Anonymous wrote:Probably an unpopular opinion but.....personally, I think if you can get into a top law school, maybe you should go to a law school ranked a little further down **if** you can get a free ride.

You should be able to be at the top of the class at a less competitive school, and if you don't have any loans upon graduation, you have way more options IMO. Especially if you don't have any outside financial assistance from family, etc.

+1 for everyone except those with extremely specific career goals that require graduating from a top school (circuit court clerkship, law professor, practice at top NYC firms).

I know grads from lower ranked schools who have worked at a high level in the DOJ, landed great federal clerkships, gotten jobs at terrific AmLaw 200 firms, worked in house at major Silicon Valley companies, etc. And I also know many, many grads of top schools who worked a few years at a firm, got laid off, hated their next firm, burned out on law.

Graduating law school without loans is a major gift. Little about your law career is guaranteed.

What do you mean by "top"? With a GPA of 3.75+ and an LSAT of 175+, you'll get into Chicago and Columbia and will have a shot at HYS. Drop the LSAT to 170+ and you'll get in to at least a couple T14 schools. Drop GPA to 3.5+ and LSAT to 170+ and you have a shot at T14 but it's not guaranteed. And things start to get really sketchy once you drop under 170. (Yeah, lots of kids get into T14 and even T3 schools with LSATs in the 160s, but lots more don't.)

Anonymous wrote:Probably an unpopular opinion but.....personally, I think if you can get into a top law school, maybe you should go to a law school ranked a little further down **if** you can get a free ride.

You should be able to be at the top of the class at a less competitive school, and if you don't have any loans upon graduation, you have way more options IMO. Especially if you don't have any outside financial assistance from family, etc.

Having been down this road myself, and having observed many others along the way, I agree 100 percent that you're far better off going to a lower ranked but still respected law school that offers you lots of money than you are going to a T5 or T14 and borrowing all or most of the tuition. You really are putting golden handcuffs on yourself. Previous posters have suggested that you can just work for Biglaw for four or five years and pay off the debt, and yes that's true, but that is hardly a cakewalk and for many can be absolutely soul-sucking. Why put yourself through that just attend a top law school, especially when the biggest advantage to going to a top law school is that it opens more doors to Biglaw than other law schools when that's not the job that you even want? It's a very circuitous argument.

In short, you need to go to the best law school that you can get into and that will not overburden you with loans. Not just the best law school.

One caveat: it isn't a given that a student with an academic profile that would get them into a T5 or a T14 is going to land at the top of the class in a T25 or T30 law school. There are a lot of smart people in those schools who just missed the cut for the T14 who could very easily kick your backside in the classroom, and there are others who didn't come close to missing the cut but who still can surprise you. Still, you're unlikely to do poorly at one of these schools and you're still better offer graduating without massive loans.

Anonymous wrote:Probably an unpopular opinion but.....personally, I think if you can get into a top law school, maybe you should go to a law school ranked a little further down **if** you can get a free ride.

You should be able to be at the top of the class at a less competitive school, and if you don't have any loans upon graduation, you have way more options IMO. Especially if you don't have any outside financial assistance from family, etc.

This depends on what type of law the student is interested in and what you mean by a little further down. Choosing the full ride beyond T20-ish vs full pay inside the T14 can make a massive difference in employment opportunities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD's friend (not in Law school yet) got perfect LSAT (180 is it?) but DD says her college GPA isn't very good. Smart kid - one of those marching to her own drum beat - kinda kid. How do LS see kids like that?

If they're applying straight from college, not well. they need some track record of success in order to overcome mediocre GPA.

How bad is not "very good?" If it's lower than a 3.5 she won't get into the top 10. Which isn't necessarily the end of the world. She very well could get merit money from a law school in the lower end of the top 20-25. They like boosting up their average LSAT.

Folks with a split in GPA and LSAT score tend to have more erratic admissions. Soft factors and an explanation for the lower GPA could make a difference. For instance, if she was working full time to support her family while in undergrad. Or if the low GPA corresponds to two semesters when she lost her dad to cancer. Recommendation letters can also help.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doing very well at a lower ranked undergrad helps you more than doing just okay at a top undergrad. Law schools care about your numbers most of all, so if everything else was equal a 4.0 at NC state, or whatever, is going to get you admitted to Yale Law over a 3.5 at Princeton UG. Being an underrepresented minority also helps a lot. Everything else like activities and awards counts only at the margins.

I disagree with this, the T30 colleges had multiple students in my T5 law school class while lower ranked schools did not have more than one. It’s always possible for a super strong kid from a lower ranked school to get in, but it’s an easier route from a top ranked undergraduate school.

Yes but the students from those top undergrads had top grades as well, or maybe several years of work experience somewhere impressive (many of my law school classmates had worked at banks or consulting companies).

The point is that a 3.2 from Stanford is still not getting you into Yale Law unless you have both a very high LSAT (178+) AND another super high value trait, like being a speechwriter for a Senator or something. It takes a lot for schools to accept a low GPA or LSAT because if they do it too often it really drags down their numbers and that hurts rankings, which are considered really important for law schools.

A top law school sont accept a bunch of students from top undergrads with inferior numbers because they don’t need to and it will hurt them in the long run.

I think it depends on the law school, even at the T5 level. You're not going to find very many 1Ls at Yale Law who didn't attend a highly ranked undergrad, and you might find a few more at Stanford, but you'll find plenty of 1Ls from so-so undergrads at Harvard. Harvard is a much bigger school than Yale and Stanford and has to cast a wider net to fill its classes.

Probably an unpopular opinion but.....personally, I think if you can get into a top law school, maybe you should go to a law school ranked a little further down **if** you can get a free ride.

You should be able to be at the top of the class at a less competitive school, and if you don't have any loans upon graduation, you have way more options IMO. Especially if you don't have any outside financial assistance from family, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doing very well at a lower ranked undergrad helps you more than doing just okay at a top undergrad. Law schools care about your numbers most of all, so if everything else was equal a 4.0 at NC state, or whatever, is going to get you admitted to Yale Law over a 3.5 at Princeton UG. Being an underrepresented minority also helps a lot. Everything else like activities and awards counts only at the margins.

Going to a good/rigorous undergrad and doing well there makes it more likely that you will do well once in top law school.

This is not actually true. Have you been to law school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doing very well at a lower ranked undergrad helps you more than doing just okay at a top undergrad. Law schools care about your numbers most of all, so if everything else was equal a 4.0 at NC state, or whatever, is going to get you admitted to Yale Law over a 3.5 at Princeton UG. Being an underrepresented minority also helps a lot. Everything else like activities and awards counts only at the margins.

I disagree with this, the T30 colleges had multiple students in my T5 law school class while lower ranked schools did not have more than one. It’s always possible for a super strong kid from a lower ranked school to get in, but it’s an easier route from a top ranked undergraduate school.

Yes but the students from those top undergrads had top grades as well, or maybe several years of work experience somewhere impressive (many of my law school classmates had worked at banks or consulting companies).

The point is that a 3.2 from Stanford is still not getting you into Yale Law unless you have both a very high LSAT (178+) AND another super high value trait, like being a speechwriter for a Senator or something. It takes a lot for schools to accept a low GPA or LSAT because if they do it too often it really drags down their numbers and that hurts rankings, which are considered really important for law schools.

A top law school sont accept a bunch of students from top undergrads with inferior numbers because they don’t need to and it will hurt them in the long run.

Anonymous wrote:Doing very well at a lower ranked undergrad helps you more than doing just okay at a top undergrad. Law schools care about your numbers most of all, so if everything else was equal a 4.0 at NC state, or whatever, is going to get you admitted to Yale Law over a 3.5 at Princeton UG. Being an underrepresented minority also helps a lot. Everything else like activities and awards counts only at the margins.

Going to a good/rigorous undergrad and doing well there makes it more likely that you will do well once in top law school.

Anonymous wrote:Doing very well at a lower ranked undergrad helps you more than doing just okay at a top undergrad. Law schools care about your numbers most of all, so if everything else was equal a 4.0 at NC state, or whatever, is going to get you admitted to Yale Law over a 3.5 at Princeton UG. Being an underrepresented minority also helps a lot. Everything else like activities and awards counts only at the margins.

I disagree with this, the T30 colleges had multiple students in my T5 law school class while lower ranked schools did not have more than one. It’s always possible for a super strong kid from a lower ranked school to get in, but it’s an easier route from a top ranked undergraduate school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD's friend (not in Law school yet) got perfect LSAT (180 is it?) but DD says her college GPA isn't very good. Smart kid - one of those marching to her own drum beat - kinda kid. How do LS see kids like that?

If they're applying straight from college, not well. they need some track record of success in order to overcome mediocre GPA.

How bad is not "very good?" If it's lower than a 3.5 she won't get into the top 10. Which isn't necessarily the end of the world. She very well could get merit money from a law school in the lower end of the top 20-25. They like boosting up their average LSAT.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school will burden you with massive debt with slim chances of landing a top firm post graduation. Avoid law school.

It's all about where you go to law school. If you go to one of the best law schools (the T14), it's relatively easy to land a top firm job if that's what you want. Then, you pay back your student loans in 4-5 years and are free to go do whatever you want from there.

But don't go to law school unless it's something you actually want to do (i.e., it's not a fallback plan like it was for a number of my classmates).

You act like this is nothing. It isn't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My sister got into basically all the best law schools (Harvard, Stanford). She went to a state school, had good grades, did student government and debate, nailed her LSAT (over 170), and worked legal and government internships during the summers.

You can 100% go to a state school and get into a top law school.

The process has changed a lot. A 170 is no longer “ nailing it” and it is difficult to get a clerkship or good job out of a state law school unless its UVA or UCLA.

She said her sister went to a state school for undergrad. In any event, ever hear of Michigan Law? How about Boalt Hall?

Anonymous wrote:DD's friend (not in Law school yet) got perfect LSAT (180 is it?) but DD says her college GPA isn't very good. Smart kid - one of those marching to her own drum beat - kinda kid. How do LS see kids like that?

If they're applying straight from college, not well. they need some track record of success in order to overcome mediocre GPA.