Have DL schools brought Antitrust / Sherman Act claims ?

[barond]

I'm just wondering if opportunist entrepreneurs seeking to profit off of distance education "law schools" would bring antitrust claims alleging that the ABA denies "graduates" of online schools the opportunity to practice law.

It seems like if you follow the broad language of §1 of the Sherman Act you could argue that the ABA engages in a conspiracy in restraint of trade.

[InterAlia1961]

Great question. I'll have to do a little research before I can join this discussion, but join I will! 

[FalconJimmy]

It seems like if you follow the broad language of §1 of the Sherman Act you could argue that the ABA engages in a conspiracy in restraint of trade.

there isn't even a shred of a case, here.

1.  The ABA just sets standards.  Schools are free to comply with them and apply for accreditation or not.

2.  States decide whether an ABA education is required or not.  Several states have decided they have too few lawyers and/or they need lawyers who don't meet the standards of nearly everybody else in the country.  It's not up to the ABA whether you can practice law or not:  it's up to the state.

You're free to sue the state if you want.  After all, why should there be standards?  I think I'd make a darned fine osteopathic surgeon, and the state shouldn't be able to stop me just because I didn't get some fancy, overpriced MD or DO degree and do some ridiculous residency.

In fact, I should open up my own medical school that caters to people who want to be doctors, but who don't want to sit in classes, learn from books, get good test scores, etc.  We'll just let them take classes on the internet and start cutting people open.

[lawstudent#1]

I'd be scared to live in a world without professional licensing standards.

Think about how much malpractice there is in the world(in any field) and then imagine if the homless whine-o who "know the constitution damnit!" was allowed to walk into court just because he felt like it and became your court appointed attorney.

Yeah, no thanks man.

[barond]

It seems like if you follow the broad language of §1 of the Sherman Act you could argue that the ABA engages in a conspiracy in restraint of trade.

there isn't even a shred of a case, here.

1.  The ABA just sets standards.  Schools are free to comply with them and apply for accreditation or not.

2.  States decide whether an ABA education is required or not.  Several states have decided they have too few lawyers and/or they need lawyers who don't meet the standards of nearly everybody else in the country.  It's not up to the ABA whether you can practice law or not:  it's up to the state.

You're free to sue the state if you want.  After all, why should there be standards?  I think I'd make a darned fine osteopathic surgeon, and the state shouldn't be able to stop me just because I didn't get some fancy, overpriced MD or DO degree and do some ridiculous residency.

In fact, I should open up my own medical school that caters to people who want to be doctors, but who don't want to sit in classes, learn from books, get good test scores, etc.  We'll just let them take classes on the internet and start cutting people open.

I agree, I just think these online tards will think they are "entitled" to sit for bar exams anywhere they want to. It would be only fair that modern technology allow them the privilege of circumventing the rules because they have situations in their life that do not allow them to go to a brick and mortar. 

The online students would love to become a real lawyer without doing what it takes to become a real lawyer.  The argument that technological advances merit allowing online "law schools"  to produce legitimate lawyers fails miserably in my view.  Theres no need to flood the market with unqualified and uneducated people who read cases online and do nothing whatsover that meets the standards of the ABA that have been in existance for decades.  Thats the problem with the Internet- it allows all these scam schools to come along and take money from people without even having any accreditation.

[lawstudent#1]

It seems like if you follow the broad language of §1 of the Sherman Act you could argue that the ABA engages in a conspiracy in restraint of trade.

there isn't even a shred of a case, here.

1.  The ABA just sets standards.  Schools are free to comply with them and apply for accreditation or not.

2.  States decide whether an ABA education is required or not.  Several states have decided they have too few lawyers and/or they need lawyers who don't meet the standards of nearly everybody else in the country.  It's not up to the ABA whether you can practice law or not:  it's up to the state.

You're free to sue the state if you want.  After all, why should there be standards?  I think I'd make a darned fine osteopathic surgeon, and the state shouldn't be able to stop me just because I didn't get some fancy, overpriced MD or DO degree and do some ridiculous residency.

In fact, I should open up my own medical school that caters to people who want to be doctors, but who don't want to sit in classes, learn from books, get good test scores, etc.  We'll just let them take classes on the internet and start cutting people open.

I agree, I just think these online tards will think they are "entitled" to sit for bar exams anywhere they want to. It would be only fair that modern technology allow them the privilege of circumventing the rules because they have situations in their life that do not allow them to go to a brick and mortar. 

The online students would love to become a real lawyer without doing what it takes to become a real lawyer.  The argument that technological advances merit allowing online "law schools"  to produce legitimate lawyers fails miserably in my view.  Theres no need to flood the market with unqualified and uneducated people who read cases online and do nothing whatsover that meets the standards of the ABA that have been in existance for decades.  Thats the problem with the Internet- it allows all these scam schools to come along and take money from people without even having any accreditation.

No more "entitlment" than all the aderall popping crybabies who demand "extra time" and other "special accomodations" on their exams and yet expect to be on our same curve. WTF?!?! Is they want to play special olympics fine, but don't throw them all in at the end as if they played the same game. Affirmative action for dummies is ok in Highschool but I'd rather have an online law grad than one of those spoonfed hand held the whole way people. One of them told me that the bar even has to let them have extra time(not sure if true) but it is, I sure hope they only charge their clients half rate since it takes them twice as long to do the job. 

[InterAlia1961]

Okay, I get it. A couple of you think you're better than the rest of us. Trust me, I'm used to such insolence and narcissism. I live in a small rural community. We see folks like you all the time. Instead of being intimidated by you, I've actually decided to see what I can learn from you. That's  the great thing about great egos--they want to tell anyone and everyone how smart they are. Free information is free information, no matter who it comes from. It is with that I give you my thanks. You've inspired me to pose a hptothetical to my LinkedIn group (Concord class of 2014). We can use this as an learning experience. I'm writing the hypothetical now, and I'll post it here later. Then, I'll post the answers from some of my classmates. Let's see who makes the most sense. Unless, of course, you big-headed brats are afraid. 

[lawstudent#1]

Afraid to read posts of what others think about themselves compared to us? -

(not helping the online grads are smart with that thinking train-and I want to support you)

How about this, could we log on and be a part of the discussion actively? That might prove something(maybe)
Or are they "scared" of what we might say?

[InterAlia1961]

Not to worry. I'll be sure to let the group know about this discussion. I think it could get quite active. Give me a couple of days. I've got a Real Property class this evening and a d worth of Crim Pro tomorrow. And let's not forget my day job. I'm happy to learn some of you want to help. That's generous. It's one thing to be generous with money; even fools can have big hearts. It's a real gift to be generous intellectually. Thank you.

[FalconJimmy]

Not to worry. I'll be sure to let the group know about this discussion.

If you really want to help yourself and others, why not let the group know how well your last graduating class did when it came time to find jobs.