Environmental Law Pessimism?

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
Ialdabaoth
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 5:26 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Ialdabaoth » Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:15 am

observationalist wrote:My comment about contacting Vermont students wasn't meant to suggest you should attend one of those schools... sorry for the confusion on that. I just thought it would be a good idea for you to speak with people who have the same interests as you but are a few years further along, and see what they're up against. It would help make you more informed before you start applying (though to what extent I can't say).

When I said I might be an exception it's because I basically saw my 1L NGO internship lead to more work during law school, which then let to me getting work after law school on a project basis. But I also received a post-grad stipend from Vanderbilt that allowed me to relocate abroad, and I had some amazing profs with a lot of NGO experience who were willing to fight for me to get through to the NGOs down here in Chile, and I also found separate work on legal education reform that was entirely fortuitous in how it came about. Combined it's a lot of work but none of the jobs are by themselves a fulltime legal gig... it's mostly policy work for which being a nonpracticing lawyer is helpful. So I can't really say I am a true example of someone who turns an NGO gig into a legal job or not. Rather I'm just scraping away and gaining experience before we return to the states and I need to look for FT legal work.

That said I still think it's possible for people to do right out of law school. It just shouldn't be something you plan on doing. If you can find small-shop enviro firms who can train and mentor you while you're still in law school you may be better off than only focusing on NGOs and hoping a position or funding opens up for you.


Sounds like you've had some cool experiences, and congrats on your success so far!

I'm definitely not planning on getting a PIEL job right out of law school in the sense that I won't be disappointed if I have to do something else for awhile first. But I do see myself being happiest in PI for the long term.

So when you mention environmental boutiques/small-shop firms, do you mean I should try to do a summer at such a firm instead of both 1L and 2 summers with NGOs or agencies?

crit_racer
Posts: 756
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:15 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby crit_racer » Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:20 am

Ialdabaoth wrote:
crit_racer wrote:I don't really have much to contribute to this thread, but I'm a 1L at UT who is looking to crack into PI enviro law. Let me know if you have any questions about UT. It seems we have a fair amount of enviro law resources that I'm hoping to take advantage of.


Hi, thanks for this offer! Have you gotten involved with the environmental law society or anything else related yet? If so, what types of things are they doing? Have you heard anything about how difficult it is to get a spot on the environmental journal or in the environmental clinic?

How are you liking UT in general?

TIA!


I did join the enviro law society, but I did not join the Journal (yet). TELJ (Texas Enviro Law Journal) is kind of a unique creature if I understand it correctly. From what I can tell, it is actually a publication by the State Bar of TX, which is published jointly w/ UT Law. I'm not sure what this means for student editorial positions, etc. They do not seem to have much of a presence on campus, which leads me to believe it's really run more by the State Bar participants than the students. I could be totally wrong about this, though, and I intend to investigate more next year.

As for the ELS, I have been somewhat underwhelmed by their community involvement. They seem to be more of a social club than anything else, but it's still a great way to meet like-minded people.

I plan on doing the environmental law clinic as well as taking some classes in environmental law. Today I went to a lunch with a UT prof who teaches air and water law classes (McGarity), and he was talking about his new book and different initiatives he and our enviro law staff have undertaken. We have a stellar enviro law faculty, and I've heard the enviro law clinic is not too tough to get into.

UT in general is great. I've been very happy w/ my experience so far. You should definitely give UT a look when it comes time to apply. You will probably get decent money here, too.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Grizz » Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:31 am

Another problem with firm work in enviro. You'll compete with people who don't necessarily have a passio for enviro who can fudge it and still get offer. I know personally. It's a ton of admin stuff, and people ARE interested in that. Also, some firms that represent businesses actively avoid people who come off as save-the-worldy. So there's that too. Something to keep in mind.

User avatar
Ialdabaoth
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 5:26 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Ialdabaoth » Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:32 am

crit_racer wrote:
I did join the enviro law society, but I did not join the Journal (yet). TELJ (Texas Enviro Law Journal) is kind of a unique creature if I understand it correctly. From what I can tell, it is actually a publication by the State Bar of TX, which is published jointly w/ UT Law. I'm not sure what this means for student editorial positions, etc. They do not seem to have much of a presence on campus, which leads me to believe it's really run more by the State Bar participants than the students. I could be totally wrong about this, though, and I intend to investigate more next year.

As for the ELS, I have been somewhat underwhelmed by their community involvement. They seem to be more of a social club than anything else, but it's still a great way to meet like-minded people.

I plan on doing the environmental law clinic as well as taking some classes in environmental law. Today I went to a lunch with a UT prof who teaches air and water law classes (McGarity), and he was talking about his new book and different initiatives he and our enviro law staff have undertaken. We have a stellar enviro law faculty, and I've heard the enviro law clinic is not too tough to get into.

UT in general is great. I've been very happy w/ my experience so far. You should definitely give UT a look when it comes time to apply. You will probably get decent money here, too.


Thanks so much for this info! Yeah, I was just looking at the TELJ website, and it does seem to be structured differently than all the other environmental journals I've seen.

UT has been on my list of schools for awhile, and I'll definitely be looking into it more. Glad to hear you're liking everything and good luck!

User avatar
Ialdabaoth
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 5:26 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Ialdabaoth » Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:40 am

Grizz wrote:Another problem with firm work in enviro. You'll compete with people who don't necessarily have a passio for enviro who can fudge it and still get offer. I know personally. It's a ton of admin stuff, and people ARE interested in that. Also, some firms that represent businesses actively avoid people who come off as save-the-worldy. So there's that too. Something to keep in mind.


Yeah, I had heard before about firms avoiding people with only PI experience. But I've also heard people say that generally they're more interested in your academic credentials, meaningful work experience, and interview presence than in actively avoiding people who might be "save-the-world" types. It seems to me that a PI summer followed by a firm summer might be the best balance. Is that a reasonable ambition?

You sure are a boatload of optimism, Grizz :) But honestly, thanks again for your input and perspective.

admisionquestion
Posts: 473
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby admisionquestion » Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:12 am

Opie wrote:ETAA: Like seriously, there was a 170/4.0 at Stanford last year. RETAKE!



This is an odd thing to say given that they also accepted several 167's etc.

http://stanford.lawschoolnumbers.com/applicants/1011/

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Grizz » Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:18 am

Ialdabaoth wrote:
Grizz wrote:Another problem with firm work in enviro. You'll compete with people who don't necessarily have a passio for enviro who can fudge it and still get offer. I know personally. It's a ton of admin stuff, and people ARE interested in that. Also, some firms that represent businesses actively avoid people who come off as save-the-worldy. So there's that too. Something to keep in mind.


Yeah, I had heard before about firms avoiding people with only PI experience. But I've also heard people say that generally they're more interested in your academic credentials, meaningful work experience, and interview presence than in actively avoiding people who might be "save-the-world" types. It seems to me that a PI summer followed by a firm summer might be the best balance. Is that a reasonable ambition?

You sure are a boatload of optimism, Grizz :) But honestly, thanks again for your input and perspective.

I agree that firms are more I interested in credentials. It definitely cuts both ways. People who can express and interest in enviro, sometimes even a not that strong one, will get offers, many times over people who have a true passion for the work. It's like having a strong enviro interest will probably not make you, but having the wrong type may break you.

PI -> firm may not hurt you. And it's doable. People do it all the time. But I might caution you somewhat about loading up on a ton of PI on your resume when applying to firms. The same thing happens to people in other PI fields and those interested in govt. work. You just have to clearly communicate that you are interested in maximizing value for clients. You want to come off with firms as someone strongly interested (positive), but not a true believer in "the cause."

Example: on a CB with an enviro boutique, I got a question, "so what do you think environmental work really is?" I was prepared. I gave an example of building a power plant, how there would be regulatory issues governing the use of the land and the physical building of the plant. How there would be regulatory issues with running the actual plant as well. All of this was framed through the perspective of helping the client navigate the regulatory framework of state and federal rules, and indeed lobbying to change those rules on behalf of the client if necessary. They loved this answer. The focus is on achieving the best result for the client within a regulatory framework, not necessarily the environment.

User avatar
gin
Posts: 389
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 3:35 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby gin » Fri Nov 11, 2011 10:43 pm

Ialdabaoth wrote:
gin wrote:Environmental law was one of the things I was considering to practice when I first went in 3 months ago. The thing that killed it was not the low pay or lack of gov't jobs; it was the idea of having to read f...ing statutes (amongst other incredibly boring material). I hate the idea of any kind of admin law in general now


I've heard similar complaints before. If you have the time, would you elaborate on why you find administrative law to be more boring than other types of law? I understand that reading statutes probably isn't the most exciting thing, but I wonder how much worse it is than other legal tasks, haha. Also, I'm not really interested in PIEL for pleasure in the work itself; I'm more interested in what I see as its goals. [Please don't bash me for being idealistic.]

This is my personal opinion of course and I don't have a whole lot experience, but for statutes the reading is extremely dry and figuring out why there is a comma somewhere or why there isn't or all the possible meanings of "may" is extremely tedious and boring and don't get me started on legislative history (Scalia has the right idea). Even cases about statutory interpretation are boring. As for regulations, agencies went through the same crap to try to figure out, though they are not that bad.
There are people who legitimately like it and more power to them, so who knows you might actually like it

blsingindisguise
Posts: 1296
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:08 am

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby blsingindisguise » Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:00 pm

gin wrote:
Ialdabaoth wrote:
gin wrote:Environmental law was one of the things I was considering to practice when I first went in 3 months ago. The thing that killed it was not the low pay or lack of gov't jobs; it was the idea of having to read f...ing statutes (amongst other incredibly boring material). I hate the idea of any kind of admin law in general now


I've heard similar complaints before. If you have the time, would you elaborate on why you find administrative law to be more boring than other types of law? I understand that reading statutes probably isn't the most exciting thing, but I wonder how much worse it is than other legal tasks, haha. Also, I'm not really interested in PIEL for pleasure in the work itself; I'm more interested in what I see as its goals. [Please don't bash me for being idealistic.]

This is my personal opinion of course and I don't have a whole lot experience, but for statutes the reading is extremely dry and figuring out why there is a comma somewhere or why there isn't or all the possible meanings of "may" is extremely tedious and boring and don't get me started on legislative history (Scalia has the right idea). Even cases about statutory interpretation are boring. As for regulations, agencies went through the same crap to try to figure out, though they are not that bad.
There are people who legitimately like it and more power to them, so who knows you might actually like it


It's not like lawyers sit around parsing statutes all day. I mean there's lots of boring stuff to do but it's not what you're describing. No offense, but this really is a useless post, because you have no idea what you're talking about and just guessing. But that's TLS.

User avatar
gin
Posts: 389
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 3:35 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby gin » Sat Nov 12, 2011 1:13 am

blsingindisguise wrote:It's not like lawyers sit around parsing statutes all day. I mean there's lots of boring stuff to do but it's not what you're describing. No offense, but this really is a useless post, because you have no idea what you're talking about and just guessing. But that's TLS.

Which is why I said it's my opinion and I don't have a lot of experience. Those disclaimers were the very first thing I wrote

MrAnon
Posts: 1615
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby MrAnon » Sat Nov 12, 2011 2:01 am

Its easy to say you are going to take a low paying public interest job before you actually incur the law school loans. Its kind of like the same way its easy to say you are going to law school instead of looking for a non-law job in environmentalism right now. I mean honestly, if you were that into environmental work, wouldnt you go do it now? Rather than postpone it three years? But getting back to the point, once you have those loans and once you are surrounded by people gunning for biglaw, you'll think you want biglaw too. In fact, you wont comprehend how to you can repay the loans without biglaw. Moreover you'll find that everyone wants an environmental law job too! Probably the best way to make an impact in environmentalism is to go find a job in the field now and forget the law degree. It doesn't do anything to enhance your candidacy in the field and in fact you will almost never attain a chief officer position other than lawyer, because you'll always be "the lawyer" in the office. You won't be the policy maker, you'll just be the mop up person who tells the chief what he or she cannot do.

User avatar
Ialdabaoth
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 5:26 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Ialdabaoth » Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:03 pm

admisionquestion wrote:
Opie wrote:ETAA: Like seriously, there was a 170/4.0 at Stanford last year. RETAKE!



This is an odd thing to say given that they also accepted several 167's etc.

http://stanford.lawschoolnumbers.com/applicants/1011/


A lot (maybe all) of those are URMs...

User avatar
AreJay711
Posts: 3406
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:51 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby AreJay711 » Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:15 pm

Doing firm work isn't the worst thing. I mean, sure, you are trying to get away with fucking the environment as much as possible with out violating the law. But you are making sure they actually follow the law and that is all that you would be able to require/enforce/litigate for in the government or PI world.

Edit: I guess that might not be true for litigation work at a firm though.

User avatar
Ialdabaoth
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 5:26 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Ialdabaoth » Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:19 pm

Grizz wrote:
Ialdabaoth wrote:
Grizz wrote:Another problem with firm work in enviro. You'll compete with people who don't necessarily have a passio for enviro who can fudge it and still get offer. I know personally. It's a ton of admin stuff, and people ARE interested in that. Also, some firms that represent businesses actively avoid people who come off as save-the-worldy. So there's that too. Something to keep in mind.


Yeah, I had heard before about firms avoiding people with only PI experience. But I've also heard people say that generally they're more interested in your academic credentials, meaningful work experience, and interview presence than in actively avoiding people who might be "save-the-world" types. It seems to me that a PI summer followed by a firm summer might be the best balance. Is that a reasonable ambition?

You sure are a boatload of optimism, Grizz :) But honestly, thanks again for your input and perspective.

I agree that firms are more I interested in credentials. It definitely cuts both ways. People who can express and interest in enviro, sometimes even a not that strong one, will get offers, many times over people who have a true passion for the work. It's like having a strong enviro interest will probably not make you, but having the wrong type may break you.

PI -> firm may not hurt you. And it's doable. People do it all the time. But I might caution you somewhat about loading up on a ton of PI on your resume when applying to firms. The same thing happens to people in other PI fields and those interested in govt. work. You just have to clearly communicate that you are interested in maximizing value for clients. You want to come off with firms as someone strongly interested (positive), but not a true believer in "the cause."

Example: on a CB with an enviro boutique, I got a question, "so what do you think environmental work really is?" I was prepared. I gave an example of building a power plant, how there would be regulatory issues governing the use of the land and the physical building of the plant. How there would be regulatory issues with running the actual plant as well. All of this was framed through the perspective of helping the client navigate the regulatory framework of state and federal rules, and indeed lobbying to change those rules on behalf of the client if necessary. They loved this answer. The focus is on achieving the best result for the client within a regulatory framework, not necessarily the environment.


That makes a lot of sense. Thanks so much for the details!

One more question: When you say "PI -> firm" do you include government work in your PI category? I'm curious about this because at an environmental law conference I recently attended, all the attorneys from environmental nonprofits seemed pretty hostile to the idea of government environmental work, even to the point of sounding like they thought their work was somehow morally superior. So, I guess what I'm getting at is whether it might be "safer" (in respect to still being able to pursue a firm position) to try to seek out opportunities at agencies instead of straight PI/nonprofit work. At the same time, I would worry that not having any direct PI experience would make me a weaker applicant for those rare, straight-out-of-law-school PIEL jobs.

User avatar
Ialdabaoth
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 5:26 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Ialdabaoth » Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:25 pm

AreJay711 wrote:Doing firm work isn't the worst thing. I mean, sure, you are trying to get away with fucking the environment as much as possible with out violating the law. But you are making sure they actually follow the law and that is all that you would be able to require/enforce/litigate for in the government or PI world.

Edit: I guess that might not be true for litigation work at a firm though.


Yeah, I'm definitely not the type that would never consider doing environmental work at a firm. I think compliance-related issues are pretty interesting, and there is some other cool stuff some firms do like brownfields redevelopment.

I think I remember seeing you post stuff last year when I was obsessed with TLS after taking the December LSAT. Did you end up at Michigan? I talked to one of their admissions reps recently about environmental law at M and was pretty impressed. The director of EL program sounds great.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Grizz » Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:32 pm

Ialdabaoth wrote:
That makes a lot of sense. Thanks so much for the details!

One more question: When you say "PI -> firm" do you include government work in your PI category? I'm curious about this because at an environmental law conference I recently attended, all the attorneys from environmental nonprofits seemed pretty hostile to the idea of government environmental work, even to the point of sounding like they thought their work was somehow morally superior. So, I guess what I'm getting at is whether it might be "safer" (in respect to still being able to pursue a firm position) to try to seek out opportunities at agencies instead of straight PI/nonprofit work. At the same time, I would worry that not having any direct PI experience would make me a weaker applicant for those rare, straight-out-of-law-school PIEL jobs.

I don't really know a ton about what government orgs think about PI stuff. I know more about firms. Sorry man. I will say that as a general rule what you do 1L summer doesn't matter that much if you can spin it right.
Last edited by Grizz on Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
theavrock
Posts: 601
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:52 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby theavrock » Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:32 pm

MrAnon wrote:Its easy to say you are going to take a low paying public interest job before you actually incur the law school loans. Its kind of like the same way its easy to say you are going to law school instead of looking for a non-law job in environmentalism right now. I mean honestly, if you were that into environmental work, wouldnt you go do it now? Rather than postpone it three years? But getting back to the point, once you have those loans and once you are surrounded by people gunning for biglaw, you'll think you want biglaw too. In fact, you wont comprehend how to you can repay the loans without biglaw. Moreover you'll find that everyone wants an environmental law job too! Probably the best way to make an impact in environmentalism is to go find a job in the field now and forget the law degree. It doesn't do anything to enhance your candidacy in the field and in fact you will almost never attain a chief officer position other than lawyer, because you'll always be "the lawyer" in the office. You won't be the policy maker, you'll just be the mop up person who tells the chief what he or she cannot do.


http://www.usnews.com/education/article ... to-college

59 of the Fortune 500 have law degrees. While someone looking to be a CEO should get an MBA almost never is not really right.

I don't even want to get into a pissing match about the rest of your post unless you have something useful regarding env. law to back up what you're saying.

Yes many people SAY they want to do env. law, but few actually DO the things needed to demonstrate an interest and make the connections to do so. You're trying to argue things both ways. No one wants to do env. law because the only place you can survive is by going in to big law and everyone wants to do env. law so there are no jobs.

OP: if you want to do env. law it is very important to network and demonstrate an interest in it from the beginning. Every env. attorney has told me this. You will not be able to slack/get shitty grades and still be able to get an env. law job because you did an internship with some env. NGO., but this commitment is a baseline for getting in to this field.

Working in policy is a great way to "make a difference" but I have met many lawyers who are doing very interesting things. If you want to be a lawyer and have a passion for the environment sacrificing that desire to just get a job in the env. field is an asinine thing to do

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Grizz » Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:37 pm

Commitment is all fine and good, but it's not determinative when applying at firms.

User avatar
beach_terror
Posts: 7235
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:01 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby beach_terror » Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:44 pm

The posts in this thread have been super long, but I'm a current 2L attempting to be an environmental attorney. You only have a few options:

1) big firm SA, when they hire you they have an opening in environmental practice group
2) boutique firms, not many of these and they're just as competitive as big law - still mostly defense/regulatory compliance
3) PI stuff, you can join some bleeding heart organization that doesn't do a ton of law work (mostly commenting, higher ups do lit)
4) government, ITE it's just not happening. You can do EPA honors, but that's just for 2 years and then you come back after 7-10 years of relevant experience. State hiring is probably frozen right now, depending on the state and the size/reputation of their DEP.

User avatar
Ialdabaoth
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 5:26 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Ialdabaoth » Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:45 pm

MrAnon wrote:Its easy to say you are going to take a low paying public interest job before you actually incur the law school loans. Its kind of like the same way its easy to say you are going to law school instead of looking for a non-law job in environmentalism right now. I mean honestly, if you were that into environmental work, wouldnt you go do it now? Rather than postpone it three years? But getting back to the point, once you have those loans and once you are surrounded by people gunning for biglaw, you'll think you want biglaw too. In fact, you wont comprehend how to you can repay the loans without biglaw. Moreover you'll find that everyone wants an environmental law job too! Probably the best way to make an impact in environmentalism is to go find a job in the field now and forget the law degree. It doesn't do anything to enhance your candidacy in the field and in fact you will almost never attain a chief officer position other than lawyer, because you'll always be "the lawyer" in the office. You won't be the policy maker, you'll just be the mop up person who tells the chief what he or she cannot do.


No offense, but I disagree with almost everything you've said here.

First, I am currently pursuing environmental work/fellowships for after undergrad. I'm going to do that for a year or two to gain experience before law school. However, I think that the best way for me (based on my interests and skills) to "make an impact in environmentalism" is through a career in PIEL.

Also, you seem to be forgetting the fact that almost all of the top law schools now have great LRAPs, and some of those programs allow students to enroll up to three years after graduation from law school. That means I could even do firm work for awhile to gain experience before getting into PI work.

It's also disrespectful for you to assume that I will only want to do BigLaw after being in law school for a couple of years. You don't know me, my ideals, or my passions. And not everyone at a T14 is going to want to do environmental work. I really don't understand what you're trying to prove here.

Last, I want to work in public interest environmental law, not "the environmental field" in general or whatever else you might mean. I am interested in the way law can be used to improve environmental and economic outcomes, and I dislike environmental "organizing" and some other facets of environmentalism. I don't want to be a CEO-type and would be happy being "the lawyer."

User avatar
SamSeaborn2016
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:07 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby SamSeaborn2016 » Sat Nov 12, 2011 8:50 pm

Ialdabaoth wrote:
SamSeaborn2016 wrote:I'm a 2L and have next summer's job locked down - a paying gig with the feds doing environmental work and I'm not at a T14 or even in the top 10% of my class at my school (rank somewhere in the 70s or 80s). Will it turn into long term employment after my 3L year? I don't know but I think it is interesting that I didn't go to school to specifically do environmental law - I just like admin law in general. That tells me you shouldn't necessarily even look for a school that has a strong E Law focus.

Seems like everyone here is leaning towards giving yourself the best suite of possibilities by retaking and possibly getting into a T14 school. I'd lean toward that direction as well but if you really are dedicated to doing PI work I'd put in a vote for limiting your debt load as much as you can. Maybe retake and end up somewhere higher in the rankings but with a substantial scholly to help offset your potential debt load.


Thanks for your response. I'm having a bit of trouble following your argument though. I don't understand how your situation shows that I shouldn't try to get into a good school that also has a good environmental program. I know you seem to be a bit of an exception, but I don't think I'm going to give up focusing on schools with good EL resources based on your experience. Congrats on your summer job though!

Also, I don't think I necessarily need to retake for "possibly getting into a T14," unless you really don't think I have much of a chance as I stand with a 3.95/4.0 and a 168. As for debt, I'm hoping to get into a T14 with a good LRAP (lower ranked schools' LRAPs often aren't as generous), which can be pretty sweet for someone as long as they get into PI within a few years of graduation.

Again, thanks for your thoughts and congrats on your success!


Fair point, my response was kind of rambling. My poor worded argument was to just to try and give yourself the most opportunities you can rather than focusing too much on environmental law. Solid overall credentials and an interest in the topic should be enough. Especially since the schools best "known" for E law aren't the top academic schools. You wouldn't want to limit yourself unnecessarily. I'm not a "T14 or bust" guy but you have the numbers to go to a great school and make post-graduation job searching a bit easier.

User avatar
Ialdabaoth
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 5:26 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Ialdabaoth » Sat Nov 12, 2011 10:48 pm

SamSeaborn2016 wrote:
Ialdabaoth wrote:
SamSeaborn2016 wrote:I'm a 2L and have next summer's job locked down - a paying gig with the feds doing environmental work and I'm not at a T14 or even in the top 10% of my class at my school (rank somewhere in the 70s or 80s). Will it turn into long term employment after my 3L year? I don't know but I think it is interesting that I didn't go to school to specifically do environmental law - I just like admin law in general. That tells me you shouldn't necessarily even look for a school that has a strong E Law focus.

Seems like everyone here is leaning towards giving yourself the best suite of possibilities by retaking and possibly getting into a T14 school. I'd lean toward that direction as well but if you really are dedicated to doing PI work I'd put in a vote for limiting your debt load as much as you can. Maybe retake and end up somewhere higher in the rankings but with a substantial scholly to help offset your potential debt load.


Thanks for your response. I'm having a bit of trouble following your argument though. I don't understand how your situation shows that I shouldn't try to get into a good school that also has a good environmental program. I know you seem to be a bit of an exception, but I don't think I'm going to give up focusing on schools with good EL resources based on your experience. Congrats on your summer job though!

Also, I don't think I necessarily need to retake for "possibly getting into a T14," unless you really don't think I have much of a chance as I stand with a 3.95/4.0 and a 168. As for debt, I'm hoping to get into a T14 with a good LRAP (lower ranked schools' LRAPs often aren't as generous), which can be pretty sweet for someone as long as they get into PI within a few years of graduation.

Again, thanks for your thoughts and congrats on your success!


Fair point, my response was kind of rambling. My poor worded argument was to just to try and give yourself the most opportunities you can rather than focusing too much on environmental law. Solid overall credentials and an interest in the topic should be enough. Especially since the schools best "known" for E law aren't the top academic schools. You wouldn't want to limit yourself unnecessarily. I'm not a "T14 or bust" guy but you have the numbers to go to a great school and make post-graduation job searching a bit easier.


Thanks!

I get what you're saying now and definitely agree, and I think that the people who plan to go to Vermont and then easily get a job with DOJ ENRD, Earthjustice, etc. are pretty delusional, haha.

MrAnon
Posts: 1615
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby MrAnon » Sat Nov 12, 2011 11:00 pm

59 of the Fortune 500 have law degrees.


And 441 do not. In other words, if you want to make it to the very top then law degree is not the way to go.

User avatar
Ialdabaoth
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 5:26 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby Ialdabaoth » Sat Nov 12, 2011 11:05 pm

MrAnon wrote:
59 of the Fortune 500 have law degrees.


And 441 do not. In other words, if you want to make it to the very top then law degree is not the way to go.


What does this have to do with pursuing a career in public interest environmental law though? I don't want to be a CEO or even an executive director of an environmental organization.

User avatar
theavrock
Posts: 601
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:52 pm

Re: Environmental Law Pessimism?

Postby theavrock » Sun Nov 13, 2011 1:45 am

MrAnon wrote:
59 of the Fortune 500 have law degrees.


And 441 do not. In other words, if you want to make it to the very top then law degree is not the way to go.


Apparently you can do math but have trouble with reading. You disregarded the rest of my post and the link I posted, so I'll help you out.

179 of them have MBA's and 59 have JD's. As I said an MBA is "the way to go" but even then less than 40% of CEO's in the Fortune 500 have MBA's so apparently that's not the way to go either.

As OP has already pointed out this has nothing to do with the question he asked. I was simply pointing out that you don't what the fuck you're talking about and you're incessant trolling is obnoxious.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests