Does prestige really matter after T-6? Forum

[bk1]

We're not saying that anybody should bank on becoming POTUS, going to SCOTUS, even clerking for SCOTUS, or anything else that is ridiculously selective by going to HYS. However, there is a reason why Yale and Harvard dominate others in professors, justices, SCOTUS clerks, etc and nobody, not even a school as closely ranked as UChi comes close.

[Adjudicator]

Presidents:

Harvard - Barack Obama, Rutherford B. Hayes

Yale - Bill Clinton, Gerald Ford

Columbia - Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt

Duke - Richard Nixon

University of Cincinnati College of Law - William Howard Taft

Albany Law School - William McKinley

University of Missouri-Kansas - Woodrow Wilson

read a book and then passed the bar - Abraham Lincoln

[vanwinkle]

We're not saying that anybody should bank on becoming POTUS, going to SCOTUS, even clerking for SCOTUS, or anything else that is ridiculously selective by going to HYS. However, there is a reason why Yale and Harvard dominate others in professors, justices, SCOTUS clerks, etc and nobody, not even a school as closely ranked as UChi comes close.

This. Harvard or Yale certainly guarantee none of those things, but they're represented more at the upper end of the legal spectrum so broadly for a reason.

It's also worth noting that for people who want the chance to move outside of legal practice later on, the Harvard name makes a big difference there as well. You'll see far more Harvard Law alums serving as CEOs now than, say, Chicago or NYU alums, even "per capita".

[AngryAvocado]

...Yale, on the other hand, has placed countless Presidents and SC Justices.

lol

I had to read all of his posts to make sure he actually said that gem. I'm not sure what's better: the fact that there's only been 10 SC Justices and 2 Presidents from YLS (guess he can't count to 12...), or the fact that he follows up that statement with "Columbia has not" when, actually, Columbia has placed the same number of Presidents and only 3 fewer Justices. HUGE DIFF, BRAH.

[bk1]

Presidents:

Harvard - Barack Obama, Rutherford B. Hayes

Yale - Bill Clinton, Gerald Ford

Duke - Richard Nixon

University of Cincinnati College of Law - William Howard Taft

Albany Law School - William McKinley

read a book and then passed the bar - Abraham Lincoln

Yes because comparing things now to things as they were 150 years ago makes a ton of sense. Notice that 3 of the 4 most recent are H/Y.

[GettingReady2010]

You seem kind of offended by my post to break out ad hominem attacks. Did I offend your delicate sensibilities?

Oh no, I really don't care what you think about me, as you shouldn't really care what I think about you. This is an anonymous forum so it's important to have some tolerance for direct challenges of ideas, which are not necessarily "attacks" even if they're strongly worded.

I think Briatharen has proven that incorrect. Also, Dean Asha at Yale.

How did they figure out who people were, out of curiosity? I guess people decided to post their exact numbers? Even so, I wonder how in the world the Dean of Yale has time to comb through TLS posts in order to find potential Yale applicants.

[bk1]

Due to the limited sample that is SCOTUS justices and the POTUS to a larger extent, which shouldn't count for this, on top of the fact that things like this change over time and the timeframe over which justices are appointed, let's get back to two things that are much larger and more immedaite: professors and SCOTUS clerks.

[AngryAvocado]

We're not saying that anybody should bank on becoming POTUS, going to SCOTUS, even clerking for SCOTUS, or anything else that is ridiculously selective by going to HYS. However, there is a reason why Yale and Harvard dominate others in professors, justices, SCOTUS clerks, etc and nobody, not even a school as closely ranked as UChi comes close.

This. Harvard or Yale certainly guarantee none of those things, but they're represented more at the upper end of the legal spectrum so broadly for a reason.

It's also worth noting that for people who want the chance to move outside of legal practice later on, the Harvard name makes a big difference there as well. You'll see far more Harvard Law alums serving as CEOs now than, say, Chicago or NYU alums, even "per capita".

What about CLS, though? That's probably a fairer comparison if you want to compare the larger, more "business-oriented" of the HYS/CCN tiers.

Edit: Also, NYU wasn't the power it is now prior to the 90s (when most of the current CEOs would have been graduating).

[Adjudicator]

Clearly the most scientific way to look at this is to compare rankings of the US Presidents and rank the law schools based on that.

Based on this, Columbia Law School is clearly the best school in the country, having graduated both Franklin Roosevelt and Theodore Roosevelt, who are widely regarded as two of the best Presidents.

And in second place comes "no law school at all," with Abraham Lincoln.


So... Columbia or bust??

[vanwinkle]

You can quibble over any amount of data that you'd like, but the bottom line is that in every measurable set worth measuring, a handful of schools consistently rank near the top. The obvious candidates are the T6 - and for the prestige-whores on TLS, that might be all many of us see - but in reality the T14 + a handful of other schools have significantly better outcomes than the rest of the field, combined.

But to imply that it "doesn't matter" after the T6 is pretty ridiculous; I'd rather be a Darrow recipient than pay sticker at Chicago. Graduates of UVA certainly seem to do significantly better than the vast majority of law students.

What?

[bk1]

You can quibble over any amount of data that you'd like, but the bottom line is that in every measurable set worth measuring, a handful of schools consistently rank near the top. The obvious candidates are the T6 - and for the prestige-whores on TLS, that might be all many of us see - but in reality the T14 + a handful of other schools have significantly better outcomes than the rest of the field, combined.

But to imply that it "doesn't matter" after the T6 is pretty ridiculous; I'd rather be a Darrow recipient than pay sticker at Chicago. Graduates of UVA certainly seem to do significantly better than the vast majority of law students.

What?

I think he took "after" to mean 7-200 rather than the intended meaning of 1-6.

[Danteshek]

TR did not graduate from Columbia Law School. He was there less than a year before he was offered the chance to run for state office. His attendance certainly did not make his Presidency any more likely.

[PDaddy]

I think what has happened is a loss in translation, so let me clarify my answer from the other post, which was locked.

The question, as posed, is intentionally vague. Does the perception of disparate prestige between schools have an impact on initial job prospects? Absolutely. Does it determine how far someone can go? There's no question that more doors are open to HYS grads; nobody will argue against that. But the ultimate question is, does one have have game to succeed as a grad from U-Chicago that he might have coming from Harvard? I think so.

Forgive me, I was answering the question as I interpreted it. Silly me, I tend to answer questions like these from a performance perspective, naively believing that one's work ethic, desire and commitment matter more than anything else. Just don't take my response too literally, because there are limits to that argument. there are some qualitative differences between the elite schools. I just don't believe they are significant enough that individual drive can't compensate for them.

[bk1]

I think what has happened is a loss in translation, so let me clarify my answer from the other post, which was locked.

The question, as posed, is intentionally vague. Does the perception of disparate prestige between schools have an impact on initial job prospects? Absolutely. Does it determine how far someone can go? There's no question that more doors are open to HYS grads; nobody will argue against that. But the ultimate question is, does one have have game to succeed as a grad from U-Chicago that he might have coming from Harvard? I think so.

Forgive me, I was answering the question as I interpreted it. Silly me, I tend to answer questions like these from a performance perspective, naively believing that one's work ethic, desire and commitment matter more than anything else. Just don't take my response too literally, because there are limits to that argument. there are some qualitative differences between the elite schools. I just don't believe they are significant enough that individual drive can't compensate for them.

You really think that given two individuals equal in all aspects where one went to HLS and one went to UChi that they would end up with the same doors open to them?

[miamiman]

This thread is absolutely ridiculous. Of course there are huge differences between HYS and CCN. Not only are there differences in conventional law firms (better chance at partner, at placing into elite firms (at least ITE), at clerkships, etc.,) but, so too, are there night and day differences for HYS grads placing into fields other than law. When I was mingling with a bunch of H grads during my application process, several had completely left the law and were doing other things (private equity, management consulting, ngo management) and, although these opportunities are not entirely shut off to Chicago or Columbia grads, they are definitely far harder to obtain.

This also completely neglects any discussion of using your law degree for politics which is what a Harvard degree does better than almost any other school. So, no, I don't think the T6 is fungible in any real sense unless we're talking about law firm placement during non-crisis economies...

[rayiner]

This also completely neglects any discussion of using your law degree for politics which is what a Harvard degree does better than almost any other school. So, no, I don't think the T6 is fungible in any real sense unless we're talking about law firm placement during non-crisis economies... outside the most elite firms.

In 2006, Harvard put as many into Wachtell as Columbia and NYU put together. I'm sure the story is true at elite litigation places too.

[thrillhouse]

You have to keep in mind that some of where a person goes to school is pretty self-selecting. That is to say, no one who wants to have any real shot at legal academia goes to Columbia if they could go to Yale or Harvard. And, the same is probably true for a person who desperately wants to clerk for the Supreme Court.

On the other hand, if someone wants Biglaw (especially NY Biglaw which is the place to do Biglaw), then they do go to Columbia because that's what Columbia does better than anyone else. But, NYU and Chicago do Biglaw almost as well. And, of course, if you do go to YHS then Biglaw is there for the taking, too.

The point? I'm not sure. Within the T6, go to the place you like best unless your heart is set on academia--then, go to Yale (or Harvard if you can't into Yale). And, if you can get T6 don't go below T6 unless you get a ton of money.

Does prestige really matter? Yes. But, we'd need a more definite indication of what you think prestige means before we can really nail this down.

[romothesavior]

Yale, Harvard, and Stanford stand head and shoulders above everyone else, especially for academia and clerkships. And I would much, much, MUCH rather be in the bottom third at HYS than bottom third anywhere else.

Choosing a school within the subtiers of HYS or between CCN based solely on "fit" makes some sense, because the differences between Chicago/Columbia or Stanford/Harvard has a lot to do with locational preference, class size preferences, etc. But anyone taking NYU over Yale should realize they are choosing a clearly inferior school (and I do not mean any slight to NYU, because it is a fantastic institution). The individual should simply recognize that they are likely closing or limiting certain opportunities by taking NYU over Yale. Such a decision is not always a bad thing overall (maybe they REALLY want NYC and they have a full ride to NYU), but they should still be aware of the sizable gap nonetheless.

(This post was made in the other thread on this topic, but it got locked and I wanted to make the same point here)

[miamiman]

Yale, Harvard, and Stanford stand head and shoulders above everyone else, especially for academia and clerkships. And I would much, much, MUCH rather be in the bottom third at HYS than bottom third anywhere else.

Choosing a school within the subtiers of HYS or between CCN based solely on "fit" makes some sense, because the differences between Chicago/Columbia or Stanford/Harvard has a lot to do with locational preference, class size preferences, etc. But anyone taking NYU over Yale should realize they are choosing a clearly inferior school (and I do not mean any slight to NYU, because it is a fantastic institution). The individual should simply recognize that they are likely closing or limiting certain opportunities by taking NYU over Yale. Such a decision is not always a bad thing overall (maybe they REALLY want NYC and they have a full ride to NYU), but they should still be aware of the sizable gap nonetheless.

(This post was made in the other thread on this topic, but it got locked and I wanted to make the same point here)

And that good sir is called plagiarism.

[romothesavior]

Pardon me...

That argument came from Rey Negro v. TLS, 381 TLS 586 (2010) (Romothesavior, J., Concurring)

[romothesavior]

Also, for those of you who think that a T20 and a school ranked ~100 are equal, come to St. Louis and ask any firm or judge to compare WUSTL to SLU. You'll find that there is no comparison.

[NU_Jet55]

I talked to a guy that used to be a partner at Jones Day. He considered there to be more disparity between positions 1 and 4 than between 20 and 30.

I would probably say that there is more of a disparity between 1 and 4 than between 20 and 100.

and basically no difference between 5 and 19

[BruceWayne]

I really do not know where this top 6 thing came from. Harvard and Yale are significantly stronger than Columbia and Chicago, and NYU really isn't any stronger than Michigan, UVA, or Penn. Still, this top 6 thing seems to be all the rage on here.

[NU_Jet55]

I really do not know where this top 6 thing came from. Harvard and Yale are significantly stronger than Columbia and Chicago, and NYU really isn't any stronger than Michigan, UVA, or Penn. Still, this top 6 thing seems to be all the rage on here.

Criticism of argument that oversimplificates law school prestige by oversimplifying law school prestige FTW!

[Rand M.]

I talked to a guy that used to be a partner at Jones Day. He considered there to be more disparity between positions 1 and 4 than between 20 and 30.

I would probably say that there is more of a disparity between 1 and 4 than between 20 and 100.

and basically no difference between 5 and 19

That's the dumbest thing I have seen said since some of the stuff I saw posted earlier in this thread.

I hate this thread.