BearsGrl wrote:If we're talking about Central CA, UCLA/USC/UCI are in the same realm and UCI is the third "ranked" school in that realm. However, I have stated that UCI is on the track to be UCLA/USC so I would ultimately have no problem with eventually putting them as peers. Right now, there is no data to back this up. However, any CA resident is going to generally agree with the sentiment expressed above.
Either way, none of this has to do with the topic at hand.
What in the everliving fuck are you on about? What is Central CA? Are we talking about bigmethdealerdefenselaw in Bakersfield?
As a CA resident with no horse in this race:
Your position is ridiculous. Why would you believe a brand new school to start out as a peer of firmly established top 20 schools that have been in existence for decades without any proof?
There is some data and it's promising. For example, a surprising amount of UCI students have managed to snag A3 clerkships. But it's flat out stupid to think that UCI will be on par with UCLA/USC. UCLA/USC have entrenched alumni networks and connections to firms that expect to hire a certain number of grads each year from those schools, UCI does not have this. UCLA/USC have a history of being the prestigious local schools in SoCal, UCI does not have this and it is something that would take a while to build considering the legal field is a prestige-obsessed industry that is resistant to change. UCI being a peer of UCLA/USC in terms of prestige would be pretty unprecedented and it doesn't make sense to believe that it will happen without any proof.
As for job placement, it is in the realm of possibility that UCI's first class puts up job placement numbers on par with UCLA/USC. But UCI's first class was 60 people. The fewer people the school has to place the easier it is to put up good numbers. The school increased its class size by 50% in its second year and will likely increase it more as time goes on. Furthermore Chemerinsky and other faculty are calling favors to help their students. Those favors are going to run out some time and aren't going to extend indefinitely into the future. That makes it pretty much impossible for them to sustain their placement. The school will also have to be self-sustainable in terms of cost and will have trouble pulling in the same level of talent in its student body due to the fact that they are basically hemorrhaging money for the moment (their first class paid 0 in tuition) on top of the increase in size. This drop in student quality likely will also hurt their placement. UCLA/USC have established pipelines to firms/judges that UCI does not.
It makes a lot more sense to think that UCI will likely end up as a peer of UCD/UCH. Without data UCI is quite a risk, but UCD/UCH are also quite risky in that a substantial portion of their class ends up unemployed/underemployed. UCI might end up as a peer of UCLA/USC one day, but it won't be the day they gain full accreditation or anytime in the near future.