HLS or SLS? Forum

[MaxWeber]

.

[bruss]

faced similar choice (throw in Y) and chose SLS w/ similar long-term interests in policy/politics as OP.

to me, the biggest draw with harvard was the name, history, and everything that came with it---supreme court justices hear 2L moot court arguments, senators have their names on the wall, the president shows up for alumni weekend, etc.

but then i realized that harvard, as a school, wasn't actually that awesome. it felt stale and out of touch with the future of the profession, and only nominally engaged in producing leaders and social innovators. it's rested on its laurels and has been able to stay awesome by plucking top faculty (who do their grunt work elsewhere) and taking a large enough class to guarantee that SOMEONE (maybe it's a 3rd gen legacy) every now and then would end up as an appellate judge or congressman.

stanford, by contrast, seemed to be where i'd develop into someone who's actually influential. i can already tell you that the 1L program at SLS is much harder than anywhere else in the country, but also more empowering. we have a 10 month 1L year and a full-term simulation course in federal pretrial litigation, including strategy, negotiation, oral argument, etc. the school actually has to petition the ABA each year for an exception to give 1L's 18 credit hours in the fall quarter (13 hours is the ordinary maximum i believe). whether or not you want to be a litigator, that's the nuts/bolts of lawyering, and you'll know it. all that stuff in the NYT about how law schools don't teach you anything? not true here. beginning 2L, you'll get to take courses that are interdisciplinary, collaborative, and which directly involve practice. if you are more academically inclined and interested in something like law and democracy, professors are eager to advise you in a directed research course, and you can start talking legal theory electives as early as your 1L spring. if you know or discover an area of law/policy you want to explore more thoroughly, join one of the clinics. and of course, you have the entire university's course offerings to explore as well. check them out.

obviously biased, but i think SLS is the future of legal education and the best law school in the country for leaders. it combined the best of both H and Y without the drawbacks of either. i think the people here seem more relaxed because we're more self-confident and comfortable with who we are and what we want to do. in some ways you have to be pretty confident to turn down harvard or yale, and being grounded like that keeps things in perspective---most of us know that we'll get a mix of Hs and Ps no matter what, and that we'll get one of the jobs we want. we still study HARD b/c the course load is so damn rigorous, but there's only a minority of people who gun for straight H's. they seem to be the fearful, study-all-night and ask obnoxious detail-oriented questions type who feel that grades are all they have to offer, but thats their prerogative and they'll be successful attorneys.

you have to live with your choice, not me. not everyone can say no to Harvard. you have to figure out if you're one of them.

ps a reassuring line about your decision from dean kramer last year when i asked him at admit weekend about choosing b/w S/Y/H: "oh god, at least you'll choose harvard if you don't come here right? i mean, they actually try to train lawyers there, it's a serious place. yale? you're not gonna learn how to do anything there, i'd want my money back."

This is exactly the kind of info that is needed for all potential 1Ls who are interested in any law school. Nice post. Minus the biased info.

[Perdevise]

faced similar choice (throw in Y) and chose SLS w/ similar long-term interests in policy/politics as OP.

to me, the biggest draw with harvard was the name, history, and everything that came with it---supreme court justices hear 2L moot court arguments, senators have their names on the wall, the president shows up for alumni weekend, etc.

but then i realized that harvard, as a school, wasn't actually that awesome. it felt stale and out of touch with the future of the profession, and only nominally engaged in producing leaders and social innovators. it's rested on its laurels and has been able to stay awesome by plucking top faculty (who do their grunt work elsewhere) and taking a large enough class to guarantee that SOMEONE (maybe it's a 3rd gen legacy) every now and then would end up as an appellate judge or congressman.

stanford, by contrast, seemed to be where i'd develop into someone who's actually influential. i can already tell you that the 1L program at SLS is much harder than anywhere else in the country, but also more empowering. we have a 10 month 1L year and a full-term simulation course in federal pretrial litigation, including strategy, negotiation, oral argument, etc. the school actually has to petition the ABA each year for an exception to give 1L's 18 credit hours in the fall quarter (13 hours is the ordinary maximum i believe). whether or not you want to be a litigator, that's the nuts/bolts of lawyering, and you'll know it. all that stuff in the NYT about how law schools don't teach you anything? not true here. beginning 2L, you'll get to take courses that are interdisciplinary, collaborative, and which directly involve practice. if you are more academically inclined and interested in something like law and democracy, professors are eager to advise you in a directed research course, and you can start talking legal theory electives as early as your 1L spring. if you know or discover an area of law/policy you want to explore more thoroughly, join one of the clinics. and of course, you have the entire university's course offerings to explore as well. check them out.

obviously biased, but i think SLS is the future of legal education and the best law school in the country for leaders. it combined the best of both H and Y without the drawbacks of either. i think the people here seem more relaxed because we're more self-confident and comfortable with who we are and what we want to do. in some ways you have to be pretty confident to turn down harvard or yale, and being grounded like that keeps things in perspective---most of us know that we'll get a mix of Hs and Ps no matter what, and that we'll get one of the jobs we want. we still study HARD b/c the course load is so damn rigorous, but there's only a minority of people who gun for straight H's. they seem to be the fearful, study-all-night and ask obnoxious detail-oriented questions type who feel that grades are all they have to offer, but thats their prerogative and they'll be successful attorneys.

you have to live with your choice, not me. not everyone can say no to Harvard. you have to figure out if you're one of them.

ps a reassuring line about your decision from dean kramer last year when i asked him at admit weekend about choosing b/w S/Y/H: "oh god, at least you'll choose harvard if you don't come here right? i mean, they actually try to train lawyers there, it's a serious place. yale? you're not gonna learn how to do anything there, i'd want my money back."

Oh dog, I am so excited for SLS, biased or not.

[jmkelly]

HLS 1Ls also take 18 credit hours in the fall. Don't know where you got the idea that SLS was unique in that respect.

[z3201]

HLS 1Ls also take 18 credit hours in the fall. Don't know where you got the idea that SLS was unique in that respect.

...Don't know where you got the idea that he thought SLS was "unique" in that respect

What makes SLS possibly harder than other schools is that after taking 18 credit hours (which is more than the average school, even though HLS does it too) in an extended-quarter-but-not-quite-as-long-as-the-average-semester term, we have two more quarters to go. So 1L ends up being 10 months long, which is sort of a while. But maybe not unique.

[thesmark]

Take Harvard because I it would open up another potential spot for me at Stanford

[ph14]

HLS 1L here. It's definitely a tough decision. I think what you're facing off against really is the smaller class size (closer relationships, more scarce of a commodity) and better grading system (no LPs) of Stanford versus the prestige/brand and large class size (more possible organizations to join, large alumni base, etc.) of Harvard. Then you have to think about location/weather, which is very subjective. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

[marckrock]

SLS just posted this new virtual tour of the school on their website

http://www.voovio.com/vvts/StanfordLawSchool

[Stig]

Then you have to think about location/weather, which is very subjective.

Heh, "subjective."

[AmandaPB]

faced similar choice (throw in Y) and chose SLS w/ similar long-term interests in policy/politics as OP.

to me, the biggest draw with harvard was the name, history, and everything that came with it---supreme court justices hear 2L moot court arguments, senators have their names on the wall, the president shows up for alumni weekend, etc.

but then i realized that harvard, as a school, wasn't actually that awesome. it felt stale and out of touch with the future of the profession, and only nominally engaged in producing leaders and social innovators. it's rested on its laurels and has been able to stay awesome by plucking top faculty (who do their grunt work elsewhere) and taking a large enough class to guarantee that SOMEONE (maybe it's a 3rd gen legacy) every now and then would end up as an appellate judge or congressman.

stanford, by contrast, seemed to be where i'd develop into someone who's actually influential. i can already tell you that the 1L program at SLS is much harder than anywhere else in the country, but also more empowering. we have a 10 month 1L year and a full-term simulation course in federal pretrial litigation, including strategy, negotiation, oral argument, etc. the school actually has to petition the ABA each year for an exception to give 1L's 18 credit hours in the fall quarter (13 hours is the ordinary maximum i believe). whether or not you want to be a litigator, that's the nuts/bolts of lawyering, and you'll know it. all that stuff in the NYT about how law schools don't teach you anything? not true here. beginning 2L, you'll get to take courses that are interdisciplinary, collaborative, and which directly involve practice. if you are more academically inclined and interested in something like law and democracy, professors are eager to advise you in a directed research course, and you can start talking legal theory electives as early as your 1L spring. if you know or discover an area of law/policy you want to explore more thoroughly, join one of the clinics. and of course, you have the entire university's course offerings to explore as well. check them out.

obviously biased, but i think SLS is the future of legal education and the best law school in the country for leaders. it combined the best of both H and Y without the drawbacks of either. i think the people here seem more relaxed because we're more self-confident and comfortable with who we are and what we want to do. in some ways you have to be pretty confident to turn down harvard or yale, and being grounded like that keeps things in perspective---most of us know that we'll get a mix of Hs and Ps no matter what, and that we'll get one of the jobs we want. we still study HARD b/c the course load is so damn rigorous, but there's only a minority of people who gun for straight H's. they seem to be the fearful, study-all-night and ask obnoxious detail-oriented questions type who feel that grades are all they have to offer, but thats their prerogative and they'll be successful attorneys.

you have to live with your choice, not me. not everyone can say no to Harvard. you have to figure out if you're one of them.

ps a reassuring line about your decision from dean kramer last year when i asked him at admit weekend about choosing b/w S/Y/H: "oh god, at least you'll choose harvard if you don't come here right? i mean, they actually try to train lawyers there, it's a serious place. yale? you're not gonna learn how to do anything there, i'd want my money back."

I love this post, it makes me so excited about Stanford. Thanks for sharing your opinion.

[Emma.]

In this thread:

Taipei continues to put his/her school (Chicago) in the same group as HYS and even suggest it is better than H.

He trolls T5 and Chicago hard.

TBF, I'm hardly a UChi troll and I can totally see good reasons for choosing Chi over HLS.

Stanford, OTOH...

Go to SLS, OP.

[Flash]

In this thread:

Taipei continues to put his/her school (Chicago) in the same group as HYS and even suggest it is better than H.

He trolls T5 and Chicago hard.

TBF, I'm hardly a UChi troll and I can totally see good reasons for choosing Chi over HLS.

Stanford, OTOH...

Go to SLS, OP.

QFFuckingT

You can have reasons to choose Chicago over HLS. There is no reason not to go to SLS, unless you're going to YLS.

[anstone1988]

In this thread:

Taipei continues to put his/her school (Chicago) in the same group as HYS and even suggest it is better than H.

He trolls T5 and Chicago hard.

TBF, I'm hardly a UChi troll and I can totally see good reasons for choosing Chi over HLS.

Stanford, OTOH...

Go to SLS, OP.

QFFuckingT

You can have reasons to choose Chicago over HLS. There is no reason not to go to SLS, unless you're going to YLS.

20 years down the road, your JD could be more valuable if used outside of law. That's when the Harvard Law diploma shows its real value.

[handsonthewheel]

20 years down the road, your JD could be more valuable if used outside of law. That's when the Harvard Law diploma shows its real value.

If 20 years down the road of your career going to Harvard as opposed to Stanford, Yale, Chicago or somewhere like that matters, you've definitely done something wrong.

Not to be mean, but what in the hell are you talking about?

[anstone1988]

20 years down the road, your JD could be more valuable if used outside of law. That's when the Harvard Law diploma shows its real value.

If 20 years down the road of your career going to Harvard as opposed to Stanford, Yale, Chicago or somewhere like that matters, you've definitely done something wrong.

Not to be mean, but what in the hell are you talking about?

It absolutely does in certain cases. Of course, what you have done during the 20 years (i.e. deals, cases, etc.) matters. However, it's often hard to assess what you have done and your strength as a candidate/partner, especially if you are competing against other people who have done similar things. If you are looking to go into buy-side finance, M&A, import/export, etc. (all of which could be much more profitable than BigLaw partnership) 20 years down the road, having access to the Harvard alumni network and the Harvard name is valuable. That's why I believe thinking ahead is essential when deciding on where to attend law school. At the HYS level, short-term career prospects for students from all three are similar. You will have a BigLaw job if you want one, and you will have to work hard if you want A3 clerkship/academia no matter which one of the three you choose. Therefore, I believe choosing where to attend comes down to which school fits your interests and personality instead of to generalizations such as "Yale is SUPREME" or "the H-bomb stays with you for life."

[handsonthewheel]

It absolutely does in certain cases. Of course, what you have done during the 20 years (i.e. deals, cases, etc.) matters. However, it's often hard to assess what you have done and your strength as a candidate/partner, especially if you are competing against other people who have done similar things. If you are looking to go into buy-side finance, M&A, import/export, etc. (all of which could be much more profitable than BigLaw partnership) 20 years down the road, having access to the Harvard alumni network and the Harvard name is valuable. That's why I believe thinking ahead is essential when deciding on where to attend law school. At the HYS level, short-term career prospects for students from all three are similar. You will have a BigLaw job if you want one, and you will have to work hard if you want A3 clerkship/academia no matter which one of the three you choose. Therefore, I believe choosing where to attend comes down to which school fits your interests and personality instead of to generalizations such as "Yale is SUPREME" or "the H-bomb stays with you for life."

That still doesn't make any sense. In what certain cases does it matter? And it is not difficult to assess "what you have done and your strength as a candidate/partner."

Regardless of whatever point you are missing, you're correct that, in the end, it's a matter of personal preference.

[icpb]

If you want to go into business after practicing law, go to Harvard Law. It's strength in business/finance blows all other law schools out of the water. It's alumni include David Bonderman, Bruce Wasserstein, Lloyd Blankfein, Jim Cramer, etc.

[handsonthewheel]

If you want to go into business after practicing law, go to Harvard Law. It's strength in business/finance blows all other law schools out of the water. It's alumni include David Bonderman, Bruce Wasserstein, Lloyd Blankfein, Jim Cramer, etc.

LOL.

[Nelson]

Jim Cramer

Yeah, definitely take Harvard. CNBC secure.

[Arro]

Can't tell if the sudden influx of anti-Harvard trolls are delusional or just butthurt they couldn't get into Harvard.

SLS and Chicago are fine if you want to stay in law your whole life. But if you ever want to do something else, go to Harvard. Presidents, Senators, Congressmen, SCOTUS Justices, CEOs, and business executives are overwhelmingly represented by HLS grads. Obviously some people don't have such life inspirations, but it would be silly to go to SLS and Chicago if you do.

And when did YHSChi become a thing? Chicago is still behind Columbia last time I checked.

[handsonthewheel]

Can't tell if the sudden influx of anti-Harvard trolls are delusional or just butthurt they couldn't get into Harvard.

SLS and Chicago are fine if you want to stay in law your whole life. But if you ever want to do something else, go to Harvard. Presidents, Senators, Congressmen, SCOTUS Justices, CEOs, and business executives are overwhelmingly represented by HLS grads. Obviously some people don't have such life inspirations, but it would be silly to go to SLS and Chicago if you do.

And when did YHSChi become a thing? Chicago is still behind Columbia last time I checked.

It's delusional to think that Harvard is that special in comparison to Stanford and Yale.

Also, nice registration just to make that post.

[Arro]

It's delusional to think that Harvard is that special in comparison to Stanford and Yale.

Compared to Stanford, no it's not delusional at all. HLS alumni are far superior to SLS alumni. Job prospects out of law school are similar, but it's clear that HLS alum occupy a far greater percentage of power positions (SCOTUS, Senator, Governor, CEO, etc.) For people that aspire to those positions, what rational reasons are there for them to choose SLS over HLS? Assuming not Cali.

Also, nice registration just to make that post.

Uh, yeah. Long-time lurker but the Harvard bashing has gotten on my nerve lately.

[Emma.]

It's delusional to think that Harvard is that special in comparison to Stanford and Yale.

Compared to Stanford, no it's not delusional at all. HLS alumni are far superior to SLS alumni. Job prospects out of law school are similar, but it's clear that HLS alum occupy a far greater percentage of power positions (SCOTUS, Senator, Governor, CEO, etc.) For people that aspire to those positions, what rational reasons are there for them to choose SLS over HLS? Assuming not Cali.

HLS' class is almost 3 times the size of SLS or UChi. Once you adjust for that I don't think you'll see quite the same huge advantage for HLS alumni.

For instance, anstone1988 suggests that HLS name would be important in making partner (which I suspect is just plain wrong), but check out these numbers (remembering that UChi's class size is ~190 compared with HLS's ~550):

http://www.nationaljurist.com/content/w ... law-school

No one is arguing (at least I hope no one is arguing) that HLS isn't a great school. If when I was choosing schools I'd had the option of choosing between HLS and UChi with equal aid $$ l I would have likely chosen to go there. But I don't think HLS is such a huge leap above UChi that it always makes sense to choose HLS over UChi.

[Arro]

It's delusional to think that Harvard is that special in comparison to Stanford and Yale.

Compared to Stanford, no it's not delusional at all. HLS alumni are far superior to SLS alumni. Job prospects out of law school are similar, but it's clear that HLS alum occupy a far greater percentage of power positions (SCOTUS, Senator, Governor, CEO, etc.) For people that aspire to those positions, what rational reasons are there for them to choose SLS over HLS? Assuming not Cali.

HLS' class is almost 3 times the size of SLS or UChi. Once you adjust for that I don't think you'll see quite the same huge advantage for HLS alumni.

For instance, anstone1988 suggests that HLS name would be important in making partner (which I suspect is just plain wrong), but check out these numbers (remembering that UChi's class size is ~190 compared with HLS's ~550):

http://www.nationaljurist.com/content/w ... law-school

That's probably true. I think HLS and UChi are extremely similar when it comes to getting a job in biglaw and eventually making partner. But it seems to me that HLS absolutely dominates in politics and business, and those are the two fields that I'd like to exit into. I said in my first post that SLS and UChi are great if you want to stay in law your whole life. But HLS has clear advantages outside of law.

No one is arguing (at least I hope no one is arguing) that HLS isn't a great school. If when I was choosing schools I'd had the option of choosing between HLS and UChi with equal aid $$ l I would have likely chosen to go there. But I don't think HLS is such a huge leap above UChi that it always makes sense to choose HLS over UChi.

I agree. If someone exclusively wants biglaw partner and doesn't have any huge political-type aspirations, then choosing $$$ at UChi vs nothing at HLS would be rational imo.

[T00L]

You obviously have great options.

DO NOT FORGET that chances to experience a completely new atmosphere are RARE. Think about it. People are different in California and in New England (or the east coast).

Just think about the difference of perspective.