Anonymous wrote:Why not?

California, Virginia, Vermont, and Washington allow apprenticeships instead of law school. Seems like a smarter way to learn law.

Lawyers are not geniuses. She's not trying to become an astronaut.

I hope she uses it to do good things... but she will become a lawyer and most lawyers are scum.

Anonymous wrote:Her father was an attorney. She is a marketing genius. I loathe almost everything the kardashians do an represent but there’s no evidence that she couldn’t be a lawyer.

Anonymous wrote:Good for her.

Her dad was an attorney. I don't doubt that she's capable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she finish college? Do you have to go to law school to sit for the bar?

Nope, California is one of 4 or 5 states where you don't have to go to law school to be a lawyer.

All she has to do is apprentice to an attorney for four years and pass the bar herself. Like that attorney on Suits.

She's probably taking private legal classes from the most brilliant law professors at UCLA/Stanford anyway.

Anonymous wrote:The article says that California is one of a handful of states that allows people to “read the law” by spending four years working under a licensed attorney rather than attending college and then law school. It looks like you have to take an exam after your first year of study that covers certain core areas, and if you pass then you’re allowed to complete the next three years. You still have to pass the bar to become a licensed attorney.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh - so according to her interview in Vogue (which has been aggregated elsewhere) she is doing an apprenticeship with a law firm instead of going to law school. I guess California will let you sit the bar if you do it that way

https://www.vogue.com/article/kim-kardashian-west-cover-may-2019

yes, you can "read" for the bar in some states. But the California Bar exam is a toughie. If she passes, more power to her.

Anonymous wrote:Huh - so according to her interview in Vogue (which has been aggregated elsewhere) she is doing an apprenticeship with a law firm instead of going to law school. I guess California will let you sit the bar if you do it that way

https://www.vogue.com/article/kim-kardashian-west-cover-may-2019

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who the heck would hire her as a lawyer??

A lot of people, I would guess. Also she'd be quite a good rainmaker/lobbyist.

She's rich enough to start and head her own firm. But I'm pretty sure she's doing this to practice privately and help clients pro bono.

She's been making a lot of waves with The Innocence Project - I applaud her efforts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's what people.com says. I am really trying not to judge and am not a Kardashian-hater, but I just can't based on these quotes:

"The reading is what really gets me. It's so time-consuming. The concepts I grasp in two seconds," says Kim Kardashian

“First year of law school, you have to cover three subjects: criminal law, torts, and contracts,” she tells the magazine. “To me, torts is the most confusing, contracts the most boring, and crim law I can do in my sleep. Took my first test, I got a 100. Super easy for me.”

I mean, I don't think that many first-year law students would disagree! Casebooks are HORRIBLY edited, and hide the ball instead of just setting out the concepts. The concepts themselves can usually be expressed in bullet or outline form (as anyone who has actually studied successfully for a law school final or the bar knows.) The one issue where reading is appropriate is to gain a sense of the facts of a case, and how opinions and briefs are written. But 1L year generally does a horrible job of showing you how to do that.

There are many ways to be a good lawyer and advocate, and having a super high IQ or intellectual sophistication is not at all required for all of them. I say good for her.

Yes, that's the point of 1L, teaching you to "think like a lawyer", i.e., read a case and figure out the important part, discard the rest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's what people.com says. I am really trying not to judge and am not a Kardashian-hater, but I just can't based on these quotes:

"The reading is what really gets me. It's so time-consuming. The concepts I grasp in two seconds," says Kim Kardashian

“First year of law school, you have to cover three subjects: criminal law, torts, and contracts,” she tells the magazine. “To me, torts is the most confusing, contracts the most boring, and crim law I can do in my sleep. Took my first test, I got a 100. Super easy for me.”

I mean, I don't think that many first-year law students would disagree! Casebooks are HORRIBLY edited, and hide the ball instead of just setting out the concepts. The concepts themselves can usually be expressed in bullet or outline form (as anyone who has actually studied successfully for a law school final or the bar knows.) The one issue where reading is appropriate is to gain a sense of the facts of a case, and how opinions and briefs are written. But 1L year generally does a horrible job of showing you how to do that.

There are many ways to be a good lawyer and advocate, and having a super high IQ or intellectual sophistication is not at all required for all of them. I say good for her.

Yes, that's the point of 1L, teaching you to "think like a lawyer", i.e., read a case and figure out the important part, discard the rest.