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

[soj]

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.

It sounds like you have a very broad definition of "wishy-washy" people who jumped ship from PI to biglaw (or a narrow definition of "significant PI experience"), considering Berkeley's employment statistics (LinkRemoved).

[romothesavior]

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

--ImageRemoved--

[flem]

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.

what is this i don't even

[worldtraveler]

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.

It sounds like you have a very broad definition of "wishy-washy" people who jumped ship from PI to biglaw (or a narrow definition of "significant PI experience"), considering Berkeley's employment statistics (LinkRemoved).

1. Not that many people come in with significant work experience in PI and want to continue. IAFG was referencing 5+ years. That's maybe 5-10% of the class. Probably less.
2. Clerkships are also really popular among PI minded people. From looking at that list it's impossible to know what all those people in clerkships would do when they're done.
3. Government includes public defenders, people working for DOJ civl rights or other divisions PI types of divisions.

The chart you pointed out shows 12-15% in PI jobs alone, even without clerkships and government. That's a large number of people given that most people do not want PI and never did.

[romothesavior]

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.

what is this i don't even

You should see some of his earlier work. Riveting stuff.

[ConfidenceMan2]

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.

Overlooked and very accurate post.

I say this as someone who originally started gravitating towards law to do PI, and who wanted to do PI for the exact reasons you describe. But I really don't think I'm alone given the kind of encouragement I received from the laypeople.

[kapital98]

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.

what is this i don't even

You should see some of his earlier work. Riveting stuff.

Yeah, this is where Romo showed a complete lack of understanding of economics. But, if a NY Times article written by a journalists says it's true -- it must be!

I'm glad your 1L wisdom still exists in 2L. Giving out useless advice and trying to put down everyone who wants to become a lawyer or do PI.

You represent the absolute worst of TLS. Well, except for radlaw.

[rad lulz]

Yeah, this is where Romo showed a complete lack of understanding of economics. But, if a NY Times article written by a journalists says it's true -- it must be!

I'm glad your 1L wisdom still exists in 2L. Giving out useless advice and trying to put down everyone who wants to become a lawyer or do PI.

You represent the absolute worst of TLS. Well, except for radlaw.

I enjoyed that thread because it was literally the stereotypical example of why law students are terrible. People who think they know more than they do, and when confronted with clear information to the contrary diarrhea all the jargon their liberal arts education will allow.

Srsly rad law sucks though.

[romothesavior]

I haven't been putting down people who want to do PI. Where the hell did I do that? I have repeatedly lauded it as important work and I'm glad people do it. My only real points ITT have been 1) there aren't many jobs in PI, 2) they are hyper competitive and usually require previous experience, 3) the ones that are out there are usually quite different than what most people dream of when they think about changing the world via public interest law, and 4) there may be cheaper and more effective means of helping the downtrodden.

Going to law school for PI can be a great idea, but it quite often doesnt pan out because of the combination of reasons I just cited. That's why so many people bail on PI. Not sure what's so offensive or snobbish about this.

I've seen some awful straw man arguments on TLS, but this is one of the worst I've seen. Im don't know how you would accuse me of putting down PI folks because I have been practically falling over myself to be respectful towards it.

[IAFG]

I haven't been putting down people who want to do PI. Where the hell did I do that? I have repeatedly lauded it as important work and I'm glad people do it. My only real points ITT have been 1) there aren't many jobs in PI, 2) they are hyper competitive and usually require previous experience, 3) the ones that are out there are usually quite different than what most people dream of when they think about changing the world via public interest law, and 4) there may be cheaper and more effective means of helping the downtrodden.

Going to law school for PI can be a great idea, but it quite often doesnt pan out because of the combination of reasons I just cited. That's why so many people bail on PI. Not sure what's so offensive or snobbish about this.

I've seen some awful straw man arguments on TLS, but this is one of the worst I've seen. Im don't know how you would accuse me of putting down PI folks because I have been practically falling over myself to be respectful towards it.

He was probably referencing my posts/disdain.

[rad lulz]

I haven't been putting down people who want to do PI. Where the hell did I do that? I have repeatedly lauded it as important work and I'm glad people do it. My only real points ITT have been 1) there aren't many jobs in PI, 2) they are hyper competitive and usually require previous experience, 3) the ones that are out there are usually quite different than what most people dream of when they think about changing the world via public interest law, and 4) there may be cheaper and more effective means of helping the downtrodden.

Going to law school for PI can be a great idea, but it quite often doesnt pan out because of the combination of reasons I just cited. That's why so many people bail on PI. Not sure what's so offensive or snobbish about this.

I've seen some awful straw man arguments on TLS, but this is one of the worst I've seen. Im don't know how you would accuse me of putting down PI folks because I have been practically falling over myself to be respectful towards it.

You know nothing about the economy and this is horribly elitist. I nominate you and rad law for least helpful forum duo of the year, and it's only April.

[kapital98]

I should make one of these for public defenders.

Can we talk about who they really defend?

No, you don't put them down at all.

P.S. It was nice to see the OP of the 2.82/155 thread give his results. He got into most of his schools and some with money. I hesitantly encouraged him rather than spitting vitriol.

[rad lulz]

I should make one of these for public defenders.

Can we talk about who they really defend?

No, you don't put them down at all.

Sarcasm





Your head

[romothesavior]

I should make one of these for public defenders.

Can we talk about who they really defend?

No, you don't put them down at all.

P.S. It was nice to see the OP of the 2.82/155 thread give his results. He got into most of his schools and some with money. I hesitantly encouraged him rather than spitting vitriol.

Way to just rip things completely out of context and miss the sarcasm, as well as just completely ignore the intended target of that joke.

[dixiecupdrinking]

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.

I'm a 2L at NYU. They are mainly 2Ls, 3Ls or recent grads at NYU and some are 2Ls or 3Ls at other T10 schools, all of whom consciously opted out of OCI. This isn't some bullshit parade I'm talking about.

I think that there has been an attitudinal sea change on TLS from optimism to cynicism about law school and legal practice over the last couple years, and rightfully so, but there is now such a culture of presuming everything sucks that people feel free to shit on things they don't know anything about, e.g. BigLaw-oriented law students shitting on public interest legal careers that they never actually investigated for a second.

[TIKITEMBO]

I think that there has been an attitudinal sea change on TLS from optimism to cynicism about law school and legal practice over the last couple years...

I'm usually taken aback by the tone in older threads. Such happier times it seems.

[Tom Joad]

Not sure why I even clicked on this thread, but boy has it been worth it.

[hung jury]

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.

My experience at S is closer to worldtraveler's. I don't know why all the biglaw types are so mad.

[kingofspain]

Can someone explain what y'all are talking about when you refer to 'good PI' gigs that want biglaw experience? In the nonprofit legal world we don't seem to have any interest in biglaw experience. Only the old people worked at biglaw first, and they made the jump years ago.

Are y'all talking about government? Private civil rights firms? Srsly curious---I need start building my self-justification for selling out and doing OCI.

[flem]

You should see some of his earlier work. Riveting stuff.

Oh my

Yeah, this is where Romo showed a complete lack of understanding of economics. But, if a NY Times article written by a journalists says it's true -- it must be!

I'm glad your 1L wisdom still exists in 2L. Giving out useless advice and trying to put down everyone who wants to become a lawyer or do PI.

You represent the absolute worst of TLS. Well, except for radlaw.

Well, in fairness, I'll take the word of writers and economists for one of the most well-respected news publications in the world over your speculative, optimistic hackery.

[flem]

Can someone explain what y'all are talking about when you refer to 'good PI' gigs that want biglaw experience? In the nonprofit legal world we don't seem to have any interest in biglaw experience. Only the old people worked at biglaw first, and they made the jump years ago.

Are y'all talking about government? Private civil rights firms? Srsly curious---I need start building my self-justification for selling out and doing OCI.

DOJ, EEOC and ACLU certainly come to mind. High profile non-profit organizations as well. It depends on what you consider truly preftigious.

Basically stuff that isn't public defense work. The world needs public defenders but it's a different level of PI than the kind of stuff most of these bros want.

[kingofspain]

Can someone explain what y'all are talking about when you refer to 'good PI' gigs that want biglaw experience? In the nonprofit legal world we don't seem to have any interest in biglaw experience. Only the old people worked at biglaw first, and they made the jump years ago.

Are y'all talking about government? Private civil rights firms? Srsly curious---I need start building my self-justification for selling out and doing OCI.

DOJ, EEOC and ACLU certainly come to mind. High profile non-profit organizations as well. It depends on what you consider truly preftigious.

Basically stuff that isn't public defense work. The world needs public defenders but it's a different level of PI than the kind of stuff most of these bros want.

I'm not sure this is true, though...

For example, ACLU job listings seem much more likely to go to someone w/ PI experience:
--LinkRemoved--
--LinkRemoved--

With DOJ, you're probably right to some extent, but not completely.
For example, it's hard to get the necessary experience for this without biglaw (or a different law enforcement position): --LinkRemoved--
But this one would likely go to someone without biglaw experience: --LinkRemoved--

It's hard to imagine any of the nonprofits here in Philly hiring someone from a firm. Maybe it's different in NYC, DC, etc., where you have nonprofits working on a national scale, but the job listings above don't seem to bear that out. I'm open to being proven wrong, but I don't see biglaw being the preferred experience for anything besides certain specialized PI jobs.

[bilbobaggins]

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.

The question shows your lack of knowledge on this subject.

The work is solo/small firm work. You apply to get on a panel in one of the CA judicial districts and the panel gives you training, looks at your work, etc. In return, you get indigent appeals that start at $85/hour up to $105/hour in capital cases. These panels are looking for recent graduates who are good at appellate work. This would include people coming from big law and also individuals coming right out of school who have done appellate work. Speak with anyone in this field in CA and they'll tell you that most of the people who do it are retiring or have retired and there is a major lack of incoming lawyers. With a good writing sample and recommendation you can get on a panel and start making pretty good money working for yourself.

[bk1]

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.

While I may not agree with DF in full, I think the bolded is the heart of the issue. Most people going to law school are K-JD's lacking in significant (or any at all) PI experience. It makes sense to be skeptical of those kids when they say they are super committed to PI.

[kapital98]

Well, in fairness, I'll take the word of writers and economists for one of the most well-respected news publications in the world over your speculative, optimistic hackery.

You think David Segal or his editors are economists!?!?!?

These guys have a communication or journalism degree and that's it. They then take what other people say, without knowing the theory behind the subject, and piece it together. If you read a newspaper on a daily basis you will know exactly what I'm talking about.

You're completely delusional on this issue. It would be a completely different if we were talking about The Economist, The Financial Times, Moodys, etc... (The opinion pages of the WSJ don't count either.) They have top-notch economists on staff who can sort through the garbage and look at the big picture.

P.S. If you look through the forum you will see I wasn't disagreeing with everything from the article. Only more outlandish statements.