Your undergraduate degree isn't part of your legal education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's often said it takes "it takes 7 years of schooling be a lawyer" because people often count the required 4 year degree to enter law school. But substantially, law is basically an undergraduate degree, the first degree in the subject (there are higher degrees that follow the JD, the LLM and the Doctor of Juridical Science).

The only reason JDs require that much university is because the US law profession gatekeeps (for no reason), not because you're getting 7 years of legal training or a more rigorous education than in other countries where law is a first undergraduate degree.

JDs are ultimately introductory courses, grounding prospective lawyers in the subject prior to taking whichever Bar course they need to qualify in their chosen jurisdiction(s).

The proof of this is the New York Bar Exam. Since there are global firms with offices in both NYC and London, there are several people who seek qualifications in both jurisdictions.

English LLBs can write the New York Bar Exam and are not required to get another qualification. They view the English LLB as "substantially and durationally equivalent" to the American JD, because both the American JD and the English LLB have three years of academic training and both the US and England are common law jurisdictions. The 4 years of college isn't part of the legal education.

I do not agree. Undergrad can be a nothing but hopefully it teaches you how to look at thing critically. Hopefully it grounds you in morals whatever you choose those to be. I am a lawyer. I do think major in undergrad matter to how well you will do in at least biglaw. History and English being the best.

I am at a firm with lots of UK lawyers both in the UK and here. I am amazed about their poor quality. Also amazed by how unmature they are. They cannot be in front of US clients. They do not hold a candle to first year associates which is saying a lot. It takes about five years before they are at the first year associate level. Why? The lack of undergrad before law school.

You may have a point if you will be a retail/streetfront lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PSA - the 3/4 time taker being referenced in this thread is Kim Kardashian.

Kamala Harris passed on her second attempt. There are many very smart attorneys that did not pass the first time for a variety of reasons.

Harris’s prosecutorial skills are quite impressive and on full display. I look forward to seeing more.

Nothing to be ashamed of passing second time. Not an issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's often said it takes "it takes 7 years of schooling be a lawyer" because people often count the required 4 year degree to enter law school. But substantially, law is basically an undergraduate degree, the first degree in the subject (there are higher degrees that follow the JD, the LLM and the Doctor of Juridical Science).

The only reason JDs require that much university is because the US law profession gatekeeps (for no reason), not because you're getting 7 years of legal training or a more rigorous education than in other countries where law is a first undergraduate degree.

JDs are ultimately introductory courses, grounding prospective lawyers in the subject prior to taking whichever Bar course they need to qualify in their chosen jurisdiction(s).

The proof of this is the New York Bar Exam. Since there are global firms with offices in both NYC and London, there are several people who seek qualifications in both jurisdictions.

English LLBs can write the New York Bar Exam and are not required to get another qualification. They view the English LLB as "substantially and durationally equivalent" to the American JD, because both the American JD and the English LLB have three years of academic training and both the US and England are common law jurisdictions. The 4 years of college isn't part of the legal education.

I do not agree. Undergrad can be a nothing but hopefully it teaches you how to look at thing critically. Hopefully it grounds you in morals whatever you choose those to be. I am a lawyer. I do think major in undergrad matter to how well you will do in at least biglaw. History and English being the best.

I am at a firm with lots of UK lawyers both in the UK and here. I am amazed about their poor quality. Also amazed by how unmature they are. They cannot be in front of US clients. They do not hold a candle to first year associates which is saying a lot. It takes about five years before they are at the first year associate level. Why? The lack of undergrad before law school.

You may have a point if you will be a retail/streetfront lawyer.

This surprises me. A global law firm is going to have some quality control and the median lawyer from either jurisdiction should be at the same level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's often said it takes "it takes 7 years of schooling be a lawyer" because people often count the required 4 year degree to enter law school. But substantially, law is basically an undergraduate degree, the first degree in the subject (there are higher degrees that follow the JD, the LLM and the Doctor of Juridical Science).

The only reason JDs require that much university is because the US law profession gatekeeps (for no reason), not because you're getting 7 years of legal training or a more rigorous education than in other countries where law is a first undergraduate degree.

JDs are ultimately introductory courses, grounding prospective lawyers in the subject prior to taking whichever Bar course they need to qualify in their chosen jurisdiction(s).

The proof of this is the New York Bar Exam. Since there are global firms with offices in both NYC and London, there are several people who seek qualifications in both jurisdictions.

English LLBs can write the New York Bar Exam and are not required to get another qualification. They view the English LLB as "substantially and durationally equivalent" to the American JD, because both the American JD and the English LLB have three years of academic training and both the US and England are common law jurisdictions. The 4 years of college isn't part of the legal education.

I have been a lawyer for nearly 30 years, and I have never once heard this, much less "often" heard it.

OP, you may need new, more exciting friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kamala failed the CA bar on her first attempt and she went to law school.

So? Lots of people fail the CA bar. Many of them "went to law school."

It’s concerning in someone running for President.

Why? The President is not an attorney.

She's the VP under Biden, why arent you concerned right now?

She probably didnt study. Very intelligent, busy prople often think they can pass with a cursory review. Passing the bar doesnt mean you are smart. Not even a little bit. But you have to study. If you fail, you didnt study, dont speak English or had some kind of mental/drug/etc issue. She was elected top lawyer in San Franciso and then California. Now that's hard

Yes, I’m concerned. There is a reason she isn’t doing interviews. She can’t put words together coherently unless she is reading them off a teleprompter.

That’s beyond rich coming from a Trumper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kamala failed the CA bar on her first attempt and she went to law school.

So? Lots of people fail the CA bar. Many of them "went to law school."

It’s concerning in someone running for President.

No. Passing the bar is not a prerequisite for being president.

Intelligence is supposed to be but that ship has sailed

Kamala got the looks, her sister got the brains.
What you want in a candidate is electability.
Right now she's looking pretty electable at least compared to Biden.
People really wanted an alternative to Biden/Trump and the Democrats gave them one.
If only the Republicans had done the same.