Last month, a new reader and non-lawyer having read some of my law school criticisms, observed that I must have a thing against law schools. I replied, yes, as a matter of fact, I do.
But although I have certainly written my fair share of posts decrying the unconscionable conduct of law schools and their legal establishment enablers, I don’t really consider myself one of those “blessed” scambloggers.
Nevertheless, to his point, maybe — enough already. I’ve wearied of the ineffectuality — nay, the uselessness of complaining about how at best, law schools owe students the truth about the job market and at worst, law schools should let up just a little in the way they’ve been screwing over their students.
But most of all, the nasty over-the-top ranting hasn’t seemed to work. Law school chieftains, ABA-hacks and their deluded defenders have yet to be shamed into reform. It’s easier to blame the complainers.
And yes, you’ll wait a long time for one of those “Have you no decency” moments in this situation.
Futile magical thinking.
In the absence of an overdue “Caveat Emptor” message to aspiring lawyers, it’s simply magical thinking to wish “that moral suasion would prompt law schools to alter their ways.”
Never mind that in the meantime, the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that the economy will create 21,800 new jobs for lawyers annually until 2020 while greedy law schools annually churn out 44,000 new graduates with only a tinker’s damn of hope of a decent-paying job.
Indeed, the past few days there’s been yet another instance of how fertile the ground is of oversaturated graduate desperation and how rank the resulting opportunism. A Connecticut law firm advertised on Craigslist for a new lawyer-in-training willing to pay them “a monthly fee” to “learn by watching the day to day practice of law.”
“ARE YOU RECENTLY ADMITTED TO THE BAR, OR AWAITING BAR RESULTS, BUT NEED EXPERIENCE FOR THAT FIRST JOB?
“General practice attorney with more than twenty years of experience is willing to train a small number of recently admitted attorneys, or those awaiting bar results. For a monthly fee, you will be able to shadow the experienced attorney, and learn by watching the day to day practice of law. Observe the following types of proceedings, as they occur; Civil Short Calender motion arguments, foreclosure mediation’s, pre-trial conferences, Workers Compensation and Social Security hearings, real estate closings, discovery proceedings and compliance, research and general office operations. Once admitted to the bar, the goal is to have you handling matters with and eventually without supervision. We reserve the right to limit participation in any or all activities, and all appearances are subject to the client and presiding judges approval. Admitted attorneys will be paid referral fees, if your referred case settles. Please submit resumes by responding to this ad.”
Anonymous view from the bench.
And then just a few days ago, a federal judge — who from such a rarefied and protected perch of lifetime tenure, one might have hoped would have bravely deigned to rush in where angels fear to tread and fearlessly proclaim their well-reasoned criticism of current legal education.
But no. The judge instead asked law professor gadfly Paul Campos to post the unsigned view from the bench “On the Failures of Legal Education.”
So gripe all you want new lawyers. Regardless of law dean lip service, there’ll be no reform from within. Law school is a shameless cash cow. As the incognito federal judge explained, “Law professors are among the highest paid academics, and enjoy the newest buildings on ever-enlarging campuses. Law schools employ many part-time adjuncts who teach large enrollment classes for meager fees, generating even more profits for the law school budget, and less teaching time for the tenured faculty. Overhead costs for laboratories, equipment and floor space are nearly non-existent.”
Voluntary reform in the air? You’d be better off wishing for a self-administered electric cattle prod.
No, it’s going to require a draconian market correction. Only marketplace discipline and then just maybe a sequestration-compelled Congress — will finally constrict the unrestricted student loan pipeline on which law schools have gorged these many years. Only then, will a metamorphosis succeed where all the pissing-and-moaning has not.
______________________________________________________________
Photo Credits: “I’m mad as hell,” by David Drexler, david drexler, at Flickr via Creative Commons-license requiring attribution; “electric cattle prod,” Wikipedia Commons, public domain.
Sadly, I believe you are correct. I had a similar situation a year ago at a networking event–where someone presumed I was against the practice of law. I was speaking with 3 college kids aspiring to the law (still!)and telling them about my post-law graduate experiences that started in 2008. “Wow, too bad you didn’t want to be a lawyer,” said one of them. I almost cried. “Actually,” I told her, “I love it. I don’t think there’s a better career for me. I even took classes through the summers so I could graduate early and get working. It’s just really rough out there and you have to go in with eyes open about your job prospects. And being independently wealthy would certainly help.” I really try not to be Negative Nelly about it, but I also don’t want other people walking blindly in like I did.
I am always appalled at the self-deception manifested by young would-be lawyers and too often, by their parents, who against all evidence to the contrary, think like the guy buying the 175 million-to-one lottery ticket — convinced they’re the ones destined to win while everyone else will lose. If you try to caution them and explain the realities, then yes, you’re either a “Negative Nelly” or a burned out cynic.
Thanks for commenting.
People who earn BA, MA or even PhD degrees in fields with even fewer job prospects than lawyers (e.g. sociology) find that it is easier to go to law school, and borrow the money they need for living expenses, than to find a job in their area of expertise. Because law schools have no particular prerequisites (unlike medical school or the sciences), they are an attractive dodge where an intelligent but unemployable person can roll the dice and hope for a better shot upon graduation, especially for those who are still unmarried and not burdened with supporting a family. In other words, law school demand is driven to a large extent not from the attraction of a possible legal career, but from the the repulsion of the job market against students whose prior years of investment in education have left them unsuited to find work that will pay off their student loans. This phenomenon has been going on for two decades now, and one effect is that people with PhDs plus a law degree tend to be much more in demand for law school faculty positions than ordinary JDs, so now we have many members of law school faculties who were part of the surplus of law students.
It seems likely that any minority law student who has been admitted through affirmative action into a school where they are destined to be in the bottom 20% of the class are going to be even more hopeless than before of finding a lawyer position after graduation.
Once enrolled in law school, the major disincentive to dropping out before graduation is that repayment of the principal of student loans has to start once you are out of graduate school. You have to stay on in self-defense, because dropping out gives you no benefit at all from your year or two of law school studies and student loans.
Can’t say I disagree with your points, especially that law school has long been “an attractive dodge,” with many having chosen to spend three years to wait out the ebb and flow of past economic cycles. And you are right in pointing out how college graduates have been incentivized with easier access to student loan monies for prospective lawyers as opposed to those seeking graduate degrees in the social sciences and humanities. However, on your final point about sticking it out until the bitter end, sometimes I think the better part of prudence is to cut your losses.
Thanks for commenting.