Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Hamilton

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 33
51
Online Law Schools / Re: Question of the day
« on: August 26, 2011, 09:17:51 AM »
Could not find the answer, and the bar was several years ago, but I am guessing Commerce Clause.

On that note - I think it's time for a constitutional ammendment that more clearly defines the scope of congress' regulating authority under the commerce clause.  It is nearly limitless and now we are stretching it to the point where we can be forced to purchase something whether we want it or not.  Would you want to be required to buy a gun?  A Bible?  A hybrid vehicle? Carbon credits?

52
And THAT is the root of the entire problem, from student loans to the schools themselves... money.  Higher ed is now largely a money-making business driven by profit/cash-flow and not voactional training.  If training for profession were the true motivator it would not cost so much and they would not pad their curriculums/graduation requirements with so much fluff (which just ends up costing the customer... I mean student... more money).

Yes, they would never go for a plan that is in the best interest of the student, reduces cost, and reduces the revenue generated by these "schools."

Note to Cooley Law School - these statements are merely personal opinions are not accusations of fraudulent or illegal activity on behalf of any law school or it's administration.  (can't be too careful with those guys).

Perhaps a baby bar should be an ABA requirement - you get 1, maybe 2 bites at the apple then you are done.  That would get rid of some of the diploma mills out there screwing students for $100K who have very little realistic prospect of passing the bar or securing gainful employment in the law.  And I am not being a snob - I went to one of those mills.

Not a crazy idea.  Given that most 1L studies are pretty much all the same subjects, this shouldn't be that hard to do.

My understanding, though, is that Law Schools are quite the revenue mill for their universities, though.  I doubt they'd appreciate the idea of losing a big chunk of tuition money.

53
Perhaps a baby bar should be an ABA requirement - you get 1, maybe 2 bites at the apple then you are done.  That would get rid of some of the diploma mills out there screwing students for $100K who have very little realistic prospect of passing the bar or securing gainful employment in the law.  And I am not being a snob - I went to one of those mills.

I'm not saying they can't revise it, they should every few years(just as they do to the GED,LSAT,Multistate bar exam,etc) but it needs to be there. If you don't filter your water, it stops being safe to drink.

I think it's not so much to prevent unsound lawyers, but to prevent people who shouldn't even be in law school from wasting 2 more years of their lives.

54
I do not understand.  What concepts take more than 1 year to remember that are tested?

55
Seriously?  Wow.  What are these other schools charging? 

Regardless, Cooley is stretching the concept of "more affordable" with this.  IMO, no school out of the T14 should be charging more than $800/credit hour.

56
$1,100/credit hour is a more affordable option?  More accessible - yes, not more affordable.

I am just saying Cooley is right in that they provide an affordable and more accessible option that Stetson and Barry.

57
I appreciate what you are saying and applaud your attitide.  Also, not saying/asking this to be a jerk, but you -- to yourself -- need to critically evaluate what "being creative and resourcefull" means when it comes to finding a job.  It sounds good, but what does that really mean?

58
One, the BA-only folks are having a hard time finding work and mentally, it's got to be VERY difficult to look for a job FAR below your education level and expectations - it just smells bad and creates a stigma.  The the questions start... 'you went to law school and you are kitchen manager at Weenie World?  What's wrong with you?  Why did you even BOTHER with law school?'  Also, once you take that non-practicing-lawyer job you virtually eliminate becoming a practicing attorney as an alternative in the future.  As you toil away in your non-lawyer job, fresh new JDs are coming out of school and snatching up the positions that are available.  After a couple of years you are no longer a shiny new penny, you've been away from the law, and generally wont be desireable to firms looking for new associates.

I'll be a little bold here I suppose, but I really think that if you have a BA and a JD and you have no job at all (after 6 months or so) you have some personal problems.

After a reasonable amount of time it would make sense to switch from practicing law only positions to the law related or JD preferred positions. Then to keep involved in the legal community and continue searching for an actual practicing position. Who sits there with no job and says "No! I must practice law or nothing!" ?

59
The big question is whether "I was just following ABA standards" is a good enough defense.

From the article: http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20110811/NEWS06/108110316/4-grads-sue-Cooley-for-250M-saying-job-finding-salary-numbers-inflated?odyssey=tab|mostpopular|text|FRONTPAGE

"If the plaintiffs were to prevail, it would "set a very disturbing precedent from the perspective of all ABA-accredited schools," said Paul Campos, a professor at the University of Colorado Law School. "That's probably the most important defense that law schools have at present, the claim that they're just following the regulatory requirements placed upon them by their accrediting body," he said.

Campos is a critic of the way schools report employment information. The current ABA standards are "very defective," he said.

Still, he said, "if a law school were found to have followed the regulatory rules, but those rules were found so defective that the entire industry is potentially liable for some kind of fraud or negligent misrepresentation or deceptive business practice, that would be a big problem."

60
So what are the "openly provable" lies?  One person reported that he heard Cooley was under Fed investigation - maybe he did hear that, maybe not, so that is a legitimate question.  But what about the person who repeats that he read elsewhere that Cooley was being investigated?  Is it his job to investigate before publishing because that certainly is NOT the standard that the print/televised media is held to.  How many wild "facts" are reported about Sarah Palin or President Obama that are known/shown to be pure BS?

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 33