Law School Discussion

Nine Years of 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 - pinkybella

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 141
51
I would chooose SW over Chapman, but that's just me personally.  I'm sure you've already covered all your bases, but I think southwestern is still a better pick regionally (its just more well known)..... even if Chapman is on its way up, SW is still higher, and if you kill your first year and score top 10% than nothing could really stop you from finding a good job (this applies to chapman, to a certain extent, as well.)

Congrats on both, though.  That's really awesome!  LA or OC...... tough choice.  Don't forget the 3 supreme court clerks at Chapman, and the fact they probably will be going up in rankings soon..... plus, a law school in OC is probably bound to do well.

eh.  i know not what i'm saying right now.  its late.  congrats though. fur reals.

Thanks Grendel. I'm so jealous about you going to Loyola btw. Oh well, if anyone should attend Loyola, it should be a fellow anteater. :)

52
News Discussion / Re: ABA says Bush violating Constitution
« on: July 24, 2006, 09:05:09 PM »
http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/prelaw/index.php/topic,67916.0.html

Yep, we're here.

Ooops, I missed that post. I guess I can delete this one then.

53
News Discussion / ABA says Bush violating Constitution
« on: July 24, 2006, 09:02:15 PM »
Bar association president says signing statements erode democracy

The ABA group, which includes a one-time FBI director and former federal appeals court judge, said the president has overstepped his authority in attaching challenges to hundreds of new laws.

The attachments, known as bill-signing statements, say Bush reserves a right to revise, interpret or disregard measures on national security and constitutional grounds.

"This report raises serious concerns crucial to the survival of our democracy," said the ABA's president, Michael Greco. "If left unchecked, the president's practice does grave harm to the separation of powers doctrine, and the system of checks and balances that have sustained our democracy for more than two centuries."

Some congressional leaders had questioned the practice. The task force's recommendations, being released Monday in Washington, will be presented to the 410,000-member group next month at its annual meeting in Hawaii.

ABA policymakers will decide whether to denounce the statements and encourage a legal fight over them.

The task force said the statements suggest the president will decline to enforce some laws. Bush has had more than 800 signing statement challenges, compared with about 600 signing statements combined for all other presidents, the group said.

Noel J. Francisco, a former Bush administration attorney who practices law in Washington, said the president is doing nothing unusual or inappropriate.

"Presidents have always issued signing statements," he said. "This administration believes that it should make clear ... when the Congress is getting close to the lines that our Constitution draws."

Francisco said the administration's input is part of the give and take between the branches of government. "I think it's good that the debate is taking place at a public level," he added.

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said last month that "it's important for the president at least to express reservations about the constitutionality of certain provisions."

The ABA report said President Reagan was the first to use the statements as a strategic weapon, and that it was encouraged by then-administration lawyer Samuel Alito -- now the newest Supreme Court justice.

The task force included former prosecutor Neal Sonnett of Miami; former FBI Director William Sessions; Patricia Wald, former chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; former Republican Rep. Mickey Edwards; and former Reagan administration lawyer Bruce Fein; and law school professors and other lawyers.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/24/lawyers.bush.ap/index.html

54
Hi Pinky, first let me say congrats, and how did you hear?  I am still waiting on them.  Anyways, i am also afraid i might be put into that dilemma.  I've been to both schools and would say that Chapman is definitely in a better neighborhood.  Chapman is right in the middle of orange county suburbia (sp?) which is a major plus to me considering how comfortable it is. It gives u a peace of mind.  Plus Chapman is a newer school, newer building, and only has about 180 students in its first yr class.  On the other hand, when i think of Southwestern, i tend to think of congestion for some reason.  It's relatively a short distance from downtown, but in a neighborhood you dont want to be near at night.  One thing that appealed me abotu chapman is when one of the deans told me "we want our students to pass and do well, we hate to see them fail" ---something you probably wont hear southwestern say considering their 18% attrition rate. Southwestern will probably land you a better job in downtown Los Angeles.  I dont know how they do in OC, and i don't know how Chapman does in downtown L.A. (but im sure it does well in OC).   They are both great schools.  You can't go wrong with what you choose.  It's now up to what SUITS YOU!  bEST OF LUCK!

Thanks Skeptic. Part of me is leaning towards Chapman because of the location & the low attrition rate.

I received a phone call from a woman at Southwestern this morning inquiring about my interest in their law school. I told her I was still interested and she said that I would receive an admissions packet sometime this week.

55
I wanted Japan, Paraguay or Mexico.

I can't believe Miss Egypt and Miss Lebanon didn't make it to the top 20.


But man, there were a lot of Latinas in the top 20  :)

56
One word:  DON'T

You just bumped a thread from November 2004 to say "don't go to Whittier?"

Hey, its good advice ;)

57
Anyone else have any words of wisdom?

58
I'm leery of stand-alone law schools, and Southwestern seems kind of like South Texas in Houston -- if you do well there, you have many opportunities in the city, but it'll be hell if you're outside the top 5 or 10 percent.

I like Chapman. It's attached to a decent undergrad (which several of my friends have attended). It's in a nice neighborhood and you can live nearby without breaking the bank (in Cali dollars) or dodging bullets. It also appears to me to be doing everything right and is faring extremely well considering its age.

That's all I've got. Good luck.

Thanks Kuddler. This is very helpful. :)

59
Thanks for everyone's comments & suggestions so far - they have been extremely helpful. If anyone else has any more advice for me, please feel free to post it :)

60
First of all, congrats, pinkybella!  I know you've been waiting for it.

While Chapman is the best school in OC, it's not like it's in a different country.  The OC only feels like a different country.   ;)  I think you should ultimately go where you feel happiest, and that might be Chapman.  I would pick Southwestern every time, but that is because I hate the OC.  OCIs are important, that's for sure, but the real question is how many people get jobs with the OCI?  They might be looking for the diamond in the rough.  What are the job placement statistics?

Thanks Mugatu! Now if USD or Loyola could take me off their WLs I'd be a completely happy camper. :)

You bring up good points. According to LSAC, 86% of SW grads are employed after graduation acompared to 84% of Chapman grads are employed after graduation. Of those students employed after graduation, 62% of Chapman grads are employed in law firms compared to 50% of Southwestern grads.

Overall bar passage rates are equal at 61%.

Southwestern's rather high attrition rate is worrisome though (17.5% of the incoming class does not return while only 8.8% of Chapman's incoming class does not return).

Which school do you think has an better reputation overall?

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 141