Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: in-state = easier to get in?  (Read 436 times)

eringrace

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
in-state = easier to get in?
« on: September 15, 2007, 10:37:07 PM »
hey comrades,

does being in-state influence your chances of getting into a public (or private) law school? i know it can drastically lower tuition...but i'm wondering if it's like undergrad where schools give preference to in-staters.

thanks!! :o these icons are delightful.  :-*

Ilovecheese

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1361
    • View Profile
Re: in-state = easier to get in?
« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2007, 12:06:26 AM »
For Californian schools it does. I think they have a mandatory 50% in state acceptances policy.

Ilovecheese

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1361
    • View Profile
Re: in-state = easier to get in?
« Reply #2 on: September 16, 2007, 01:16:31 AM »
For Californian schools it does. I think they have a mandatory 50% in state acceptances policy.

 ???

I'm pretty sure that's not true. Link?

Boalt says they don't: http://www.law.berkeley.edu/admissions/jddegree/faq.html#Q3

Edit: I guess Boalt "strives for a majority of residents," but there's not a 50% quota.

UCLA's website doesn't say.

Hastings says they don't take it into consideration: http://www.uchastings.edu/?pid=480#residency

I believe that UT Austin has an in-state quota, although I can't find it on their website. Other than that, I don't know. It depends on the school. I think you may have to ask individual admissions offices.

an admission consultant told me that.

JusAccrescendi

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
    • AOL Instant Messenger - JusAbstinendi
    • View Profile
Re: in-state = easier to get in?
« Reply #3 on: September 16, 2007, 01:31:52 AM »
I've read in a few public law school brochures that a school gives preference to in-state residents. I think University of Maryland was one such school, but don't quote me on that.
I have studied and thoroughly mastered the laws of logic. So to argue that I sometimes violate the laws of logic in ordinary conversation would be like arguing that some physicist circumvents the laws of physics in everyday life.

http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=jusabstinendi

tonyp

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 44
  • Champions!
    • View Profile
Re: in-state = easier to get in?
« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2007, 12:42:51 PM »
Boalt says they don't: http://www.law.berkeley.edu/admissions/jddegree/faq.html#Q3

Edit: I guess Boalt "strives for a majority of residents," but there's not a 50% quota, and "you have a roughly equal chance of being admitted regardless of your residency."

It's been awhile, but I definitely recall LSN suggesting an LSAT disparity between resident and nonresident admissions at Boalt during the 05-06 cycle.  (All usual caveats regarding reliability of LSN data apply.)

Boalt's FAQ is an exercise in carefully worded ambiguity.  Given that they get 6000-7000 applicants and enroll fewer than 300, they can legitimately claim "roughly equal" chances for both pools of applicants - that is, "small" and "slightly smaller."  Even though they offer admissions to "equal numbers" of residents and nonresidents, they need not apply the same standards to arrive at those equal numbers.

Bottom line: there's circumstantial evidence suggesting that in-state students do have an advantage at Boalt,  but nothing like a "50% quota."

Quote
I believe that UT Austin has an in-state quota, although I can't find it on their website. 

Yeah, nonresident enrollment is limited to 35%, though as I understand it, that's measured over a period of years rather than for each class.
The University of Texas School of Law, Class of 2009