"It's not the status of the undergrad institution that matters so much as the law school. And I know and have worked with TONS of lawyers."
You may have worked with tons of lawyers but evidently, you haven't read the Hopwood case. Applicants at top law schools are dinged for having attended weak colleges or for a noncompetitive major in favor of applicants with similar GPAs at prestigious schools. Hopwood's file was moved from the "presumptive admission" group to the
"discretionary zone" despite her strong GPA at a Cal State and a community college she'd transferred from.
"Once Johanson (The faculty chair of the UT Austin Law admissions committee) determined which files were in the presumptive admission
category, he conducted a preliminary review of the files. (footnote 23) By the end of
the admissions process, Johanson reviewed 300 to 350 resident files and 200 to
250 nonresident files in this category. Johanson, vol. 3 at 32-35. In his
review of these files, Johanson checked to see if the applicant's TI ("Texas Index" score, which is a composite of GPA and LSAT) was
inflated by high grades in a noncompetitive major or at a weak school or if
there was some other questionable feature of the applicant's file. Johanson
generally held those files for further review in the discretionary zone.
Johanson dropped approximately ten percent of the presumptive admission
applicants into the discretionary category. Those applicants with a high TI
reflecting a high LSAT and high grades in a rigorous major at a leading
undergraduate institution were admitted by Johanson, who had unilateral
authority to admit any applicant in this category without further consultation
with the full admissions committee. D-362."
https://tarltonapps.law.utexas.edu/rare/documents/hopwood_district_courts_decision.pdf