Harvard Law School c/o 2018 Waitlist Forum

[The thinker]

Baseless speculation but I'm going to guess that we don't see movement until at least tomorrow. They're gonna want to wait and see if people withdraw because of this email, right?

I think that's probably a likely assumption

[mimiquestionmark]

Baseless speculation but I'm going to guess that we don't see movement until at least tomorrow. They're gonna want to wait and see if people withdraw because of this email, right?

I think that's probably a likely assumption

Maybe this means that we won't have JSb's this go around? But maybe not... Does anyone know if they sent out an email like this last year?

[HungarianGirl13]

what does JSb mean?

[mimiquestionmark]

what does JSb mean?

Sorry I mistyped; I meant to write JS1b. It's a call from JS (if you've been interviewed before being waitlisted) to confirm that you are still interested/able to attend.

[The thinker]

Baseless speculation but I'm going to guess that we don't see movement until at least tomorrow. They're gonna want to wait and see if people withdraw because of this email, right?

I think that's probably a likely assumption

Maybe this means that we won't have JSb's this go around? But maybe not... Does anyone know if they sent out an email like this last year?

From a quick look it doesn't seem like an email like this was sent out last year at least not at this time in the cycle

[paahhgg]

Does this mean the WL admits are binding?!? Strongly implied in email...

[Cinderella24]

Does this mean the WL admits are binding?!? Strongly implied in email...

...you know what...you are right...It seems to be like it is binding. Oh. Stuff just got real.

[Four Winds]

I vote our next wild speculation should focus on why the initial WL email called it a "wait list" and this latest email dropped the space to produce a "waitlist." What else is Harvard hiding from us?

[paahhgg]

I am definitely in this for the long haul, no matter what, but this binding WL thing is weird. Can they even do that? Is this the first year they pulled something like this?

[The thinker]

While it does sound very binding the fact that you have to accept the offer suggests that they can't really hold you to anything . Sounds to me like they had issues last year with candidates turning down waitlist offers and they want to scare people off that might do the same this year

[Atmosphere]

While it does sound very binding the fact that you have to accept the offer suggests that they can't really hold you to anything . Sounds to me like they had issues last year with candidates turning down waitlist offers and they want to scare people off that might do the same this year

I want to know just how binding this is. It's a very risky proposition as people are beginning to sign leases and such

[kadyevna]

Did everybody else get a "HLS Waitlist Process" email

Yeah, just got it.

It made me really excited for all of ten seconds before I realized it was just a general email and not any good news

+1

+2, pretty much what happened to me

[qwertyTLS]

I think they'll still have js1b's. if they're so concerned about yield off the WL (which it appears they are from the WL), a js1b is a pretty great way to confirm interest before offering an acceptance. i agree with the posters who said this e-mail is probably just to trim the fat/serve as a confirmation.

eta wait did we already receive a confirmation? i'm confusing myself

[w0w]

I highly doubt they can actually make it really binding. I think it's just strongly worded to get people to withdraw who are not totally sure they would attend.

[MustaphaMond]

I highly doubt they can actually make it really binding. I think it's just strongly worded to get people to withdraw who are not totally sure they would attend.

Even if they very much wanted to "bind" you I don't see them being able to. I agree that it's prob just strongly worded. I think it's basically a polite and explanatory way of saying "Don't bullshit us."

[Auxilio]

I do not recall. but there wasn't any of that binding language when we actually agreed non-passively to join the WL right?

[Atmosphere]

I do not recall. but there wasn't any of that binding language when we actually agreed non-passively to join the WL right?

Nope, nothing binding in the original email

[Comma.Split]

I highly doubt they can actually make it really binding. I think it's just strongly worded to get people to withdraw who are not totally sure they would attend.

Even if they very much wanted to "bind" you I don't see them being able to. I agree that it's prob just strongly worded. I think it's basically a polite and explanatory way of saying "Don't bullshit us."

Well, in theory, they could:
1) report it to the LSAC (hypothetically, they could disqualify you)
2) Report it to the school you deposited at (hypothetically they could rescind admissions).
3) Sue you for breach of contract (if this counts as a contract).

Obviously, the chances of this happening are slim to none. It doesn't make sense to go through the hassle just to punish one or two people. But the bigger question is why in hell would someone remain on H's waitlist if they are not sure they will go when accepted. The only reasonable possibility is if you are on the waitlist at Harvard and Stanford/Yale, you get into both and decide to go to S/Y. Otherwise, if you are not sure you would give up CCN with $$ over Harvard at $0, it's time to make up your mind and make decision.

[lujanj7]

I highly doubt they can actually make it really binding. I think it's just strongly worded to get people to withdraw who are not totally sure they would attend.

Even if they very much wanted to "bind" you I don't see them being able to. I agree that it's prob just strongly worded. I think it's basically a polite and explanatory way of saying "Don't bullshit us."

Well, in theory, they could:
1) report it to the LSAC (hypothetically, they could disqualify you)
2) Report it to the school you deposited at (hypothetically they could rescind admissions).
3) Sue you for breach of contract (if this counts as a contract).

Obviously, the chances of this happening are slim to none. It doesn't make sense to go through the hassle just to punish one or two people. But the bigger question is why in hell would someone remain on H's waitlist if they are not sure they will go when accepted. The only reasonable possibility is if you are on the waitlist at Harvard and Stanford/Yale, you get into both and decide to go to S/Y. Otherwise, if you are not sure you would give up CCN with $$ over Harvard at $0, it's time to make up your mind and make decision.

Without knowing how much financial aid Harvard can give you if you are somehow magically accepted, it makes it a tad difficult to make that type of decision now. Why would anyone give up a full ride or close to full ride at another great school to take on potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of debt? I get it, its ~Harvard~, but come on, be reasonable.

[The thinker]

Without knowing how much financial aid Harvard can give you if you are somehow magically accepted, it makes it a tad difficult to make that type of decision now. Why would anyone give up a full ride or close to full ride at another great school to take on potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of debt? I get it, its ~Harvard~, but come on, be reasonable.[/quote]

Aid is only need based you should be able to get a good idea of your need by checking this out
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 5#p7663164

[White Dwarf]

So you'll have a minimum of ~$135K debt pre-interest. A little underwhelming given their full-need undergrad financial aid... and $47 trillion dollar endowment.

[Hikari]

I highly doubt they can actually make it really binding. I think it's just strongly worded to get people to withdraw who are not totally sure they would attend.

Even if they very much wanted to "bind" you I don't see them being able to. I agree that it's prob just strongly worded. I think it's basically a polite and explanatory way of saying "Don't bullshit us."

Well, in theory, they could:
1) report it to the LSAC (hypothetically, they could disqualify you)
2) Report it to the school you deposited at (hypothetically they could rescind admissions).
3) Sue you for breach of contract (if this counts as a contract).

Obviously, the chances of this happening are slim to none. It doesn't make sense to go through the hassle just to punish one or two people. But the bigger question is why in hell would someone remain on H's waitlist if they are not sure they will go when accepted. The only reasonable possibility is if you are on the waitlist at Harvard and Stanford/Yale, you get into both and decide to go to S/Y. Otherwise, if you are not sure you would give up CCN with $$ over Harvard at $0, it's time to make up your mind and make decision.

Without knowing how much financial aid Harvard can give you if you are somehow magically accepted, it makes it a tad difficult to make that type of decision now. Why would anyone give up a full ride or close to full ride at another great school to take on potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of debt? I get it, its ~Harvard~, but come on, be reasonable.

This.
They can't punish you for remaining on a waitlist. For some people it makes sense to see what HLS will cost them before they can make a final decision. For others who are trolling the waitlist just to be able to say I turned down HLS it is time to withdraw.
For people like me who really want to get in regardless of cost, this is great.
Hoping for some movement soon!

[qwertyTLS]

didn't the email make it clear you would have to accept their waitlist offer before receiving financial aid information?

so:
step 1. they offer acceptance which is not officially binding
step 2. you accept or deny their offer which IS binding, and you withdraw from other school you've deposited at.
step 3. you receive financial aid information from HLS

[Hikari]

didn't the email make it clear you would have to accept their waitlist offer before receiving financial aid information?

so:
step 1. they offer acceptance which is not officially binding
step 2. you accept or deny their offer which IS binding, and you withdraw from other school you've deposited at.
step 3. you receive financial aid information from HLS

It actually says:

By remaining active on the waitlist you agree to:

Accept an offer of admission if it is extended to you.
Withdraw your seat at any school to which you have committed if offered admission at HLS.

Reading it again it sounds like by remaining on the waitlist you are agreeing to accept. I am personally not bothered by it but wow.
Who has already withdrawn?

[lujanj7]

I highly doubt they can actually make it really binding. I think it's just strongly worded to get people to withdraw who are not totally sure they would attend.

Even if they very much wanted to "bind" you I don't see them being able to. I agree that it's prob just strongly worded. I think it's basically a polite and explanatory way of saying "Don't bullshit us."

Well, in theory, they could:
1) report it to the LSAC (hypothetically, they could disqualify you)
2) Report it to the school you deposited at (hypothetically they could rescind admissions).
3) Sue you for breach of contract (if this counts as a contract).

Obviously, the chances of this happening are slim to none. It doesn't make sense to go through the hassle just to punish one or two people. But the bigger question is why in hell would someone remain on H's waitlist if they are not sure they will go when accepted. The only reasonable possibility is if you are on the waitlist at Harvard and Stanford/Yale, you get into both and decide to go to S/Y. Otherwise, if you are not sure you would give up CCN with $$ over Harvard at $0, it's time to make up your mind and make decision.

***UPDATE*** I called LSAC directly to see if they had a specific policy on this. The representative said that on May 15, a report is sent to all schools that tells them which of their admits are wait-listed or deposited at other schools, and WHICH schools. At this point, schools MAY rescind offers of admission, but it isn't a certainty. Each school may have their own policy.

So, of course, I called the other school I deposited to so I could ask them what their policy is on double-deposits and accepting a wait-list offer elsewhere. The admissions rep there said that they have no policy on this, and that they don't rescind offers of admission simply because someone is deposited elsewhere or has accepted a wait-list position elsewhere. They said that at some point, they will reach out to simply ask what our plans are, but that once the seat is yours, it's yours.

Basically, Harvard would be in charge of enforcing the "binding admission" requirement, which without the other institutions' cooperation, would be rather difficult to do. At this point, I suggest that those of you who plan to ride this thing out but are uncertain of whether or not you'd take the spot from Harvard if it was offered to you for financial reasons or otherwise, call your current top choice(s) to see what their policy is on this type of thing. The girl I spoke to didn't even request my name, so I honestly don't think they can be retaliatory if you're simply calling to ask. Better to find out now, rather than wait the wait-list out and be backed into a (ridiculously expensive) corner.


***edit***
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/admissions ... wait-list/

This blog from HLS gives more information on the process. The link was provided in the email we received. It seems to loosen the expectation that admission is "binding," but does strongly suggest that you consider whether or not you can reasonably accept an offer if one is extended to you. Check it out. I feel a bit better after reading.

ALSO! REMAINING ON THE WAIT LIST DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU HAVE TO WITHDRAW AT OTHER SCHOOLS NOW! THEY ONLY ASK YOU TO WITHDRAW ONCE AN OFFER OF ADMISSION IS EXTENDED TO YOU! NO ONE SHOULD BE WITHDRAWING FROM OTHER SCHOOLS AT THIS POINT IN TIME!! KEEP YOUR OPTIONS OPEN, FOLKS.