To follow Bike Pilot and nealric's comments, the quality of faculty is high at all, or nearly all, law schools. Why? The pool from which law profs have come over the past several decades is that of a Top 5 law school, a clerkship or perhaps a year or two at a national firm, and then on to teaching. There are few Kingsfields about anymore. And most who go into teaching go because they want to, so you're generally getting a happy professoriate.
I attended Texas and also, years later, Harvard. An important aspect of both is that, as large law schools, there's pretty much a wide palette to choose from, at least in years 2-3. A tiny law school might be considered to hold its students more captive, but the only ones I can think of have reputations as having, if anything, an even cozier, more student-friendly reputation.
Bike Pilot's point about Law & Econ, environmental (or some other) specialization is fair, so if that's a concern and you're *far* on the opposite side (which might not be the best approach to get the most out of any law school), that might be a factor at the very few schools (Chicago, Yale, Vermont) for which one of these is a clear bent.
So, in sum, it's hard to think of a school that would be markedly better (or worse) on this score, and it's likely not the factor on which a decision of where to go should be made.