Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:34 pm

flem wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:are dismissive of such people at the very least.


To be fair, that doesn't make it less true though.

As I said above, whether it's true is beside the point. Why should anyone criticize someone for not doing the absolute most helpful thing? It's like when person A says they're a vegetarian and person B responds, "Yeah, well do you eat eggs?" Who cares? Why seek to poke holes in someone's ethical system? Failing to be absolutely consistent with your values doesn't mean what you do do is meritless. At least you're trying, and succeeding to some extent.

User avatar
flem
Posts: 12949
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby flem » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:38 pm

dixiecupdrinking wrote:As I said above, whether it's true is beside the point. Why should anyone criticize someone for not doing the absolute most helpful thing? It's like when person A says they're a vegetarian and person B responds, "Yeah, well do you eat eggs?" Who cares? Why seek to poke holes in someone's ethical system? Failing to be absolutely consistent with your values doesn't mean what you do do is meritless. At least you're trying, and succeeding to some extent.


No, it's not beside the point. You're just ducking the issue here.

And the issue is that most PI work is not hiring or not there, so it's an unrealistic goal in the first place. Likely more unrealistic than Biglaw. (not counting public defenders)

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby IAFG » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:42 pm

dixiecupdrinking wrote:
flem wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:are dismissive of such people at the very least.


To be fair, that doesn't make it less true though.

As I said above, whether it's true is beside the point. Why should anyone criticize someone for not doing the absolute most helpful thing? It's like when person A says they're a vegetarian and person B responds, "Yeah, well do you eat eggs?" Who cares? Why seek to poke holes in someone's ethical system? Failing to be absolutely consistent with your values doesn't mean what you do do is meritless. At least you're trying, and succeeding to some extent.

I guess the thing is, I do think someone trying to weasel into the crowded PI field is doing something pretty much entirely without merit. Their intentions might be partially good, but their added value to society is pretty much zero.

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:46 pm

flem wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:As I said above, whether it's true is beside the point. Why should anyone criticize someone for not doing the absolute most helpful thing? It's like when person A says they're a vegetarian and person B responds, "Yeah, well do you eat eggs?" Who cares? Why seek to poke holes in someone's ethical system? Failing to be absolutely consistent with your values doesn't mean what you do do is meritless. At least you're trying, and succeeding to some extent.


No, it's not beside the point. You're just ducking the issue here.

And the issue is that most PI work is not hiring or not there, so it's an unrealistic goal in the first place. Likely more unrealistic than Biglaw. (not counting public defenders)

Oh my god. Okay. No doubt it's hard but something being "likely more unrealistic than Biglaw" is really not all that unrealistic. (I would go a step further and say that it is undoubtedly harder than getting a BigLaw job. It is still not impossible.)

Look, you guys seem invested in thinking that people who are doing this are all making a big mistake and have these hubristic expectations about what their lives will be like and aren't going to help as much as if they went and worked at a V50 firm and they should go work in BigLaw. My point is you're assuming things about their motives for pursuing this kind of work that are either uncharitable or that make it irrational for them to want to do public interest work. When you start with those assumptions about a whole group of people then yeah, it's easy to say they're doing stupid things. Most 0Ls who say "I am going to be a public interest lawyer" and go to good enough schools will end up in BigLaw. There is no doubt in my mind about that. The others, though, don't deserve to be the subject of such dismissive talk; that's all.
Last edited by dixiecupdrinking on Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby IAFG » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:48 pm

dixiecupdrinking wrote:Most 0Ls who say "I am going to be a public interest lawyer" and go to good enough schools will end up in BigLaw. There is no doubt in my mind about that. The others, though, don't deserve to be the subject of such dismissive talk; that's all.

But the ones that do deserve it tend to think they don't. And they don't even know it yet.

User avatar
flem
Posts: 12949
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby flem » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:48 pm

dixiecupdrinking wrote:Oh my god. Okay. No doubt it's hard but something being "likely more unrealistic than Biglaw" is really not all that unrealistic. (I would go a step further and say that it is undoubtedly harder than getting a BigLaw job. It is still not impossible.)

Look, you guys seem invested in thinking that people who are doing this are all making a big mistake and have these hubristic expectations about what their lives will be like and aren't going to help as much as if they went and worked at a V50 firm and they should go work in BigLaw. My point is you're assuming things about their motives for pursuing this kind of work that are either uncharitable or that make it irrational for them to want to do public interest work. Most 0Ls who say "I am going to be a public interest lawyer" and go to good enough schools will end up in BigLaw. There is no doubt in my mind about that. The others, though, don't deserve to be the subject of such dismissive talk; that's all.


That's beside the point. I don't care what people do, everyone is just pointing out it's an unrealistic goal, especially when taking out crippling debt to do so.

The world needs do gooders. That's fine.

Once again, you seem to be defending the select few that have both good intentions and opportunities. This topic is aimed at the rest of the people that don't know anything yet or will have no opportunities.

User avatar
TIKITEMBO
Posts: 597
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 5:07 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby TIKITEMBO » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:50 pm

But they don't lack access to lawyers because there aren't lawyers willing to do it, they lack access because these organizations have no money to bring on more lawyers.


Well, Romo we're pretty much in agreement on that. Still, I just really don't like the conflicts of clients/work that can happen in big law firms. It's not that you don't have those in PI, but I guess it depends on what conflicts of clients/work you're willing to accept. I guess mine are mostly tied up in who can afford legal services and who can't. And representing "public good" interests groups.
Last edited by TIKITEMBO on Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:52 pm

IAFG wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:Most 0Ls who say "I am going to be a public interest lawyer" and go to good enough schools will end up in BigLaw. There is no doubt in my mind about that. The others, though, don't deserve to be the subject of such dismissive talk; that's all.

But the ones that do deserve it tend to think they don't. And they don't even know it yet.

Maybe. Again (this is becoming my refrain), who cares? This is true of all horrible people across all demographics. The most insufferable people never know it. I am not speaking on behalf of obnoxious people who have ill-conceived, self-righteous career plans that are never going to pan out in a million years. When you cut them out, there's still a big ol' chunk of public interest folks left who are not deserving of disparagement.

User avatar
bilbobaggins
Posts: 686
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 3:41 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby bilbobaggins » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:54 pm

This thread is hilarious and ridiculous.

Why do people want to be PI lawyers instead of social workers? Well, a lot of them want to be trial attorneys. Others want to be appellate attorneys, where a lot of the work has nothing at all to do with the kinds of stuff you do in other fields. In CA there's a genuine lack of appellate defense attorneys and so no one would be "weaseling" their way into anything. Why do people do policy PI work? Because they want to make structural/institutional change - something that is difficult to do in Big Law pro bono work. What's even funnier, is that people are actually advancing the idea that big law provides more help through pro bono than individuals do through PI work.

At the end of the day, it's incredibly difficult to get good PI work because incredibly talented individuals are driven to do that work. People do things for different reasons, but I'm sure some of them do it because money is less important than a job where they can see the impact of their work for regular people on a regular basis. Many people who choose PI work in law have already come from prestigious and remunerative business jobs and are making an informed decision about what type of career will make them happy. It is really strange that this is so difficult to understand or accept.

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:54 pm

flem wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:Oh my god. Okay. No doubt it's hard but something being "likely more unrealistic than Biglaw" is really not all that unrealistic. (I would go a step further and say that it is undoubtedly harder than getting a BigLaw job. It is still not impossible.)

Look, you guys seem invested in thinking that people who are doing this are all making a big mistake and have these hubristic expectations about what their lives will be like and aren't going to help as much as if they went and worked at a V50 firm and they should go work in BigLaw. My point is you're assuming things about their motives for pursuing this kind of work that are either uncharitable or that make it irrational for them to want to do public interest work. Most 0Ls who say "I am going to be a public interest lawyer" and go to good enough schools will end up in BigLaw. There is no doubt in my mind about that. The others, though, don't deserve to be the subject of such dismissive talk; that's all.


That's beside the point. I don't care what people do, everyone is just pointing out it's an unrealistic goal, especially when taking out crippling debt to do so.

The world needs do gooders. That's fine.

Once again, you seem to be defending the select few that have both good intentions and opportunities. This topic is aimed at the rest of the people that don't know anything yet or will have no opportunities.

You're right, that is who I'm defending—and I'm also trying to make the case that they are not as rare or exceptional as one might think.

User avatar
flem
Posts: 12949
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby flem » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:54 pm

dixiecupdrinking wrote:Maybe. Again (this is becoming my refrain), who cares? This is true of all horrible people across all demographics. The most insufferable people never know it. I am not speaking on behalf of obnoxious people who have ill-conceived, self-righteous career plans that are never going to pan out in a million years. When you cut them out, there's still a big ol' chunk of public interest folks left who are not deserving of disparagement.


You do realize that you're defending people that, for the most part, are not being attacked, right? You're defending people with good intentions and actual options, not the fart-smelling douches who go to shitty schools at sticker to rely on LRAP that might not be there because "they just want to help people, man"

User avatar
flem
Posts: 12949
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby flem » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:56 pm

bilbobaggins wrote:This thread is hilarious and ridiculous.

Why do people want to be PI lawyers instead of social workers? Well, a lot of them want to be trial attorneys. Others want to be appellate attorneys, where a lot of the work has nothing at all to do with the kinds of stuff you do in other fields. In CA there's a genuine lack of appellate defense attorneys and so no one would be "weaseling" their way into anything. Why do people do policy PI work? Because they want to make structural/institutional change - something that is difficult to do in Big Law pro bono work. What's even funnier, is that people are actually advancing the idea that big law provides more help through pro bono than individuals do through PI work.

At the end of the day, it's incredibly difficult to get good PI work because incredibly talented individuals are driven to do that work. People do things for different reasons, but I'm sure some of them do it because money is less important than a job where they can see the impact of their work for regular people on a regular basis. Many people who choose PI work in law have already come from prestigious and remunerative business jobs and are making an informed decision about what type of career will make them happy. It is really strange that this is so difficult to understand or accept.


Oh, so they work at good firm jobs and then lateral into prestigious PI work?

That's what everyone has been saying.

User avatar
skers
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:33 am

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby skers » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:57 pm

Most people who do PI want to do so because they're under the assumption they'll still make solid money, wear suits, and help people.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby romothesavior » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:59 pm

bilbobaggins wrote:This thread is hilarious and ridiculous.

Why do people want to be PI lawyers instead of social workers? Well, a lot of them want to be trial attorneys. Others want to be appellate attorneys, where a lot of the work has nothing at all to do with the kinds of stuff you do in other fields. In CA there's a genuine lack of appellate defense attorneys and so no one would be "weaseling" their way into anything. Why do people do policy PI work? Because they want to make structural/institutional change - something that is difficult to do in Big Law pro bono work. What's even funnier, is that people are actually advancing the idea that big law provides more help through pro bono than individuals do through PI work.

At the end of the day, it's incredibly difficult to get good PI work because incredibly talented individuals are driven to do that work. People do things for different reasons, but I'm sure some of them do it because money is less important than a job where they can see the impact of their work for regular people on a regular basis. Many people who choose PI work in law have already come from prestigious and remunerative business jobs and are making an informed decision about what type of career will make them happy. It is really strange that this is so difficult to understand or accept.

y u mad tho

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:59 pm

flem wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:Maybe. Again (this is becoming my refrain), who cares? This is true of all horrible people across all demographics. The most insufferable people never know it. I am not speaking on behalf of obnoxious people who have ill-conceived, self-righteous career plans that are never going to pan out in a million years. When you cut them out, there's still a big ol' chunk of public interest folks left who are not deserving of disparagement.


You do realize that you're defending people that, for the most part, are not being attacked, right? You're defending people with good intentions and actual options, not the fart-smelling douches who go to shitty schools at sticker to rely on LRAP that might not be there because "they just want to help people, man"

Okay, well I suppose I am also calling into question your ability to determine based on someone's post on an internet forum whether he or she is a "fart-smelling douche." There should not be such a presumption of douchery and contemptibleness just because someone expresses an interest in doing public interest work.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby IAFG » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:59 pm

dixiecupdrinking wrote:
IAFG wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:Most 0Ls who say "I am going to be a public interest lawyer" and go to good enough schools will end up in BigLaw. There is no doubt in my mind about that. The others, though, don't deserve to be the subject of such dismissive talk; that's all.

But the ones that do deserve it tend to think they don't. And they don't even know it yet.

Maybe. Again (this is becoming my refrain), who cares? This is true of all horrible people across all demographics. The most insufferable people never know it. I am not speaking on behalf of obnoxious people who have ill-conceived, self-righteous career plans that are never going to pan out in a million years. When you cut them out, there's still a big ol' chunk of public interest folks left who are not deserving of disparagement.

I care because it's annoying, and because the majority of public interest 0Ls are insufferable. Not because they're self-righteous, necessarily, but because they're naive, stubborn, unrealistic future OCI-bidders. And, at least here, the ones who actually do go on to skip OCI are predominantly the self-righteous jerks who make everyone else roll their eyes. So, essentially we have liars, jerks and the very rare person who sticks to their guns without being a tool. The disparagement is deserved enough of the time for me to not tone it down.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby IAFG » Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:00 pm

bilbobaggins wrote:This thread is hilarious and ridiculous.

Why do people want to be PI lawyers instead of social workers? Well, a lot of them want to be trial attorneys. Others want to be appellate attorneys, where a lot of the work has nothing at all to do with the kinds of stuff you do in other fields. In CA there's a genuine lack of appellate defense attorneys and so no one would be "weaseling" their way into anything. Why do people do policy PI work? Because they want to make structural/institutional change - something that is difficult to do in Big Law pro bono work. What's even funnier, is that people are actually advancing the idea that big law provides more help through pro bono than individuals do through PI work.

At the end of the day, it's incredibly difficult to get good PI work because incredibly talented individuals are driven to do that work. People do things for different reasons, but I'm sure some of them do it because money is less important than a job where they can see the impact of their work for regular people on a regular basis. Many people who choose PI work in law have already come from prestigious and remunerative business jobs and are making an informed decision about what type of career will make them happy. It is really strange that this is so difficult to understand or accept.

Show me the job listings. And if they're looking for people lateraling out of biglaw, it doesn't count.

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:03 pm

IAFG wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:
IAFG wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:Most 0Ls who say "I am going to be a public interest lawyer" and go to good enough schools will end up in BigLaw. There is no doubt in my mind about that. The others, though, don't deserve to be the subject of such dismissive talk; that's all.

But the ones that do deserve it tend to think they don't. And they don't even know it yet.

Maybe. Again (this is becoming my refrain), who cares? This is true of all horrible people across all demographics. The most insufferable people never know it. I am not speaking on behalf of obnoxious people who have ill-conceived, self-righteous career plans that are never going to pan out in a million years. When you cut them out, there's still a big ol' chunk of public interest folks left who are not deserving of disparagement.

I care because it's annoying, and because the majority of public interest 0Ls are insufferable. Not because they're self-righteous, necessarily, but because they're naive, stubborn, unrealistic future OCI-bidders. And, at least here, the ones who actually do go on to skip OCI are predominantly the self-righteous jerks who make everyone else roll their eyes. So, essentially we have liars, jerks and the very rare person who sticks to their guns without being a tool. The disparagement is deserved enough of the time for me to not tone it down.

I guess if that's your experience then your opinion is both understandable and not swayable by anything that can be said here. Mine is based on personal relationships with dozens of people who are pursuing this kind of work, so I suppose we each have our biased view on who this population is that we're talking about.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby IAFG » Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:09 pm

dixiecupdrinking wrote:I guess if that's your experience then your opinion is both understandable and not swayable by anything that can be said here. Mine is based on personal relationships with dozens of people who are pursuing this kind of work, so I suppose we each have our biased view on who this population is that we're talking about.

Where are they in the process?

I'll admit, Northwestern is unusual in that most people here aren't pursuing PI, so my exposure is small, but I don't think any 0L should go around speaking authoritatively on this subject. They seem to think (based on comments in this thread) that anyone who doesn't follow through just wasn't dedicated enough, just didn't have enough experience in the nonprofit world, whatever. 2Ls know better. 2Ls know that people who spent 5 years before law school working with poor people, came in with a clear, sure path, picked their school for the LRAP, all that, will still end up going to large law firms. When you say "well, some people weren't that dedicated," it sounds like a rationalization.

User avatar
kapital98
Posts: 1188
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:58 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby kapital98 » Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:56 pm

bilbobaggins wrote:This thread is hilarious and ridiculous.

Why do people want to be PI lawyers instead of social workers? Well, a lot of them want to be trial attorneys. Others want to be appellate attorneys, where a lot of the work has nothing at all to do with the kinds of stuff you do in other fields. In CA there's a genuine lack of appellate defense attorneys and so no one would be "weaseling" their way into anything. Why do people do policy PI work? Because they want to make structural/institutional change - something that is difficult to do in Big Law pro bono work. What's even funnier, is that people are actually advancing the idea that big law provides more help through pro bono than individuals do through PI work.

At the end of the day, it's incredibly difficult to get good PI work because incredibly talented individuals are driven to do that work. People do things for different reasons, but I'm sure some of them do it because money is less important than a job where they can see the impact of their work for regular people on a regular basis. Many people who choose PI work in law have already come from prestigious and remunerative business jobs and are making an informed decision about what type of career will make them happy. It is really strange that this is so difficult to understand or accept.


This thread has become a magnet for big law apologists. Under the criteria Romo, Fleming, and IAFG have produced it's impossible for 99% of people who want PI work to actually help others.

Can't get a prestigious PI job? Your low level PI job won't help anyone. Taking out debt to go to law school? LRAP is a lie and you'll be forever in debt. You actually get a PI job? You must be a douche. Can you get a PI job at all? No, even the low level PI work makes big law look easy to get into. You get a PI job that pays decent? You should just get a job with a firm and donate the extra money to your local PD's office.

It's insufferable. This thread has become useless.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby romothesavior » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:04 pm

Have you read a single thing I have written? You have done a fantastic job mischaracterizing what I have said ITT.

User avatar
ilovesf
Posts: 11804
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:20 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby ilovesf » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:07 pm

I wanted PI but PI didn't want me. In a place like SF where every applicant has like 10 years of experience saving the world, it's pretty hard to get. So I'm pretty much giving up on it.

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby rad lulz » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:08 pm

kapital98 wrote:This thread has become a magnet for big law apologists. Under the criteria Romo, Fleming, and IAFG have produced it's impossible for 99% of people who want PI work to actually help others.

Can't get a prestigious PI job? Your low level PI job won't help anyone. Taking out debt to go to law school? LRAP is a lie and you'll be forever in debt. You actually get a PI job? You must be a douche. Can you get a PI job at all? No, even the low level PI work makes big law look easy to get into. You get a PI job that pays decent? You should just get a job with a firm and donate the extra money to your local PD's office.

It's insufferable. This thread has become useless.

Keep on mowing down them strawmen brah

User avatar
worldtraveler
Posts: 7669
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:47 am

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby worldtraveler » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:09 pm

IAFG wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:I guess if that's your experience then your opinion is both understandable and not swayable by anything that can be said here. Mine is based on personal relationships with dozens of people who are pursuing this kind of work, so I suppose we each have our biased view on who this population is that we're talking about.

Where are they in the process?

I'll admit, Northwestern is unusual in that most people here aren't pursuing PI, so my exposure is small, but I don't think any 0L should go around speaking authoritatively on this subject. They seem to think (based on comments in this thread) that anyone who doesn't follow through just wasn't dedicated enough, just didn't have enough experience in the nonprofit world, whatever. 2Ls know better. 2Ls know that people who spent 5 years before law school working with poor people, came in with a clear, sure path, picked their school for the LRAP, all that, will still end up going to large law firms. When you say "well, some people weren't that dedicated," it sounds like a rationalization.


Perhaps NU is special, but I do not know a single person who came in with significant PI experience and knew they wanted to do PI and then jumped ship for a firm. I know plenty of K-JD who said they wanted PI who did and plenty of wishy-washy people who did, but there is a strong contingent of people who come in knowing the population they want to serve and don't break away from that. Those are usually people who get Skadden Fellowships and the like.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Proposal: We stop accepting the flame that 0Ls will do PI

Postby IAFG » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:13 pm

worldtraveler wrote:
IAFG wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:I guess if that's your experience then your opinion is both understandable and not swayable by anything that can be said here. Mine is based on personal relationships with dozens of people who are pursuing this kind of work, so I suppose we each have our biased view on who this population is that we're talking about.

Where are they in the process?

I'll admit, Northwestern is unusual in that most people here aren't pursuing PI, so my exposure is small, but I don't think any 0L should go around speaking authoritatively on this subject. They seem to think (based on comments in this thread) that anyone who doesn't follow through just wasn't dedicated enough, just didn't have enough experience in the nonprofit world, whatever. 2Ls know better. 2Ls know that people who spent 5 years before law school working with poor people, came in with a clear, sure path, picked their school for the LRAP, all that, will still end up going to large law firms. When you say "well, some people weren't that dedicated," it sounds like a rationalization.


Perhaps NU is special, but I do not know a single person who came in with significant PI experience and knew they wanted to do PI and then jumped ship for a firm. I know plenty of K-JD who said they wanted PI who did and plenty of wishy-washy people who did, but there is a strong contingent of people who come in knowing the population they want to serve and don't break away from that. Those are usually people who get Skadden Fellowships and the like.

I'd say Boalt and NU are both exceptional on opposite extremes.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: echonov, SweetTort and 2 guests