sapien wrote: Given that SLS almost doubles HLS's clerkship rate and that their students have an easier time in OCI for almost every market (especially in NYC and DC, where there is less competition among classmates), this is silly. And how can you know whether HLS grads at the top almost always do better?
Edit: my advice to OP: go to HLS. 100k is really not that bad.
SCOTUS clerkships were about even on a per-capita basis over the past decade: 101 for Harvard, 33 for Stanford. I don't know about other high-prestige ones.
I don't know about the relative difficulty on OCI, either.
Both Harvard and Stanford students who want Biglaw are going to get it with almost 100% certainty. But we do have a lot of data that shows, on a per-capita basis, Harvard places more students into V50 firms, and more students into the top two or three firms in every market except the West Coast, than does Stanford. We have the Leiter data, firm directory data, and the NLJ data that all demonstrate this. Each of these pieces of data has its limitations: The Leiter stuff is fairly dated, the firm directory data naturally lags in estimating current OCIs, and the NLJ data is a small sample size.
But I have never seen data conclusively demonstrate that, in any non-West Coast market at any time, Stanford was placing more grads in upper-echelon firms over a significant period of time on a per-capita basis. If someone has any data that would conclusively show that, please post it and I'll retract my previous statements.