often mirrors that of ITLSS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TLS hasn't caused change. TLS had to be dragged kicking and screanming towards reality in my opinion.

      For a long time, TLS wouldn't even allow direct links to this blog- that policy only changed in the past six months or so.
      When I first started posting on TLS a couple of years ago, people attacked anyone who tried to explain the reality of employment. The common wisdom then was that anyone who was against law school was just trying to limit competition.

      TLS users still attack and call flame on people who post about bad outcomes. Or they like to tell people that they just must be bad interviewers.

      There is little support on TLS for the idea that there simply are not enough jobs, that most people should drop out or that biglaw is far from guaranteed even if you are above median at a T14.

      TlS has not done a single thing- other than starting to allow direct links to this blog- to be leaders in fighting the scam. They are very late to the party and still filled with delusion about how difficult the job market remains.

      Delete
    2. I want to add: maybe now that a few well-known TLS posters got no- offered from their summer jobs and now remain jobless and that others are starting to post a little about being unemployed, the 3L job search, etc. , people might start to comprehend.
      That one of the leading people on TLS who is a northwestern grad ended up in six review because of the crash ( even though he had more than 20 interview) was not enough of a warning to people.

      People tend not to post about bad outcomes though, and only one person who was jobless posted much about their search. The great majority of TLS posters drift away after graduating.

      Delete
    3. I've found TLS more convincing than most of the commentators on this blog. This blog (Campos and DJM aside) tends to be dominated by "Tier 1, e.g., American" and lower grads. Many of these grads seem to get a kick out of saying self-serving and dumb things like students who are "top 10% at a top ten school" or "above median at Yale" will have a tough time. As someone who attends HYS, I have first hand knowledge that all but a handful of our graduates still do quite well. But as a regular on TLS I've also encountered enough people who graduated from T14 schools and who are struggling that I have a more realistic portrait of the market. Since these people aren't the kind of people who feel compelled to decry every decision to go to law school as a bad one, I can actually trust their estimations of the legal market for top grads.

      Now before someone comes in to tell me I'll be unemployed when I'm forty, let me say this:

      I'll have five figure debt without paying a cent of my own money for my degree, have the option of using my school's generous LRAP (way better than IBR), and will have paid for my opportunity costs within the first seven years post-graduation. If I was choosing to attend law school today, TLS and the blog posts on this site would give me some pause. The hysterical commentators on this site wouldn't.

      Delete
    4. Sorry, but many people I know from HYS are not doing so well. They are not current students though or in their first year since graduation from law school. The HYS degree gets you a first and maybe a second job. After that, you are on your own and not every HYS grad remains employed.

      Delete
    5. The problem is that 2:24, a current HYS student, mistakenly thinks he/she has made it into what DJM and LawProf call a limited access guild. In fact, it is really a tournament guild. Lots of people from Harvard or Yale lose jobs at some point and cannot get back into the profession. It has been that way for a long time, but is much worse now. Harvard, Yale and Stanford Law do not provide anyone with long term job security. They do provide a good beginning for a career, and a chance at a good middle, but grads of these top schools do wash out, have to take counsel positions that are eat-what-you kill, have to become solos, or are actually unemployed. It is rare just out of law school, but less rare as each law school class gets older.

      Delete
    6. 2:24 What is so galling about this scam is the lack of information you have about the real risks of attending HYS and where your career will go. While many people from HYS have wonderful careers, many do not. I think if the real longer term outcomes were known, a lot of people would rather not take the risk, and would go into a somewhat safer career.

      Delete
    7. The other thing is that I do not think earning $125,000 in the private sector with not such great benefits is a good outcome for a HYS grad in New York City after 10 or 20 years of experience. That is also where some grads are. If you want a comfortable life, and the risk is you have a certain not small chance of making significantly less than a first year associate in the private sector, and the job requires a three hour a day commute, well, is that a good outcome? Sure, you are employed, but you could have been more comfortably employed with a short commute, living in a lower cost area, with more job security if you had chosen a different career and maybe even a less prestigious career than law. Why would you chose HYS Law for that outcome. If you came from a top college, the income is probably little above the median income for grads of your college in your geographic area. What has that HYS degree got you in my example, a true one?

      Delete
    8. LOL.

      Seriously, the risks of attending HYS? I was facing long term unemployment when I enrolled for little but cost of living (almost all my tuition is paid for). I have a useless degree from a mediocre college. I can't think of a single colleague from my major who is making more than 50-60k a year (and they are the lucky ones).

      Does an HYS degree give me employment for 30 years? Of course not. I don't think I've "made it" in the sense that I won't need to struggle for my keep. But having a crack at a couple good jobs was way better than my alternative. The fact that you know a few people struggling with HYS law degrees is not relevant. (And the fact that 125k is not viewed as an absolutely ideal scenario is hysterical, by the way--without law school I'd be making 35-40k right now, tops). The question is whether the HYS population do better with or without their law degrees. You have to be a shitboomer with a terrible understanding of the modern economy and our generation's standing in it to think that we could all just waltz into other great, high paying jobs. That ship has sailed.

      The law market is extremely overstaturated. HYS isn't a guarantee of being at the top of the profession. But the jaded lawyers and law students on here are also incredibly myopic. My problem isn't that I think I've made it. My problem is that the shitboomer's sold out my generation, law students and non-law students alike. Exiting law ain't no cure for that.

      But telling the kid with the liberal arts degree who got a full need-based aid package from HYS law that he made a bad deal is fucking retarded and only detracts from your arguments.

      Delete
    9. I'm not even mad, tho.

      I should add that I agree having longitudinal data would be create and might have influenced the decision-making of some of my colleagues, who do have better non-law options than I do.

      Delete
    10. create = great

      Delete
    11. If you got full scholy to HYS, you are unusual and of course it would make sense to attend or at least seriously consider attending. The people I know who are attending HYS today are paying through the nose.

      I quite frankly am pissed that I attended. The long term employment outcomes are not worth it for many people. I had other options besides law school that would have been better in terms of employment outcomes.

      The average salary from my undergraduate college is about $110,000 ten years out of college. That is nationally. For NY City it is probably closer to the $125,000 that law grad was making. A substantial number of HYS grads come from top colleges. A cop in NY City makes $90,000 after 5 years. There is nothing hysterical about an expensive law degree producing an economic detriment, which would be the case for my top law school grad who had to pay full freight for HYS and ended up making the average income for his top college that people make in his city even without law degrees. His/her HYS law degree is a negative.

      I look at my contemporaries who pursued other options, including teaching, and they are much better off than a fair number of the top law school crowd.

      Delete
    12. You are too young to understand it. Your contemporaries have not yet gone through the process of losing jobs and not getting them back in an oversaturated market. The scam is losing your top job and getting back in in a lousy position, even from Harvard.

      Delete
    13. Another big part of the scam is awful employment outcomes for minorities and poor employment outcomes for women. If you fall into one of those categories, even more risk of your degree not working out longer term.

      Not a reliable degree if you want a real career as opposed to a shorter term good job. A chance at a great career if you go to HYS, but the odds of actually having a great career, probably not even 50/ 50, but who knows the actual numbers?

      If you get tenure as a teacher, you have a job. If you are a school principal, golden. If you are a doctor, dentist, pharmacist, nurse practitioner, physician assistant, or skilled technician doing radiology, you have a job.

      As a lawyer, you do not necessarily have a job. It is tournament guild in the true sense.

      Delete
    14. I have plenty of teacher colleagues making 30k a year--some of whom don't have job stability (lol @ "tenure"). I have nursing friends who are having trouble finding work. I have a doctor friend whose debt load is in the hundreds of thousands and will need to remain in his career in spite of not getting the residency he wanted and hating his job. Pretty sure he is depressed and developing a drug problem but I don't press too hard. And I have way more friends who've suffered through serious unemployment and continue to live with their parents.

      The idea that I don't understand because I'm young is shitboomer flame. It is us young'uns who understand. Try hitting the job market for the first time post-2008. I full as hell know that I might end up no-offered or pushed out a couple years in. But my eyes are open enough to know that there aren't magical career paths out there--NYC cop!!!--that don't have their own drawbacks.

      FYI: An HYS grad paying full freight either made ~ 200k per year or thereabouts prior to college or has parents who are making that much. And if you're looking for sympathy because your law degree didn't fully maximize your income from a pure cost-benefit standpoint you'll need to look elsewhere.

      Delete
    15. Dude, Im one of the posters that tells kids to go the municipal route. Is an nyc cop, fireman, electrician, carpenter, teacher, etc. better off than someone who goes to Touro (and whose parents aren't rich)? Absolutely. Are those same types better off than people finishing Brooklyn, SJU, Dozo, etc.? Probably (again, assuming mom and dad do nkt have money). Are those same types better off than people going to Fordham, GW, and even some of the T14? If trends continue, 50-50 (again, assuming mom and dad dont have the paper). Are those same types better off than people going to HYS, or better put, is it better being a cop than going to HYS? The answer is no. The kind of doors a degree from such a school open can be incredible. Moreover,those doors open many more times than not for people from those schools.

      Advising that people not attend those schools and comparing those prospects of those people to NYC cops is ludicrous. It hurts both the scamblog message and it casts doubts in the minds of people that should go down the.muni route instead of college and/or law school (by making us sound extreme).

      I advise young kids from non-richfamilies to drop out of college and LS to become cops, firemen, plumbers, etc. I do this to the detriment of my ego, reputation, and pysche, as the exchange is mostly met with ridicule, but if I can save even one person, I am happy. However, telling people that HYS is a bad bet is fucking ludicrous. Even if things wind up bad from there, the opportunities are truly incredible. So stop harping about it.

      Delete
    16. My point is not HYS vs nothing. It is to look at other options. Some careers pay terribly to start but end up quite nicely, like teaching in NY City.

      In the longer term, other careers besides law offer more job security. Double Harvard or double Yale does not protect you from unemployment. I have a classmate who committed suicide when he lost his law job. Another was unemployed and living with no income inspite of BigLaw and an in house gigs after double Harvard or Yale. I could go on in this vein with more examples.

      It is very possible to do everything right and end up with no employment options. The doctor friend may have a lot of debt, but unless he/she was stupid enough to go into a non-primary care specialty for which there is little demand, he/she has a job.

      Teaching may be hard for the first few years, but in NYC, an experienced teacher gets $108,000 in salary and huge benefits. For my contemporaries, including HYSColNYU, law was generally great in the early years of their careers. Some kept their jobs for the longer term. However, there is a fairly high percentage (I cannot tell you what it is) where the law degree from a top school flamed out to nothing. That is not going to happen in teaching or health care because the demand is there. There are a whole host of factors covered in this blog that contributed to the flame out.

      One thing people do not understand is how few real long term legal jobs there are once someone gets out of the first 10 or so years from graduation, and how that number of jobs decreases very substantially as one ages. When you want to keep that job, going to HYS does not matter. Your connections in the job matter. A Cooley lawyer who is better connected can keep that job while the HYS is let go.

      I am not saying HYS is a bad bet. It is, however, a risky bet, especially if you are a woman or minority. Other areas may be safer bets long term if you want to stay employed at a reasonable salary. They have less salary to start, but more income overall income careerwise taking into account the high unemployment rates for lawyers, the high cost of attending law school and the three years of foregone income.

      Delete
    17. For the people I know, the $30,000 job in human resources right out of college ended up as a better bet than going to a middle of the road top 50 law firm. Why? Because there is growth in human resources. Many people were promoted to responsible jobs in human resources. The jobs were not up or out.

      Delete
    18. 11:03 You do not know how bad or good the experienced legal job market is. Depends on many factors. The experienced job market is soo different from the junior attorney market. There is no data. I don't know any unemployed nurses,doctors, dentists or pharmacists. The unemployed teachers I know are very recent grads waiting to get in during a period of severe cutbacks. They are not midcareer or even with a few years experience. I know plenty of unemployed lawyers from top schools with top experience. This is just anecdotal.

      Delete
    19. 9:37, instead of posting the same anecdotal claims 200 times on this blog, why don't you do a little research? I'm serious: get the current alumni directory for a top school (yours ideally) and just go through the class of 1992 or 1987 or whatever. This would take you a couple of hours at most. Then send the data to Lawprof -- I'm sure he'd be more than happy to publicize whatever you discovered.

      Delete
    20. I knew being a cop, teacher, fireman etc. in big ciTy is better than being a lawyer and most things that involve getting a serious education. However, if you are telling me those things are better than getting a law degree from HYS, then we got real problems.

      Delete
    21. 11:16 - Fair enough, I agree that most law-bound students would be better off considering alternative careers, particularly those that don't require professional or even undergraduate degrees. I have plenty of family members in trades or service positions who do quite well. Even a cop friend who has a nice deal(but I have more who've wanted to join and keep getting turned away).

      9:37 - I second 9:45's question. Give us the data. I am in touch with alumni from my school and most of what I've seen is positive, particularly if the benchmark is "student with liberal arts degree." I know of a couple people who've struggled--being a first year associatate getting hit with the crash was terrible, for instance--but even they have bounced around from position to position. And I know of others who've leveraged their HYS degrees to find great positions outside of the law that they'd never have had a shot at prior to the degree. When my generation is facing 30% underemployment I'm going to need to see better than "I know some HYS grads 10 years out that are unemployed."

      - HYS student with nice aid package

      Delete
    22. Data? Here? To back up one of the hundreds of anecdotal (a/k/a bullshit) claims made in the comments section here on a daily basis?

      That's crazy talk.

      No facts here! Just recirculated rumors and myths and "I have a friend of a friend of a friend who is a cop earning $5M per year and retired when he was 15 years old" stuff.

      Delete
    23. It is probably ridiculous to suggest cops are better off than most prudent HYHYS grads. However,big city cops are infinitely better off than 90% of all other lawyers. You can pull the NYC civil list with a simple Google search. You should be able to see what any city worker makes. Note that it takes 5 years to make top pay as a cop, so, theres that. Also the civil list does not appear to contain overtime compensation. You can aslo look at.NYPD recruit .com.

      A regular cop makes 90k, detectives make 98k, sarges makes 108k, liuetants 125k and captains are at 145-160. This does not include overtime. They are eligible for retirement at 20-25 years of service. The pensions range from 5-10k a month (after taxes).

      That is all public record that you can find by simple goverment record and public document searches.

      Pay for muni tradesmen, janitors, firemen, garbagemen, etc. is comprable.


      That certainly beats getting most educations available today, including STEM. (Certainly not a HYSlegal education, but mostly everything else).

      Also, I have heard that their vacation time is incredible (but to be honest, I havent seen the data on this).

      Smart kids, whose parents are not rich and/or did not get into incredibly elite professional programs, will go to those jobs (or try to). If they fail, life goes on. If they are dumb, they can go gamble their future at the Higher Education Casino.

      Delete
    24. It is not that there are no jobs available. The jobs that are available are hard work, often geographically a long commute and they are really unstable; they disappear for any reason or no reason. I count people who became partners at major law firms and then got screwed and are now struggling as not such a great outcome. One guy I know retired early as a GC and made a huge amount of money from stock options. Some of the other GCs I know were basically screwed and forced out with some money but really no future.

      When you compare most of these lawyers to doctors or dentists, the doctors ad dentists win. Doctors and dentists do not have to put up with job losses. They do not have to involuntarily change jobs. They can work as long as they are willing and able, and they always have the ability to earn a six figure income.

      Medicine and dentistry win by leaps and bounds over law, and they win by leaps and bounds over HYS Law. You do not need a HYS Law GPA or test scores to get into med school.

      The point is the long term outcomes of law schools are so different from the entry level job market and are so little known by OLs and people starting their legal careers. You cannot say 5 years out - this is good. The story changes drastically as you get you older.

      Delete
    25. 2:09 "Data? Here? To back up one of the hundreds of anecdotal (a/k/a bullshit) claims made in the comments section here on a daily basis?"

      Sure, is just bull. No HYS are solos, or working as counsel in some firm no one has ever heard of. The people I have happened to know from HYS who lost their jobs and never got back into good jobs are the exception. Of course, if this were true, that HYS produces some bad outcomes after 9 months, there would be data. Of course the information in the HYS alumni directory is not proprietary. I can take it right off the directory and publish names and employment results with impunity. Of course, law schools have published employment data going out more than 9 months in a way where a 0L can evaluate employment outcomes.

      Delete
  52. Also my thanks to the facebook page Don't Go to Law School

    ReplyDelete
  53. Here's the truth about Brian Leiter:

    *He's a pathological liar and a deeply fucked up person in general. He's well known for sock puppeting and obsessive trolling all over the net, while denying that he does so. For instance in this thread someone who purports not to be Leiter posted that Leiter doesn't pay attention to this blog, even though Leiter writes about this blog regularly (always because an unnamed colleague "told him" about something on it), and even though an intelligent ten year old would realize that the only person in the world who would know whether or care about Brian Leiter pays attention to this blog is Brian Leiter.

    *Leiter has a pathological hatred of and obsession with Campos, that is frankly creepy. Leiter is an out of control narcissist and can't stand that someone else gets more attention than he does. This is so intense that Leiter just ignores that he appears to have little or no substantive disagreements with Campos in regard to the subject matter of this blog. Instead he rants on and on about how Campos is just repeating what people like Henderson and Tamanaha (and of course Leiter himself!) have been saying for years. So his attacks on Campos are on their face purely personal and petty, but he's so fucked up emotionally that he can't even recognize this.

    *His out of control behavior is making him an open joke in legal academia. He used to be respected for his actual academic work, despite his obsession with comically self-serving law school rankings and the like, but now his weird little fetishes have gotten too out of control, and he just creeps people out. The best thing to do would be to ignore him. Ironically, he realizes that every time he attacks Campos he just gives this blog more attention, which is exactly what he can't stand, but he obviously has lost the ability to control his obsessions.

    Short version: Leiter is a fucked up creep who is probably headed for a semi-public breakdown of some kind.

    ReplyDelete
  54. BriAnon posts 30 anonymous comments on his own shitty blog Law School Fail.

    Some of his user names:

    A Hopeful Law Student
    BriAnon
    Anonymous (his favorite)

    And he is also Mr. Infinity. Have fun looking for a law job in your law semester of law school, you pathetic piece of shit.

    ReplyDelete
  55. http://www.autoadmit.com/leiter.html

    "Why Dr. Brian Leiter Hates Us

    AutoAdmit - The most prestigious admissions board in the world

    Is it any coincidence that less than 24 hours after we release a study that all but entirely discredits University of Texas law professor Brian Leiter's competing law school ranking index, Dr. Leiter goes on a venomous and utterly juvenile tirade slandering the author personally and us as a whole?"

    "He also has apparently taken to searching for bathroom, racist, and anti-semitic language in thread titles. It's a veritable rainbow of colorful language!
    cunt: 4 times
    fuck: 1 time
    blowjob: 2 times
    bitch: 5 times
    whore: 1 time
    fag: 5 times
    fags: 1 time
    nigger: 14 times
    blacks: 2 times
    jews: 14 times
    jew: 9 times
    kike: 1 time
    This mystery individual was also the first user to search for all of the terms mentioned in Leiter's blog today--before it was ever posted.

    The above are just about the only law school-related terms this anonymous user has searched for in the records, with two exceptions: after searching for such lovely little treasures, this anonymous user does move on to two respected academic figures:
    bernstein - 1 time
    volokh - 1 time
    In his spare time, he enjoys clicking on links to Hotornot pages of students from UT, learning more about Paris Hilton, and reading threads about Leiter (such as this one )."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really don't see why the above should be surprising. The merits or usefulness of BLs resulting post aside, all that shows is that he researched the substance of his post.

      Delete
    2. "In his spare time, he enjoys clicking on links to Hotornot pages of students from UT, learning more about Paris Hilton, and reading threads about Leiter (such as this one )."

      Um, yeah, "research" -- that's the ticket.

      Delete
    3. Depends. If he visited the site numerous times before writing the post and clicked on those links then yeah I'm with you. If the visits and clicks were concentrated in the few days before he wrote the post then I'd say he was gathering material for his post.

      Delete
  56. Not exactly on topic but this seems like as good a place as any:

    I graduated in May from a lower ranked tier one school with a strong regional presence in May and took and passed PA and NJ's Bar Exams in July (should let you guess which school). What do I do now? I volunteer in the legal department of a government agency (won't say what level of government) 3 1/2 days a week and I'm a valet the rest. So I am a licensed attorney who parks the cars, often for other lawyers. Oh and my two lawyers roommates also could only find volunteer lawyer work since being admitted to two bars.

    This week I get to work on New Year's Eve and New Year's day parking cars, then a shift on Friday, a double shift on Saturday and a morning shift on Sunday. I entered law school prepared to work long hours on holidays and weekends, but I never imagined I'd be working longs hours parking fucking cars--which barely allows me to cover my rent and food.

    Oh and career services is counting me as employed ("JD not required," as if that'll be made clear to OL's) for purposes of ABA and admission stats.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rutgers Camden or one of the Philly Schools....

      Delete
    2. I went to Rutgers Newark and graduated in 2012. I had all the bells and whistles but decided early in that there was no way I was pursuing a legal job.

      I had a classmate who did quite well and was fond of saying, "All I know is that two years ago I was working at Olive Garden and next year I've got a job lined up where I wont have to bring anyone any fucking food." (He was one of the tiny handful of winners of the law school lottery)

      No matter how many times I'd say, "yeah but there are literally hundreds of people in this building right now who will *never* get a real legal job. *That's* why it's a scam," he just wouldn't hear it. He was blind to the stats due to his own success.

      Delete
    3. That's correct, your friend is a winner and the others are losers. Welcome to life.

      Delete
  57. More rants by Mr. Infinity ....


    http://www.lawschoolfail.com/#.dpuf

    It does not matter what people think of me. Especially negative nellies like the scambloggers. [...] I really don't want to have anything to do with these people anymore. They honestly sadden me. They are so wretched and they are very disturbed people that need to do something with their lives. I hate to say that I am glad they failed, but the truth is, these people do not deserve success. They are crybaby whiners and they are meeting a fitting end.

    [...]

    I can't believe that I actually fell for the lies of these stupid scamblogs! It's one of the most shameful events of my life. I have realized, learned the hard way, if you will, that hanging out with people who are negative will only bring you down to their level and their way of thinking. I want to rise above that! I am so much better than that. So much better.

    [...]

    I am a special little snowflake. And If I want a law job, I will find a law job! And you can too!

    ReplyDelete
  58. A stream of losers who accomplished nothing, and will accomplish nothing. Law school tuitions are higher than ever losers!!! Schools are raking it in while you whine like bitches, PLUS they dominated in the courts too! It's the golden age for the law school scam.

    Let me give you a word of advice. When someone roofies you and bangs you in the rear, don't waste your time trying to get back at then, get your own roofies and bang someone else. It's the way of the world. Get used to it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. More rants by Mr. Infinity. LOL, psychopath.

      Delete
    2. Your first paragraph is nonsense, because despite all of the ways that you insist law schools are winning, they're now facing a small and drastically decreasing applicant pool - none of that other shit matters. Law schools could charge $100K/year but it wouldn't mean shit if no one was applying or attending.

      So all I'm taking from this is that you've been roofied and banged in the ass and now do the same to others.

      Delete
    3. 10:48 is a loser. He obviously takes this all very personally

      Delete
  59. This song goes out to you Mr. Infinity:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHsxMqpL0c

    ReplyDelete
  60. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  61. haha oh man, I spent a good hour reading these comments and the other two blogs lawschoolfail and Leiter's blog. I have come to the conclusion that people are really, really weird. Ha well that was a good use of an hour, not sure if I dare to go to the comment sections again, I really appreciate Campos blog.

    ReplyDelete
  62. @10:05am,

    Thanks. And when I graduated it was T4.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I got your name and the standing of NYU wrong, but the sentiment is sincere. No one else from the very top schools has documented their experiences after losing their jobs in the crash. It is an important aspect of the scam, but many people justify going to school as long as they go to a T6. The scam mostly focuses on lower tier schools.

      Delete
  63. BI1Y,

    NYU was never a T4. Perhaps you were fooled during that one year when USNWR moved the deck chairs around (who could forget when UT made the T14 only to be dropped the following year or how USNWR shuffles between YHS, SYH, or is it YSH?) and placed NYU ahead of Columbia only to be switched back the following year. This is indicative of the problem: the weight placed on the useless USNWR rankings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree about NYU's rank being a good indication of the problems with USN, but iirc, NYU was #4 for two years. Tied with Columbia once, and then ahead of Columbia.

      Delete
  64. I'm working with a woman in an in house position. We're both temporary workers. She went to Michigan Law, has a BS engineering degree from a highly ranked school (on par with MIT), a MS from another highly ranked university and she worked in a major NYC firm for a few years and has her patent bar. I went to a third tier toilet, but I have a lot of scientific education and experience. Both of us are doing menial legal work on par with that of a paralegal. Basically kissing in-house counsel butt and doing their scut work. I can't say much for this woman's work ethic (or even her personality for that matter), but when someone like that can't get a job, you know the field is glutted. For all you prospective law students that think patent law might be a good career path, think again - the market is 100% glutted to the point where even people like this woman can't find stable employment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, the field is totally glutted. To that extent, it's like architecture, only worse.

      Delete
  65. It looks like Painter is getting manic. Time to put a stop to this idiot before he gets out of hand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kids coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan with serious injuries are the ones who have it bad, yet Painter won't give up his self-indulgent pity party. Utterly replusive.

      Delete
  66. I have been quietly lurking in the legal scene for some 20 years now. Law school is a billion dollar industry. Given the tax exempt status of universities, the legal education industry complex nets more a year than the entire porn industry! That stat astounds me.

    Many people make money off of the legal education scam. Westlaw, Barbri, TopLawSchools websites, law school consultants count on the scam in addition to the law school deans and administrators. For years, the scam went unnoticed. Many law graduates were too embarrassed to admit failure, and as some suggested, internalized these results as somehow being a reflection of their efforts. The internet wasn't advanced in 1995 as it is today.

    Law schools have always lied. Law school shills tried drowning the scambloggers by coining them losers. By all accounts, this May 2013, another 22,000 losers will be dumped on an already supersaturated market. People don't believe this profession is saturated, especially 0Ls. Simple research, such as looking at your local yellow pages will tell you how supersaturated the "profession"is. In my yellow pages, lawyer pages outnumber barbers, mechanics, restuarants and dentists combined!

    As competition for business intensifies, ethics will be thrown out the window, by both young and older lawyers. I am already seeing it happen. Newbie lawyers will be the most exposed. I know someone in my jurisdiction that has filed over 50 complaints against newbie attorneys for violating rules of professional conduct (as it applies to attorney advertising) over fraudulent craigslist and other ads. In my jurisdiction, having a virtual office does not cut it. If you spent $150K for a worthless degree and cannot spend another $20K more to set up shot, then you are done.

    One thing I have noticed as of late is how law schools are getting into the fray by publishing these idiotic op-ed pieces about how law school is worth it or how this is the best time to apply to law school. Beware of the fear of desperate men...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed, it is getting crazy. In the shitlaw trenches guys that get cases get all the money. Many times these people are very, very, very incompetent lawyers, yet their connections and capital infrastructure permit them to do far better than people vastly more competent and ethical than they. Its a fact that business is about sales, but professions are supposed to be about skills. When you destroy a profession by letting everyone and anyone you kill that, and with that,you reduce the ethical rules to something that applies, at most, to the weak and the desperate.

      Delete
    2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo

      Delete
  67. Hey Leiter:

    Campos is still here! Does that burn your butt you circus freak?

    He's still here Brian, as your relevance fades, and Chicago regrets its investment.

    Cass (Sunstein) was right, they should never have considered hiring a joker like you!

    Haaaaa haaa haaaa!

    ReplyDelete
  68. What Leiter lacks in charm and humility he more than makes up for in chinless arrogance and boundless self regard..

    ReplyDelete
  69. Thank you for everything. The Golden Toilet Award. And everything else.

    This is graduation year for me. I will be walking down the aisle, the FIRST IN FAMILY to graduate college + law school. I am proud.

    In a few months I will be working towards passing the bar. I will be working towards finding my first real job. I am excited. This is a dream come true for me! You all have tried so hard to destroy that dream for me, but I will not let you any longer! We all have but one life to live! This one is mine, and it's MY year! It's my turn! You had yours, so why can't I have mine?

    You can't take me down. I am a mile high and only flyin' higher!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're the only scamblogger with the balls to call it like it is. A sewer of negativity and hate.

      The other scambloggers left long ago, leaving just Nando and Campos in this shell of a movement.

      You made the right call. Hope you stick around!

      Delete
    2. Stop talking to yourself.

      Delete
  70. Wow, how big ARE your hands?December 31, 2012 at 7:41 AM

    Above, 2:24 writes, "As someone who attends HYS, I have first hand knowledge that all but a handful of our graduates still do quite well. "


    Hmm... let's see. Harvard 2011 has over 60 who either couldn't find full time employment or who are employed by the law school itself. How big is a handful?


    Hmm... Yale has over 10 percent of its 2011 class employed by the law school itself. How big is a handful?

    ReplyDelete
  71. For the record, at my blog I have been chronicling the law school's cooking of the books and juking of the stats since 2005. In the comments at Prawfslblawg I was questioning the economics of 3rd and 4th tier schools by 2008.

    http://legalethicsforum.typepad.com/blog/2008/08/law-schools-and.html

    http://www.legalethicsforum.com/blog/2010/02/law-review-circulation-numbers-cooking-the-books-and-legal-ethics.html

    http://www.legalethicsforum.com/blog/2005/03/ethics_is_law_s.html

    http://www.legalethicsforum.com/blog/2010/05/did-16-law-schools-commit-malpractice-spirit-vs-formalism-cooking-the-books-as-teaching-ethics.html

    http://legalethicsforum.typepad.com/blog/2008/06/truly-truly-it.html ("I am scandalized by the lack of information, and misleading information, flowing from law schools to applicants and students. It's not fair and it's sometimes a consumer fraud issue. And, when we see law students become lawyers who are enmeshed in scandals that involve "cooking the books," we might well ask, "where in the world did law students get the idea that responsible grown-ups are supposed to play with the numbers like that?")

    http://www.legalethicsforum.com/blog/2011/12/top-ten-legal-ethics-stories-of-2011.html

    http://www.legalethicsforum.com/blog/2012/10/law-school-falsified-jobs-data-ex-employee-of-thomas-jefferson-law-school-says.html

    http://www.legalethicsforum.com/blog/2011/11/aba-committee-readies-law-school-placement-salary-questionnaire.html

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.