Top Law Schools

Drake014 wrote:

Z'Barron wrote:
+100 There's a prevailing notion that blacks who go to BigLaw ultimately disprove that AA in law schools works. This turns that notion on its ear. It suggests that the T-14 or bust to get BigLaw paradigm doesn't apply to Aframs...which goes a long ways towards explaining why so many Black males get recruited to BigLaw out of just about any top-100 school, Howard, Suffolk or NCCU, and why, in addition to leaving because of lack of attention/politics, etc, they tend to bail for better opportunities.

Some studies suggest that credentials matter less for African Americans. In one study, highly qualified blacks had the same chances of getting called for an interview based off of their application as less qualified blacks. The same didn't apply for whites. This actually means that good education (or education in general) is less an important investment for African Americans than whites. I believe this is the article (or its a similar one) I read on that subject a while back: http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=124232

So we are agreeing, right? URM's who are admitted to law school through AA, or some aspect of it, perform well, get hired into BigLaw and leave after four years, are not necessarily doing so b/c they couldn't "cut it" at that level...but b/c of opportunity elsewhere. That's what Indiana was saying...and what I was saying. So many people want to believe URM's to be innately inferior that they cannot see past one "cause" when URM's leave BigLaw firms.

Str8As wrote:idk but making partner is a whole diff. story--so if that's your foal, keep that in mind too...

For a moment there I thought I learned a new idiom.

this thread seems pretty relevant:

--LinkRemoved--

f0bolous wrote:this thread seems pretty relevant:

--LinkRemoved--

I take everything on autoadmit with a grain of salt. I could pull up wikipedia and 5 minutes later be "Gandhi, taking questions". While his explanations are plausible, so are several others, namely the often proferred lament that minorities in biglaw have a hard time finding mentors to train and go to bat for them. JaggedEdge, a respected minority attorney on autoadmit, has often advanced the notion that that phenomenon has alot to do with low levels of minority partners, high levels of minority associate dissatisfaction, and high levels of minority layoffs during economic downturns.

Who knows? Believe it or not, no place actually tells you when they're screwing you over because you're black. Sometimes the people screwing you don't even know that's the reason.

It's amazing how many people overlook that rather obvious fact.

Man, I wish there was more information out here about this. Not even the people in my BLSA are forthcoming about hiring information. Everyone is so secretive about their GPAs. I'm somewhere between Top 50% - Top 80 % at Michigan, and I don't even know if that's good enough for BIGLAW. I don't care anything about prestige, just want a market paying job.

Man, I wish there was more information out here about this. Not even the people in my BLSA are forthcoming about hiring information. Everyone is so secretive about their GPAs. I'm somewhere between Top 50% - Top 80 % at Michigan, and I don't even know if that's good enough for BIGLAW. I don't care anything about prestige, just want a market paying job.

If that's not then a hell of a lot of people are in trouble. Are you black?

kurama20 wrote: If that's not then a hell of a lot of people are in trouble. Are you black?

Yep, and I have a feeling that a hell of a lot of people are in trouble. I'll let TLS know how it goes I guess. I'm scared.

kurama20 wrote:

Who knows? Believe it or not, no place actually tells you when they're screwing you over because you're black. Sometimes the people screwing you don't even know that's the reason.

It's amazing how many people overlook that rather obvious fact.

Indeed, it is. Today racism and race (to a lesser extent) are taboo topics in American society. Many people would rather explain away an instance of racism than take seriously the idea that an instance of racism has occurred. For example, look at Mallard's response.

OperaAttorney wrote:Indeed, it is. People would rather explain away an instance of racism than take seriously the idea that an instance of racism has occurred. For example, look at Mallard's response.

Sniping at me a week later. Friendly.

Be careful! Am I the only one who thought this was an advertisement for an African-American already at a BigLaw firm who had been given the task of seeking out African-American talent for internship leading to a potential associateship? lol.

Z'Barron wrote:Be careful! Am I the only one who thought this was an advertisement for an African-American already at a BigLaw firm who had been given the task of seeking out African-American talent for internship leading to a potential associateship?

Yes, you are.

mallard wrote:

OperaAttorney wrote:Indeed, it is. People would rather explain away an instance of racism than take seriously the idea that an instance of racism has occurred. For example, look at Mallard's response.

Sniping at me a week later. Friendly.

Nice to see you too, Mallard. I'm just moving the dialogue along. Besides, this thread was dead for many weeks before someone resurrected it.

mallard wrote:

Z'Barron wrote:Be careful! Am I the only one who thought this was an advertisement for an African-American already at a BigLaw firm who had been given the task of seeking out African-American talent for internship leading to a potential associateship?

Yes, you are.

That's because it wouldn't have concerned YOU anyways. You are quite the jerk. I had already posted on this thread, but I wanted to lightheartedly caution the OP.

OperaAttorney wrote:Nice to see you too, Mallard. I'm just moving the dialogue along. Besides, this thread was dead for many weeks before someone resurrected it.

Hopefully someday you'll learn the difference between being accusatory and "moving the dialogue along."

tl wrote:

kurama20 wrote: If that's not then a hell of a lot of people are in trouble. Are you black?

Yep, and I have a feeling that a hell of a lot of people are in trouble. I'll let TLS know how it goes I guess. I'm scared.

Not at Michigan or similarly prestiged schools. the sh_t won't hit their fans until the very last possible moments (if ever), meaning they will also experience the shortest decline in hiring. That bottom 50% might have probs, but the top-50% will land on their feet. The cushy $35K bonuses won't be there, but the top 10-15% will still get $10K bonuses, maybe more.

LawandOrder wrote:I can't imagine that it's as easy as being a high performing black and then having everything handed down on a silver platter.

My guess is, being a high performing black does lend itself towards getting things easier. As stated earlier, low supply + high demand = easier time, at least on the surface. On the flip, the shit you may have to deal with from colleagues, the hoops you may have to jump through just to show you're playing ball, etc. make it hell on one's psyche.

mallard wrote:

OperaAttorney wrote:Nice to see you too, Mallard. I'm just moving the dialogue along. Besides, this thread was dead for many weeks before someone resurrected it.

Hopefully someday you'll learn the difference between being accusatory and "moving the dialogue along."

Hopefully someday you'll learn the importance of being humble and realizing that your perspective is not always valid.

BUMP...

What do you all view biglaw chances from URM at schools that don't usually get students outside 10% BigLaw jobs? Is it the same for URMs, or do they also have some leeway at lower Tier1 or Tier 2 schools?

lewis louis wrote:What do you all view biglaw chances from URM at schools that don't usually get students outside 10% BigLaw jobs? Is it the same for URMs, or do they also have some leeway at lower Tier1 or Tier 2 schools?

Because I have no physical evidence, my best guess that for URMs is that they get more leeway when it comes to recruiting, BIGLAW or not. The fact that there are so few (and MUCH FEWER black males), URMs probably can perform at median and still be alright. Law firms want to appear as if they care about diversity so this probably bodes well for URMs.

Black males, especially, are a rare commodity.

OperaAttorney wrote:

mallard wrote:

OperaAttorney wrote:Nice to see you too, Mallard. I'm just moving the dialogue along. Besides, this thread was dead for many weeks before someone resurrected it.

Hopefully someday you'll learn the difference between being accusatory and "moving the dialogue along."

Hopefully someday you'll learn the importance of being humble and realizing that your perspective is not always valid.

Posting in this thread is like pissing into the wind; no matter how careful you are, it's coming back on you.

Jules Winnfield wrote:

lewis louis wrote:What do you all view biglaw chances from URM at schools that don't usually get students outside 10% BigLaw jobs? Is it the same for URMs, or do they also have some leeway at lower Tier1 or Tier 2 schools?

Because I have no physical evidence, my best guess that for URMs is that they get more leeway when it comes to recruiting, BIGLAW or not. The fact that there are so few (and MUCH FEWER black males), URMs probably can perform at median and still be alright. Law firms want to appear as if they care about diversity so this probably bodes well for URMs.

Black males, especially, are a rare commodity.

A recent study was done, that pretty much confirms that at least some firms acknowledge looking at more than grades when hiring URM's. I know it's a small sample group but who would have thought that Bingham's SF office was a magnet for top AA talent, and that MoFo inspires gays and Hispanics?

Here is a link to the study: --LinkRemoved-- ... report.pdf

elmagic wrote:

Jules Winnfield wrote:

lewis louis wrote:What do you all view biglaw chances from URM at schools that don't usually get students outside 10% BigLaw jobs? Is it the same for URMs, or do they also have some leeway at lower Tier1 or Tier 2 schools?

Because I have no physical evidence, my best guess that for URMs is that they get more leeway when it comes to recruiting, BIGLAW or not. The fact that there are so few (and MUCH FEWER black males), URMs probably can perform at median and still be alright. Law firms want to appear as if they care about diversity so this probably bodes well for URMs.

Black males, especially, are a rare commodity.

A recent study was done, that pretty much confirms that at least some firms acknowledge looking at more than grades when hiring URM's. I know it's a small sample group but who would have thought that Bingham's SF office was a magnet for top AA talent, and that MoFo inspires gays and Hispanics?

Here is a link to the study: --LinkRemoved-- ... report.pdf

Much appreciated, elmagic!

Boo! Link's dead.

+1 for effort.