DC area law schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, The current USNWR rankings are
Georgetown 14 (tied with others)
GW and Mason tied at 31 (with several others, including W&M)
Catholic 71 (tied)
American 104

I went to AU law when it was ranked in the top 50 and liked it, have had good jobs since graduation. But it was outrageously expensive then and seems to be so now. I can’t fathom what it has done to fall so far in the rankings.

If I had it to do all over again and wanted to be in this area, I would live in VA and go to Mason law school. Well ranked and a lot less expensive.

Yeah, what's going on at AU Law?

Likely nothing is "going on at AU Law," the rankings have never meant much beyond top 15 or so and they have shifted like crazy for many, many schools in recent history, and usually for no obvious reason. I attended Tulane when it was just inside the first tier at 40 and now it's 78. Nothing "going on" (although there were some issues when Katrina hit, that was over 20 years ago).

LOL. The "first tier" stops way short of no. 40.

Not when I went to law school it didn't. It referred to the top 50, not the top 14 like now.

When did you go to law school? Fifty years ago?

No, not 50 years ago.

When did you go to law school? Yeah, that’s what I thought. Never. You’re one of the mommies, right? Obsessing over things like this because you want your kid to go to law school? Yep. That’s what I thought.

DP
I went to law school 30 years (been practicing ever since) and I would not recommend my kid go to law school if they couldn't go to a pretty good one and top 50 ain't it.
Top 10 maybe top 20,but not top 50

I agree. I went to law school 25 years ago (at T10), and I would have the same advice for my kids.

I’m surprised that you both say this. I am also a practicing lawyer for 30 plus years, as is my spouse, as are many friends, and of course colleagues. I’ve worked in big law and in house, and know many attorneys well who have worked in both areas plus government, nonprofits, smaller firms, and left the law entirely. I’m sure your circles are similar.

But I have the opposite view as you do. The more experienced I am, the more I encounter attorneys in senior positions who have graduated from a variety of law schools. It’s a big world out there! I see the obsession with T14 schools usually at mid level associates and below (probably because they are trying to distinguish themselves). Those with more experience realize that there is a lot more to being strong in one’s field beyond where they went to law school. Many attorneys from top schools just don’t have it or haven’t yet found their niche, and conversely many great attorneys graduated from GW, American, Fordham, so on.

I do find that I can usually tell in meetings when someone is/has been a practicing attorney (regardless of the school) because they approach the matter in an analytic way. another saying that non-lawyers don’t do that or that all lawyers do, but there is a consistency.

I’d discourage my own kids from going to law school entirely, but that’s a different post

Both DH and I are lawyers and would not want either of our 3 DC to go to law school. But not going to T14 will limit where you end up. DH says that at his big law firm, they do not recruit anywhere below Georgetown. There are absolutely no grads or lawyers from non top law schools except for a few rain making partners who have a chip on their shoulder but went to a lower ranked law school and are only at the firm because of they business they bring in their particular niche. And you can tell by tier of firm, how analytical the lawyers are. DH has worked at several big law firms in the span of 30 years and has noticed quality of associates declines with reputation of firm, which is really reputation of law schools they came from.

There is not a single large firm in any major market where there are "no grads or lawyers from non stop law schools" other than rainmakers. Zero. None. Not in DC, not in NYC, not in LA, not in Chicago. Nowhere. The demand for associates in Biglaw exceeds the supply of T14 graduates, requiring that EVERY SINGLE FIRM dip a little lower.

I'm not saying that you're better off attending a T14, but you absolutely can get a job at ANY major law firm in the United States coming out of a lower ranked one. Yes, you will have to have done well, often extraordinarily well. But it can be done and IS being done.

Prove me wrong. Provide a link to a Biglaw firm without a single associate who graduated from a law school below Georgetown. I'll wait.

This is not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Above the Law Rankings are heavily weighted by outcomes—e.g. employment after graduation—and GMU is not ranked in the top 50. It wasn’t ranked in the top 50 last year either.

Georgetown, GWU, William & Mary and Howard are all ranked both years.

https://abovethelaw.com/2025/06/2025-top-50-law-school-rankings/

No one cites Above the Law for law school rankings. No one. It’s USNWR, and top 14, that everyone talks about, where Scalia is ranked 31z https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/george-mason-university-03159

No one “cites” it? lol, ok.

It’s a legit reference created by people actually working in law. This T14 “that everyone talks about” is when “everyone” = the mommies on dcum who are desperate strivers looking into all of this for a kid who probably doesn’t want to go to law school or who will end up bottom 10% on the lsat lol. DP

Sorry, not a DC “mommy” here but a real lawyer from T3 law firm, clerk and Big Law with kid also going to T3 law school. Above the Law is gossip trash.

What’s the 3rd rated law firm?

They are saying top 3, like T14 is USNWR top 14. So I’m guessing Arnold & Porter, Jones Day, Covington . Maybe Wilmer Hale

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Above the Law Rankings are heavily weighted by outcomes—e.g. employment after graduation—and GMU is not ranked in the top 50. It wasn’t ranked in the top 50 last year either.

Georgetown, GWU, William & Mary and Howard are all ranked both years.

https://abovethelaw.com/2025/06/2025-top-50-law-school-rankings/

No one cites Above the Law for law school rankings. No one. It’s USNWR, and top 14, that everyone talks about, where Scalia is ranked 31z https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/george-mason-university-03159

Right. GMU is ranked 31st but still does a relatively shitty job of getting its grads top jobs. That's why I cited ATL. For that metric only.

If you had bothered to google “Scalia job placement “ before shooting off your mouth, AI could have instructed you thusly:

Antonin Scalia Law School (George Mason University) boasts strong employment outcomes, with 97.5% of the Class of 2023 employed, primarily in private practice ($149,784 median salary) and the public sector ($74,672 median salary). The school excels in judicial clerkships, securing 102 for 2025-2028 terms, and leverages a strong DC-area network and focus on law


Employment and Salary Highlights
High Employment Rate: 99.4% of the Class of 2023 were employed or in graduate studies shortly after graduation, according to the NALP report.

Employment Sectors (Class of 2023): 49.1% entered the private sector, while 50.9% entered the public sector, including government and public interest.
Salaries: The median salary for the private sector was $149,784, while the median for the public sector was $74,672.
Location: Most graduates are employed in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.


Key Opportunities and Clerkships
Clerkships: Strong performance in placing graduates in federal and state courts, with 72 federal clerkships (including 31 U.S. Courts of Appeals) secured for the 2025-2028 terms.
Law & Economics Focus: The school's emphasis on the intersection of law and economics provides unique networking opportunities through the Law & Economics Center.

Networking and Recruitment: Active Fall and Spring recruiting programs are available, with opportunities to connect with top law firms and government agencies, note users on Reddit.

Career Services: The Career and Academic Services Office provides resources for job placement, including counseling and on-campus interviews.

Networking: The school connects students with employers through various, often intimate, settings.

For more detailed data, you can view the official 2023 NALP report and employment statistics on the Scalia Law School website.

That’s puffery on their own website.

No, it’s not. it’s AI from a simple google: Scalia Law jobs. You could have checked that yourself before posting.

Yea, AI generated it largely from Scalia's own website. That's how AI works. Duh.

DP Please show me how it’s wrong - I’ve taught and recruited there. Looks right to me. It has 30 students right now in federal clerkships and one on SCOTUS. Very few law schools can say that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Above the Law Rankings are heavily weighted by outcomes—e.g. employment after graduation—and GMU is not ranked in the top 50. It wasn’t ranked in the top 50 last year either.

Georgetown, GWU, William & Mary and Howard are all ranked both years.

https://abovethelaw.com/2025/06/2025-top-50-law-school-rankings/

No one cites Above the Law for law school rankings. No one. It’s USNWR, and top 14, that everyone talks about, where Scalia is ranked 31z https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/george-mason-university-03159

No one “cites” it? lol, ok.

It’s a legit reference created by people actually working in law. This T14 “that everyone talks about” is when “everyone” = the mommies on dcum who are desperate strivers looking into all of this for a kid who probably doesn’t want to go to law school or who will end up bottom 10% on the lsat lol. DP

Sorry, not a DC “mommy” here but a real lawyer from T3 law firm, clerk and Big Law with kid also going to T3 law school. Above the Law is gossip trash.

You sound utterly insufferable. 🙄

DO. No, they gave just the facts in response to PP’s nasty “mommy” line. And only silly women on here who are not lawyers use “insufferable” or “tippy top”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, The current USNWR rankings are
Georgetown 14 (tied with others)
GW and Mason tied at 31 (with several others, including W&M)
Catholic 71 (tied)
American 104

I went to AU law when it was ranked in the top 50 and liked it, have had good jobs since graduation. But it was outrageously expensive then and seems to be so now. I can’t fathom what it has done to fall so far in the rankings.

If I had it to do all over again and wanted to be in this area, I would live in VA and go to Mason law school. Well ranked and a lot less expensive.

Yeah, what's going on at AU Law?

Likely nothing is "going on at AU Law," the rankings have never meant much beyond top 15 or so and they have shifted like crazy for many, many schools in recent history, and usually for no obvious reason. I attended Tulane when it was just inside the first tier at 40 and now it's 78. Nothing "going on" (although there were some issues when Katrina hit, that was over 20 years ago).

LOL. The "first tier" stops way short of no. 40.

Not when I went to law school it didn't. It referred to the top 50, not the top 14 like now.

When did you go to law school? Fifty years ago?

No, not 50 years ago.

When did you go to law school? Yeah, that’s what I thought. Never. You’re one of the mommies, right? Obsessing over things like this because you want your kid to go to law school? Yep. That’s what I thought.

DP
I went to law school 30 years (been practicing ever since) and I would not recommend my kid go to law school if they couldn't go to a pretty good one and top 50 ain't it.
Top 10 maybe top 20,but not top 50

I agree. I went to law school 25 years ago (at T10), and I would have the same advice for my kids.

I’m surprised that you both say this. I am also a practicing lawyer for 30 plus years, as is my spouse, as are many friends, and of course colleagues. I’ve worked in big law and in house, and know many attorneys well who have worked in both areas plus government, nonprofits, smaller firms, and left the law entirely. I’m sure your circles are similar.

But I have the opposite view as you do. The more experienced I am, the more I encounter attorneys in senior positions who have graduated from a variety of law schools. It’s a big world out there! I see the obsession with T14 schools usually at mid level associates and below (probably because they are trying to distinguish themselves). Those with more experience realize that there is a lot more to being strong in one’s field beyond where they went to law school. Many attorneys from top schools just don’t have it or haven’t yet found their niche, and conversely many great attorneys graduated from GW, American, Fordham, so on.

I do find that I can usually tell in meetings when someone is/has been a practicing attorney (regardless of the school) because they approach the matter in an analytic way. another saying that non-lawyers don’t do that or that all lawyers do, but there is a consistency.

I’d discourage my own kids from going to law school entirely, but that’s a different post

I've been a litigator for 20+ years, lead course in dozens of federal trials to verdict. Never, not once, have I said, "this case is a winner because opposing counsel went to Cooley" or "I want out because opposing counsel went to Harvard."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want Biglaw your only realistic choices are Georgetown and GWU. Mason may be highly ranked but its reputation doesn't match its ranking. As for AU, virtually all of its top students end up transferring.

[url]

Scalia law has done amazing things since it started unaccredited around 1976. Today, it hovers between 25-34. It sends a lot of its students to conservative judges and justices, who also teach there. It has sent six students to clerk in the Supreme Court. And,it is with great with merit (offered my son free tuition)

Well, five not six but who's counting. And nothing you said contradicts my post. GMU is highly ranked but doesn't place in Biglaw commensurate with its ranking. My guess is that it doesn't precisely because, as you imply, it's faculty and students are [b]super Trumpy and Biglaw skews liberal.

I’m there today at an antitrust conference and can say there is no one here “super Trumpy”. You are confusing the fact that there are all sorts of moderate to far right beliefs that have nothing to do with Trump. Even the judges appointed by him are, imho, not Trumpy.

[url]
[/url]
It’s Trumpy AF.

If it were “Trumpy” (such an elegant word choice!) was was GMU targeted by the Trump Administration in 2025?

Not the PP you responded to. Maybe he confused the many George schools in the DC area? Would you be surprised if that was true?

No. Because GMU was targeted and the other two were not. You could have googled this:

“As of mid-2025, George Mason University (GMU) and President Gregory Washington are facing four federal investigations launched by the Trump administration, focusing on alleged discriminatory practices in admissions, hiring, and diversity initiatives, as well as the handling of antisemitism. The investigations, primarily from the Department of Education and Department of Justice (DOJ), scrutinize DEI programs and claim race-based decision-making violates Title VI.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, The current USNWR rankings are
Georgetown 14 (tied with others)
GW and Mason tied at 31 (with several others, including W&M)
Catholic 71 (tied)
American 104

I went to AU law when it was ranked in the top 50 and liked it, have had good jobs since graduation. But it was outrageously expensive then and seems to be so now. I can’t fathom what it has done to fall so far in the rankings.

If I had it to do all over again and wanted to be in this area, I would live in VA and go to Mason law school. Well ranked and a lot less expensive.

Yeah, what's going on at AU Law?

Likely nothing is "going on at AU Law," the rankings have never meant much beyond top 15 or so and they have shifted like crazy for many, many schools in recent history, and usually for no obvious reason. I attended Tulane when it was just inside the first tier at 40 and now it's 78. Nothing "going on" (although there were some issues when Katrina hit, that was over 20 years ago).

LOL. The "first tier" stops way short of no. 40.

Not when I went to law school it didn't. It referred to the top 50, not the top 14 like now.

When did you go to law school? Fifty years ago?

No, not 50 years ago.

When did you go to law school? Yeah, that’s what I thought. Never. You’re one of the mommies, right? Obsessing over things like this because you want your kid to go to law school? Yep. That’s what I thought.

DP
I went to law school 30 years (been practicing ever since) and I would not recommend my kid go to law school if they couldn't go to a pretty good one and top 50 ain't it.
Top 10 maybe top 20,but not top 50

I agree. I went to law school 25 years ago (at T10), and I would have the same advice for my kids.

I’m surprised that you both say this. I am also a practicing lawyer for 30 plus years, as is my spouse, as are many friends, and of course colleagues. I’ve worked in big law and in house, and know many attorneys well who have worked in both areas plus government, nonprofits, smaller firms, and left the law entirely. I’m sure your circles are similar.

But I have the opposite view as you do. The more experienced I am, the more I encounter attorneys in senior positions who have graduated from a variety of law schools. It’s a big world out there! I see the obsession with T14 schools usually at mid level associates and below (probably because they are trying to distinguish themselves). Those with more experience realize that there is a lot more to being strong in one’s field beyond where they went to law school. Many attorneys from top schools just don’t have it or haven’t yet found their niche, and conversely many great attorneys graduated from GW, American, Fordham, so on.

I do find that I can usually tell in meetings when someone is/has been a practicing attorney (regardless of the school) because they approach the matter in an analytic way. another saying that non-lawyers don’t do that or that all lawyers do, but there is a consistency.

I’d discourage my own kids from going to law school entirely, but that’s a different post

Both DH and I are lawyers and would not want either of our 3 DC to go to law school. But not going to T14 will limit where you end up. DH says that at his big law firm, they do not recruit anywhere below Georgetown. There are absolutely no grads or lawyers from non top law schools except for a few rain making partners who have a chip on their shoulder but went to a lower ranked law school and are only at the firm because of they business they bring in their particular niche. And you can tell by tier of firm, how analytical the lawyers are. DH has worked at several big law firms in the span of 30 years and has noticed quality of associates declines with reputation of firm, which is really reputation of law schools they came from.

There is not a single large firm in any major market where there are "no grads or lawyers from non stop law schools" other than rainmakers. Zero. None. Not in DC, not in NYC, not in LA, not in Chicago. Nowhere. The demand for associates in Biglaw exceeds the supply of T14 graduates, requiring that EVERY SINGLE FIRM dip a little lower.

I'm not saying that you're better off attending a T14, but you absolutely can get a job at ANY major law firm in the United States coming out of a lower ranked one. Yes, you will have to have done well, often extraordinarily well. But it can be done and IS being done.

Prove me wrong. Provide a link to a Biglaw firm without a single associate who graduated from a law school below Georgetown. I'll wait.

This is not true.

Because you say so?

Show your math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, The current USNWR rankings are
Georgetown 14 (tied with others)
GW and Mason tied at 31 (with several others, including W&M)
Catholic 71 (tied)
American 104

I went to AU law when it was ranked in the top 50 and liked it, have had good jobs since graduation. But it was outrageously expensive then and seems to be so now. I can’t fathom what it has done to fall so far in the rankings.

If I had it to do all over again and wanted to be in this area, I would live in VA and go to Mason law school. Well ranked and a lot less expensive.

Yeah, what's going on at AU Law?

Likely nothing is "going on at AU Law," the rankings have never meant much beyond top 15 or so and they have shifted like crazy for many, many schools in recent history, and usually for no obvious reason. I attended Tulane when it was just inside the first tier at 40 and now it's 78. Nothing "going on" (although there were some issues when Katrina hit, that was over 20 years ago).

LOL. The "first tier" stops way short of no. 40.

Not when I went to law school it didn't. It referred to the top 50, not the top 14 like now.

When did you go to law school? Fifty years ago?

No, not 50 years ago.

When did you go to law school? Yeah, that’s what I thought. Never. You’re one of the mommies, right? Obsessing over things like this because you want your kid to go to law school? Yep. That’s what I thought.

DP
I went to law school 30 years (been practicing ever since) and I would not recommend my kid go to law school if they couldn't go to a pretty good one and top 50 ain't it.
Top 10 maybe top 20,but not top 50

I agree. I went to law school 25 years ago (at T10), and I would have the same advice for my kids.

I’m surprised that you both say this. I am also a practicing lawyer for 30 plus years, as is my spouse, as are many friends, and of course colleagues. I’ve worked in big law and in house, and know many attorneys well who have worked in both areas plus government, nonprofits, smaller firms, and left the law entirely. I’m sure your circles are similar.

But I have the opposite view as you do. The more experienced I am, the more I encounter attorneys in senior positions who have graduated from a variety of law schools. It’s a big world out there! I see the obsession with T14 schools usually at mid level associates and below (probably because they are trying to distinguish themselves). Those with more experience realize that there is a lot more to being strong in one’s field beyond where they went to law school. Many attorneys from top schools just don’t have it or haven’t yet found their niche, and conversely many great attorneys graduated from GW, American, Fordham, so on.

I do find that I can usually tell in meetings when someone is/has been a practicing attorney (regardless of the school) because they approach the matter in an analytic way. another saying that non-lawyers don’t do that or that all lawyers do, but there is a consistency.

I’d discourage my own kids from going to law school entirely, but that’s a different post

I've been a litigator for 20+ years, lead course in dozens of federal trials to verdict. Never, not once, have I said, "this case is a winner because opposing counsel went to Cooley" or "I want out because opposing counsel went to Harvard."

Me, too, practicing 40 years, but did someone say that above? You have to admit though, that clients like to say “my Harvard-trained lawyer”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want Biglaw your only realistic choices are Georgetown and GWU. Mason may be highly ranked but its reputation doesn't match its ranking. As for AU, virtually all of its top students end up transferring.

[url]

Scalia law has done amazing things since it started unaccredited around 1976. Today, it hovers between 25-34. It sends a lot of its students to conservative judges and justices, who also teach there. It has sent six students to clerk in the Supreme Court. And,it is with great with merit (offered my son free tuition)

Well, five not six but who's counting. And nothing you said contradicts my post. GMU is highly ranked but doesn't place in Biglaw commensurate with its ranking. My guess is that it doesn't precisely because, as you imply, it's faculty and students are [b]super Trumpy and Biglaw skews liberal.

I’m there today at an antitrust conference and can say there is no one here “super Trumpy”. You are confusing the fact that there are all sorts of moderate to far right beliefs that have nothing to do with Trump. Even the judges appointed by him are, imho, not Trumpy.

[url]
[/url]
It’s Trumpy AF.

If it were “Trumpy” (such an elegant word choice!) was was GMU targeted by the Trump Administration in 2025?

Not the PP you responded to. Maybe he confused the many George schools in the DC area? Would you be surprised if that was true?

No. Because GMU was targeted and the other two were not. You could have googled this:

“As of mid-2025, George Mason University (GMU) and President Gregory Washington are facing four federal investigations launched by the Trump administration, focusing on alleged discriminatory practices in admissions, hiring, and diversity initiatives, as well as the handling of antisemitism. The investigations, primarily from the Department of Education and Department of Justice (DOJ), scrutinize DEI programs and claim race-based decision-making violates Title VI.”

Not the law school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, The current USNWR rankings are
Georgetown 14 (tied with others)
GW and Mason tied at 31 (with several others, including W&M)
Catholic 71 (tied)
American 104

I went to AU law when it was ranked in the top 50 and liked it, have had good jobs since graduation. But it was outrageously expensive then and seems to be so now. I can’t fathom what it has done to fall so far in the rankings.

If I had it to do all over again and wanted to be in this area, I would live in VA and go to Mason law school. Well ranked and a lot less expensive.

Yeah, what's going on at AU Law?

Likely nothing is "going on at AU Law," the rankings have never meant much beyond top 15 or so and they have shifted like crazy for many, many schools in recent history, and usually for no obvious reason. I attended Tulane when it was just inside the first tier at 40 and now it's 78. Nothing "going on" (although there were some issues when Katrina hit, that was over 20 years ago).

LOL. The "first tier" stops way short of no. 40.

Not when I went to law school it didn't. It referred to the top 50, not the top 14 like now.

When did you go to law school? Fifty years ago?

No, not 50 years ago.

When did you go to law school? Yeah, that’s what I thought. Never. You’re one of the mommies, right? Obsessing over things like this because you want your kid to go to law school? Yep. That’s what I thought.

DP
I went to law school 30 years (been practicing ever since) and I would not recommend my kid go to law school if they couldn't go to a pretty good one and top 50 ain't it.
Top 10 maybe top 20,but not top 50

I agree. I went to law school 25 years ago (at T10), and I would have the same advice for my kids.

I’m surprised that you both say this. I am also a practicing lawyer for 30 plus years, as is my spouse, as are many friends, and of course colleagues. I’ve worked in big law and in house, and know many attorneys well who have worked in both areas plus government, nonprofits, smaller firms, and left the law entirely. I’m sure your circles are similar.

But I have the opposite view as you do. The more experienced I am, the more I encounter attorneys in senior positions who have graduated from a variety of law schools. It’s a big world out there! I see the obsession with T14 schools usually at mid level associates and below (probably because they are trying to distinguish themselves). Those with more experience realize that there is a lot more to being strong in one’s field beyond where they went to law school. Many attorneys from top schools just don’t have it or haven’t yet found their niche, and conversely many great attorneys graduated from GW, American, Fordham, so on.

I do find that I can usually tell in meetings when someone is/has been a practicing attorney (regardless of the school) because they approach the matter in an analytic way. another saying that non-lawyers don’t do that or that all lawyers do, but there is a consistency.

I’d discourage my own kids from going to law school entirely, but that’s a different post

Both DH and I are lawyers and would not want either of our 3 DC to go to law school. But not going to T14 will limit where you end up. DH says that at his big law firm, they do not recruit anywhere below Georgetown. There are absolutely no grads or lawyers from non top law schools except for a few rain making partners who have a chip on their shoulder but went to a lower ranked law school and are only at the firm because of they business they bring in their particular niche. And you can tell by tier of firm, how analytical the lawyers are. DH has worked at several big law firms in the span of 30 years and has noticed quality of associates declines with reputation of firm, which is really reputation of law schools they came from.

There is not a single large firm in any major market where there are "no grads or lawyers from non stop law schools" other than rainmakers. Zero. None. Not in DC, not in NYC, not in LA, not in Chicago. Nowhere. The demand for associates in Biglaw exceeds the supply of T14 graduates, requiring that EVERY SINGLE FIRM dip a little lower.

I'm not saying that you're better off attending a T14, but you absolutely can get a job at ANY major law firm in the United States coming out of a lower ranked one. Yes, you will have to have done well, often extraordinarily well. But it can be done and IS being done.

Prove me wrong. Provide a link to a Biglaw firm without a single associate who graduated from a law school below Georgetown. I'll wait.

This is not true.

Because you say so?

Show your math.

You are a child. Actually, the burden is on you because you posted something false and now can’t prove it.

Google oversupply lawyers and start reading:

The legal profession is currently experiencing high competition due to an oversupply of law graduates relative to traditional, high-paying, "Big Law" jobs. While over 32,000 students graduate annually in the U.S. alone, many struggle to secure legal positions, particularly as technological advancements make firms more efficient. This creates a challenging, high-debt, and increasingly competitive market, often described as having too many lawyers and not enough jobs, although some argue that opportunities still exist outside of traditional practice.

Key factors contributing to this trend include:
Over-enrollment: Law schools continued to increase or maintain high enrollment numbers despite market fluctuations.

High Debt, Low Demand: Significant student loan debt burdens graduates, making lower-paying legal or public interest jobs less attractive, driving them away from the field.
Structural Shifts: The legal job market has changed, reducing the availability of traditional, high-salaried positions.

Market Disconnection: A major gap exists between the high number of graduates and the demand for legal services, especially in areas where they are needed most. “

[Anonymous]

I'm not going to go through all the trouble of posting all the links, but it's readily available on the web that the largest 100 law firms in the country collectively hire well over 4000 new lawyers a year. For the T14 alone to cover those hires, each school would have to provide over 300 graduates a year to Biglaw.

Many T14 law schools don't even have 300 students in a class, and no law school sends more than 2/3 of its class to Biglaw.

Half of new hires in Biglaw are from outside the T14.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want Biglaw your only realistic choices are Georgetown and GWU. Mason may be highly ranked but its reputation doesn't match its ranking. As for AU, virtually all of its top students end up transferring.

[url]

Scalia law has done amazing things since it started unaccredited around 1976. Today, it hovers between 25-34. It sends a lot of its students to conservative judges and justices, who also teach there. It has sent six students to clerk in the Supreme Court. And,it is with great with merit (offered my son free tuition)

Well, five not six but who's counting. And nothing you said contradicts my post. GMU is highly ranked but doesn't place in Biglaw commensurate with its ranking. My guess is that it doesn't precisely because, as you imply, it's faculty and students are [b]super Trumpy and Biglaw skews liberal.

I’m there today at an antitrust conference and can say there is no one here “super Trumpy”. You are confusing the fact that there are all sorts of moderate to far right beliefs that have nothing to do with Trump. Even the judges appointed by him are, imho, not Trumpy.

[url]
[/url]
It’s Trumpy AF.

If it were “Trumpy” (such an elegant word choice!) was was GMU targeted by the Trump Administration in 2025?

Not the PP you responded to. Maybe he confused the many George schools in the DC area? Would you be surprised if that was true?

No. Because GMU was targeted and the other two were not. You could have googled this:

“As of mid-2025, George Mason University (GMU) and President Gregory Washington are facing four federal investigations launched by the Trump administration, focusing on alleged discriminatory practices in admissions, hiring, and diversity initiatives, as well as the handling of antisemitism. The investigations, primarily from the Department of Education and Department of Justice (DOJ), scrutinize DEI programs and claim race-based decision-making violates Title VI.”

Not the law school.

Correct, but think: if GMU were that Trumpy would Trump go after the whole institution (the same President heads the law school). I’ve taught at GMU and can’t say any of the faculty were Trumpers. The students, as you must know, are all over the lot because it is a PUBLC law school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, The current USNWR rankings are
Georgetown 14 (tied with others)
GW and Mason tied at 31 (with several others, including W&M)
Catholic 71 (tied)
American 104

I went to AU law when it was ranked in the top 50 and liked it, have had good jobs since graduation. But it was outrageously expensive then and seems to be so now. I can’t fathom what it has done to fall so far in the rankings.

If I had it to do all over again and wanted to be in this area, I would live in VA and go to Mason law school. Well ranked and a lot less expensive.

Yeah, what's going on at AU Law?

Likely nothing is "going on at AU Law," the rankings have never meant much beyond top 15 or so and they have shifted like crazy for many, many schools in recent history, and usually for no obvious reason. I attended Tulane when it was just inside the first tier at 40 and now it's 78. Nothing "going on" (although there were some issues when Katrina hit, that was over 20 years ago).

LOL. The "first tier" stops way short of no. 40.

Not when I went to law school it didn't. It referred to the top 50, not the top 14 like now.

When did you go to law school? Fifty years ago?

No, not 50 years ago.

When did you go to law school? Yeah, that’s what I thought. Never. You’re one of the mommies, right? Obsessing over things like this because you want your kid to go to law school? Yep. That’s what I thought.

DP
I went to law school 30 years (been practicing ever since) and I would not recommend my kid go to law school if they couldn't go to a pretty good one and top 50 ain't it.
Top 10 maybe top 20,but not top 50

I agree. I went to law school 25 years ago (at T10), and I would have the same advice for my kids.

I’m surprised that you both say this. I am also a practicing lawyer for 30 plus years, as is my spouse, as are many friends, and of course colleagues. I’ve worked in big law and in house, and know many attorneys well who have worked in both areas plus government, nonprofits, smaller firms, and left the law entirely. I’m sure your circles are similar.

But I have the opposite view as you do. The more experienced I am, the more I encounter attorneys in senior positions who have graduated from a variety of law schools. It’s a big world out there! I see the obsession with T14 schools usually at mid level associates and below (probably because they are trying to distinguish themselves). Those with more experience realize that there is a lot more to being strong in one’s field beyond where they went to law school. Many attorneys from top schools just don’t have it or haven’t yet found their niche, and conversely many great attorneys graduated from GW, American, Fordham, so on.

I do find that I can usually tell in meetings when someone is/has been a practicing attorney (regardless of the school) because they approach the matter in an analytic way. another saying that non-lawyers don’t do that or that all lawyers do, but there is a consistency.

I’d discourage my own kids from going to law school entirely, but that’s a different post

Both DH and I are lawyers and would not want either of our 3 DC to go to law school. But not going to T14 will limit where you end up. DH says that at his big law firm, they do not recruit anywhere below Georgetown. There are absolutely no grads or lawyers from non top law schools except for a few rain making partners who have a chip on their shoulder but went to a lower ranked law school and are only at the firm because of they business they bring in their particular niche. And you can tell by tier of firm, how analytical the lawyers are. DH has worked at several big law firms in the span of 30 years and has noticed quality of associates declines with reputation of firm, which is really reputation of law schools they came from.

There is not a single large firm in any major market where there are "no grads or lawyers from non stop law schools" other than rainmakers. Zero. None. Not in DC, not in NYC, not in LA, not in Chicago. Nowhere. The demand for associates in Biglaw exceeds the supply of T14 graduates, requiring that EVERY SINGLE FIRM dip a little lower.

I'm not saying that you're better off attending a T14, but you absolutely can get a job at ANY major law firm in the United States coming out of a lower ranked one. Yes, you will have to have done well, often extraordinarily well. But it can be done and IS being done.

Prove me wrong. Provide a link to a Biglaw firm without a single associate who graduated from a law school below Georgetown. I'll wait.

This is not true.

Because you say so?

Show your math.

You are a child. Actually, the burden is on you because you posted something false and now can’t prove it.

Google oversupply lawyers and start reading:

The legal profession is currently experiencing high competition due to an oversupply of law graduates relative to traditional, high-paying, "Big Law" jobs. While over 32,000 students graduate annually in the U.S. alone, many struggle to secure legal positions, particularly as technological advancements make firms more efficient. This creates a challenging, high-debt, and increasingly competitive market, often described as having too many lawyers and not enough jobs, although some argue that opportunities still exist outside of traditional practice.

Key factors contributing to this trend include:
Over-enrollment: Law schools continued to increase or maintain high enrollment numbers despite market fluctuations.

High Debt, Low Demand: Significant student loan debt burdens graduates, making lower-paying legal or public interest jobs less attractive, driving them away from the field.
Structural Shifts: The legal job market has changed, reducing the availability of traditional, high-salaried positions.

Market Disconnection: A major gap exists between the high number of graduates and the demand for legal services, especially in areas where they are needed most. “

See my post below. Your AI exercise above doesn't even address the issue. The issue isn't whether there's a lawyer glut generally. Of course there is. But we're talking about another thing entirely -- whether there are enough T14 law graduates to satisfy Biglaw hiring needs. And there clearly aren't. Try this search on AI:

"Are there enough T14 law graduates to fill all available Biglaw positions?" There's your answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not going to go through all the trouble of posting all the links, but it's readily available on the web that the largest 100 law firms in the country collectively hire well over 4000 new lawyers a year. For the T14 alone to cover those hires, each school would have to provide over 300 graduates a year to Biglaw.

Many T14 law schools don't even have 300 students in a class, and no law school sends more than 2/3 of its class to Biglaw.

[b]Half of new hires in Biglaw are from outside the T14.

Oh! Cite please!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, The current USNWR rankings are
Georgetown 14 (tied with others)
GW and Mason tied at 31 (with several others, including W&M)
Catholic 71 (tied)
American 104

I went to AU law when it was ranked in the top 50 and liked it, have had good jobs since graduation. But it was outrageously expensive then and seems to be so now. I can’t fathom what it has done to fall so far in the rankings.

If I had it to do all over again and wanted to be in this area, I would live in VA and go to Mason law school. Well ranked and a lot less expensive.

Yeah, what's going on at AU Law?

Likely nothing is "going on at AU Law," the rankings have never meant much beyond top 15 or so and they have shifted like crazy for many, many schools in recent history, and usually for no obvious reason. I attended Tulane when it was just inside the first tier at 40 and now it's 78. Nothing "going on" (although there were some issues when Katrina hit, that was over 20 years ago).

LOL. The "first tier" stops way short of no. 40.

Not when I went to law school it didn't. It referred to the top 50, not the top 14 like now.

When did you go to law school? Fifty years ago?

No, not 50 years ago.

When did you go to law school? Yeah, that’s what I thought. Never. You’re one of the mommies, right? Obsessing over things like this because you want your kid to go to law school? Yep. That’s what I thought.

DP
I went to law school 30 years (been practicing ever since) and I would not recommend my kid go to law school if they couldn't go to a pretty good one and top 50 ain't it.
Top 10 maybe top 20,but not top 50

I agree. I went to law school 25 years ago (at T10), and I would have the same advice for my kids.

I’m surprised that you both say this. I am also a practicing lawyer for 30 plus years, as is my spouse, as are many friends, and of course colleagues. I’ve worked in big law and in house, and know many attorneys well who have worked in both areas plus government, nonprofits, smaller firms, and left the law entirely. I’m sure your circles are similar.

But I have the opposite view as you do. The more experienced I am, the more I encounter attorneys in senior positions who have graduated from a variety of law schools. It’s a big world out there! I see the obsession with T14 schools usually at mid level associates and below (probably because they are trying to distinguish themselves). Those with more experience realize that there is a lot more to being strong in one’s field beyond where they went to law school. Many attorneys from top schools just don’t have it or haven’t yet found their niche, and conversely many great attorneys graduated from GW, American, Fordham, so on.

I do find that I can usually tell in meetings when someone is/has been a practicing attorney (regardless of the school) because they approach the matter in an analytic way. another saying that non-lawyers don’t do that or that all lawyers do, but there is a consistency.

I’d discourage my own kids from going to law school entirely, but that’s a different post

Both DH and I are lawyers and would not want either of our 3 DC to go to law school. But not going to T14 will limit where you end up. DH says that at his big law firm, they do not recruit anywhere below Georgetown. There are absolutely no grads or lawyers from non top law schools except for a few rain making partners who have a chip on their shoulder but went to a lower ranked law school and are only at the firm because of they business they bring in their particular niche. And you can tell by tier of firm, how analytical the lawyers are. DH has worked at several big law firms in the span of 30 years and has noticed quality of associates declines with reputation of firm, which is really reputation of law schools they came from.

There is not a single large firm in any major market where there are "no grads or lawyers from non stop law schools" other than rainmakers. Zero. None. Not in DC, not in NYC, not in LA, not in Chicago. Nowhere. The demand for associates in Biglaw exceeds the supply of T14 graduates, requiring that EVERY SINGLE FIRM dip a little lower.

I'm not saying that you're better off attending a T14, but you absolutely can get a job at ANY major law firm in the United States coming out of a lower ranked one. Yes, you will have to have done well, often extraordinarily well. But it can be done and IS being done.

Prove me wrong. Provide a link to a Biglaw firm without a single associate who graduated from a law school below Georgetown. I'll wait.

This is not true.

Because you say so?

Show your math.

You are a child. Actually, the burden is on you because you posted something false and now can’t prove it.

Google oversupply lawyers and start reading:

The legal profession is currently experiencing high competition due to an oversupply of law graduates relative to traditional, high-paying, "Big Law" jobs. While over 32,000 students graduate annually in the U.S. alone, many struggle to secure legal positions, particularly as technological advancements make firms more efficient. This creates a challenging, high-debt, and increasingly competitive market, often described as having too many lawyers and not enough jobs, although some argue that opportunities still exist outside of traditional practice.

Key factors contributing to this trend include:
Over-enrollment: Law schools continued to increase or maintain high enrollment numbers despite market fluctuations.

High Debt, Low Demand: Significant student loan debt burdens graduates, making lower-paying legal or public interest jobs less attractive, driving them away from the field.
Structural Shifts: The legal job market has changed, reducing the availability of traditional, high-salaried positions.

Market Disconnection: A major gap exists between the high number of graduates and the demand for legal services, especially in areas where they are needed most. “

See my post below. Your AI exercise above doesn't even address the issue. The issue isn't whether there's a lawyer glut generally. Of course there is. But we're talking about another thing entirely -- whether there are enough T14 law graduates to satisfy Biglaw hiring needs. And there clearly aren't. Try this search on AI:[b]

"Are there enough T14 law graduates to fill all available Biglaw positions?" There's your answer.

Law prof here. You are wrong. Please provide statistical proof so I can show my T14 students who can’t find a job.