Top Law Schools

I've seen a couple of posts on this topic earlier, but I thought I would start my own thread to see what contributions I can get. I am presently considering attending the following two schools, Georgetown and UCLA. I have a couple of waitlists pending at higher-ranked schools but for the moment I'm not actively considering them.

I have noticed that Georgetown is ranked one notch higher than UCLA--14th as opposed to 15th. Whether this constitutes a substantive difference or if its a marginal statistical blip I am not sure. I know that the top 14 schools are commonly referred to as "T14"--does this mean that there is some kind of special distinction or recognition attained by being ranked 14th or higher?

A couple of different factors will play into my ultimate decision. Two of the most important are employment and prestige.
I am seeking to go to the school that will offer me the best prospects for employment and from which a degree will confer the most prestige. Georgetown has obviously been around longer, which counts in its favor in the prestige department, but UCLA is no slouch--it is after all, nationally recognized. However, perhaps UCLA has certain advantages as far as employability for someone who is planning to work in the Southern California area.

The other main factor is money. Without having received my financial aid offers yet, I know that UCLA will be about 35k per year tuition wise since I am a California resident, whereas Georgetown will be about 41-42k. Is Georgetown worth the extra dough?

I am sure I will hear lots of comments to the effect that LA is a more pleasant place to live than Washington, DC. Having lived in LA all my life, though, I am not averse to spending some time in another locale. This probably counts as a point in Georgetown's favor.

Anybody who can offer some insight into this dilemma, your help will be much appreciated.

I am in at UCLA and WL'ed at GULC. If $ were no issue, I'd probably pick GULC because I like the east coast, never spent much time in Cali and would prefer to live on the east coast after graduation. I wouldn't mind working in some type of political area of law after graduation, maybe even federal gov't work. GULC probably offers better opportunities for this type of career.
That having been said, I'll probably go to UCLA because I am in there and who knows if I'll get off the waitlist. Plus I have a GI Bill and Yellow Ribbon scholarship. GULC is stingy with the yellow ribbon scholarships and I am not interested in going into debt.

Both schools are just outside of the top 13 schools commonly referred to as "T13", this mean there is little difference between the schools.

GULC. It has more national reach.

relmeligy wrote:I've seen a couple of posts on this topic earlier, but I thought I would start my own thread to see what contributions I can get. I am presently considering attending the following two schools, Georgetown and UCLA. I have a couple of waitlists pending at higher-ranked schools but for the moment I'm not actively considering them.

I have noticed that Georgetown is ranked one notch higher than UCLA--14th as opposed to 15th. Whether this constitutes a substantive difference or if its a marginal statistical blip I am not sure. I know that the top 14 schools are commonly referred to as "T14"--does this mean that there is some kind of special distinction or recognition attained by being ranked 14th or higher?

A couple of different factors will play into my ultimate decision. Two of the most important are employment and prestige.
I am seeking to go to the school that will offer me the best prospects for employment and from which a degree will confer the most prestige. Georgetown has obviously been around longer, which counts in its favor in the prestige department, but UCLA is no slouch--it is after all, nationally recognized. However, perhaps UCLA has certain advantages as far as employability for someone who is planning to work in the Southern California area.

The other main factor is money. Without having received my financial aid offers yet, I know that UCLA will be about 35k per year tuition wise since I am a California resident, whereas Georgetown will be about 41-42k. Is Georgetown worth the extra dough?

I am sure I will hear lots of comments to the effect that LA is a more pleasant place to live than Washington, DC. Having lived in LA all my life, though, I am not averse to spending some time in another locale. This probably counts as a point in Georgetown's favor.

Anybody who can offer some insight into this dilemma, your help will be much appreciated.

go to georgetown if you want the absolute best shot at getting a placing into a good job. and personally i think georgetown is worth the 5k-7k per year extra.

And with tuition going up at UCLA by the time you're a 2L GULC will probably be cheaper than UCLA.

And I was comparing UCLA instate vs. GULC sticker.

How do you guys know that GULC has more "national reach" than UCLA? Or that it has better job prospects for graduates? Are there any kind of statistics out there about this sort of thing?

0L speaking here, but I'm in a similar boat, choosing between UVA and UCLA with equal scholarship amounts. Two things you want to consider: 1) UCLA is So Cal. If you want a job in So Cal, UCLA is a better choice, despite GULC's "national reputation"; and 2) UCLA's tuition is on the rise. For in-stater rates, here's what I heard: 10-11 (1L) 40K, 11-12 (2L) 45K, 12-13 (3L) 49 K. That's in-state. I would keep that in mind. My source for those numbers was Dean Schwartz, and they were just estimates, but I think the rates will be pretty close.

If you want to work in SoCal, UCLA is your answer. It's a fine school, and your professors/clinics, etc. will all be tied to the region.

If you want to work somewhere else, go to GU.

The other main factor is money. Without having received my financial aid offers yet, I know that UCLA will be about 35k per year tuition wise since I am a California resident, whereas Georgetown will be about 41-42k. Is Georgetown worth the extra dough?

UCLA law's tuition is set to skyrocket to 50k. It may not actually cost any extra.

In general, GULC has much better placement nationally. However, if you are dead-set on southern California UCLA might make things a bit easier there. If you miss out on biglaw, being local will help greatly with networking.

If OP wants to practice in SoCal eventually, I don't think this is even a question. Georgetown places marginally better nationally and on the east coast, but UCLA is better hands-down for southern california (both because of reputation and network). Even at equal cost I would say take UCLA.

This is the current in state tuition rate at UCLA for students admitted in 2008 or later:
$35,328

I don't know where people are getting all these crazy numbers about 45k or 50k. That sounds outlandish.

I'm hearing a diversity of opinion on this subject, which is good. I continue to vacillate back and forth. As someone who wants to practice in SoCal, staying local at UCLA clearly has its advantages... but there seems to be an additional edge as far as national reputation goes with GULC.

I think this is an interesting comparison:
"With 99.2% of its most recent graduates reporting, Georgetown reports that 97.1% were employed after nine months, with 439 graduates (or 70.1%) working for law firms."
"UCLA reports that 99.1% of its most recent graduates were employed after nine months (319/322), with 189 (or 59.2%) working for law firms."

More UCLA grads are employed after nine months, but fewer of them work at law firms. Hmm.

relmeligy wrote:This is the current in state tuition rate at UCLA for students admitted in 2008 or later:
$35,328

I don't know where people are getting all these crazy numbers about 45k or 50k. That sounds outlandish.

I'm hearing a diversity of opinion on this subject, which is good. I continue to vacillate back and forth. As someone who wants to practice in SoCal, staying local at UCLA clearly has its advantages... but there seems to be an additional edge as far as national reputation goes with GULC.

I think this is an interesting comparison:
"With 99.2% of its most recent graduates reporting, Georgetown reports that 97.1% were employed after nine months, with 439 graduates (or 70.1%) working for law firms."
"UCLA reports that 99.1% of its most recent graduates were employed after nine months (319/322), with 189 (or 59.2%) working for law firms."

More UCLA grads are employed after nine months, but fewer of them work at law firms. Hmm.

Damn 40% of UCLA's class can't find any kind of legal job in nine months?! 30% at GULC is pretty depressing too...

beef wellington wrote:

relmeligy wrote:This is the current in state tuition rate at UCLA for students admitted in 2008 or later:
$35,328

I don't know where people are getting all these crazy numbers about 45k or 50k. That sounds outlandish.

I'm hearing a diversity of opinion on this subject, which is good. I continue to vacillate back and forth. As someone who wants to practice in SoCal, staying local at UCLA clearly has its advantages... but there seems to be an additional edge as far as national reputation goes with GULC.

I think this is an interesting comparison:
"With 99.2% of its most recent graduates reporting, Georgetown reports that 97.1% were employed after nine months, with 439 graduates (or 70.1%) working for law firms."
"UCLA reports that 99.1% of its most recent graduates were employed after nine months (319/322), with 189 (or 59.2%) working for law firms."

More UCLA grads are employed after nine months, but fewer of them work at law firms. Hmm.

Damn 40% of UCLA's class can't find any kind of legal job in nine months?! 30% at GULC is pretty depressing too...

Uh....I'm thinking about 10% or so were doing clerkships....maybe another 15 - 25% doing public interest/non-firm work.
I don't see how those are "non legal jobs."

reverendt wrote:

beef wellington wrote:

relmeligy wrote:This is the current in state tuition rate at UCLA for students admitted in 2008 or later:
$35,328

I don't know where people are getting all these crazy numbers about 45k or 50k. That sounds outlandish.

I'm hearing a diversity of opinion on this subject, which is good. I continue to vacillate back and forth. As someone who wants to practice in SoCal, staying local at UCLA clearly has its advantages... but there seems to be an additional edge as far as national reputation goes with GULC.

I think this is an interesting comparison:
"With 99.2% of its most recent graduates reporting, Georgetown reports that 97.1% were employed after nine months, with 439 graduates (or 70.1%) working for law firms."
"UCLA reports that 99.1% of its most recent graduates were employed after nine months (319/322), with 189 (or 59.2%) working for law firms."

More UCLA grads are employed after nine months, but fewer of them work at law firms. Hmm.

Damn 40% of UCLA's class can't find any kind of legal job in nine months?! 30% at GULC is pretty depressing too...

Uh....I'm thinking about 10% or so were doing clerkships....maybe another 15 - 25% doing public interest/non-firm work.
I don't see how those are "non legal jobs."

Of course, I totally misread that.

This is the current in state tuition rate at UCLA for students admitted in 2008 or later:
$35,328

I don't know where people are getting all these crazy numbers about 45k or 50k. That sounds outlandish.

With the budget crisis in California, the UC system's budget is being slashed 20% (as reported in The Economist), so tuition is almost certainly going to go up for students from outside of California. I think that for the UC system to raise the tuition for California students would require the cooperation of the legislature: however, what I've heard (again in The Economist) is that schools like UC Berkeley may try to get around this by imposing outrageous "fees" of up to $10,000. Again, though, that may just be for out-of-state applicants.

I know that the top 14 schools are commonly referred to as "T14"--does this mean that there is some kind of special distinction or recognition attained by being ranked 14th or higher?

My understanding of the so-called "T14" is that it exists because the schools comprising it are almost always ranked somewhere between 1 and 14 in USNWR. UCLA is currently placed just outside of it, but that follows a rapid ascension in the ranks over the past decade; I don’t believe that it’s ever been ranked higher than 15th, and it hasn’t been at 15th for very long. Georgetown, on the other hand, has been at 14 or higher in the USNWR rankings since their inception, save perhaps rare occasions when it’s just slipped outside; but I think to maintain T14 status (or the very existence of a “T14”) you can’t fall outside of that range for more than one consecutive year, so when T14 schools have slipped in the past, they’ve always rebounded the year after. That, I believe, is the origin of the term. Does it make any difference? I doubt it. I imagine that if UCLA stayed at 15 or higher for the next ten years, people would start talking about a “T15”.

relmeligy wrote:I've seen a couple of posts on this topic earlier, but I thought I would start my own thread to see what contributions I can get. I am presently considering attending the following two schools, Georgetown and UCLA. I have a couple of waitlists pending at higher-ranked schools but for the moment I'm not actively considering them.

I have noticed that Georgetown is ranked one notch higher than UCLA--14th as opposed to 15th. Whether this constitutes a substantive difference or if its a marginal statistical blip I am not sure. I know that the top 14 schools are commonly referred to as "T14"--does this mean that there is some kind of special distinction or recognition attained by being ranked 14th or higher?

A couple of different factors will play into my ultimate decision. Two of the most important are employment and prestige.
I am seeking to go to the school that will offer me the best prospects for employment and from which a degree will confer the most prestige. Georgetown has obviously been around longer, which counts in its favor in the prestige department, but UCLA is no slouch--it is after all, nationally recognized. However, perhaps UCLA has certain advantages as far as employability for someone who is planning to work in the Southern California area.

The other main factor is money. Without having received my financial aid offers yet, I know that UCLA will be about 35k per year tuition wise since I am a California resident, whereas Georgetown will be about 41-42k. Is Georgetown worth the extra dough?

I am sure I will hear lots of comments to the effect that LA is a more pleasant place to live than Washington, DC. Having lived in LA all my life, though, I am not averse to spending some time in another locale. This probably counts as a point in Georgetown's favor.

Anybody who can offer some insight into this dilemma, your help will be much appreciated.

did you get your financial aid packet from UCLA yet? With my grant aid and in-state tuition, I'll be paying around 20-25K for my first year, which I don't consider bad.

I ED'd to UCLA because I love warm (but not humid) weather and because LA has a raging gay scene. But in the debate between which is better I'm sure you won't forget you're choosing between two phenomenal schools are there are kids who would love to be in the decision predicament you're currently in.

For whatever reason, people on TLS don't often talk about the long-term prospects of Cali's economy. How many years will it take for the state to recover fiscally? To what extent can the schools sustain their reputations when they are the most expensive schools in the country? What will the job prospects be like in a few years, but also 10 years down the road. Given all of this uncertainty, G'Town seems like the better choice here, at least it seems that way to me.

D. H2Oman wrote:Both schools are just outside of the top 13 schools commonly referred to as "T13", this mean there is little difference between the schools.

While I have seen others refer to the T13, I believe T14 is much more commonly used.

ArmyVet07 wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote:Both schools are just outside of the top 13 schools commonly referred to as "T13", this mean there is little difference between the schools.

While I have seen others refer to the T13, I believe T14 is much more commonly used.

lol. Supposedly GULC has taken a large hit relative to the other T14 schools ITE, but these dudes are on a mission.

MURPH wrote:I am in at UCLA and WL'ed at GULC. If $ were no issue, I'd probably pick GULC because I like the east coast, never spent much time in Cali and would prefer to live on the east coast after graduation. I wouldn't mind working in some type of political area of law after graduation, maybe even federal gov't work. GULC probably offers better opportunities for this type of career.
That having been said, I'll probably go to UCLA because I am in there and who knows if I'll get off the waitlist. Plus I have a GI Bill and Yellow Ribbon scholarship. GULC is stingy with the yellow ribbon scholarships and I am not interested in going into debt.

Has UCLA confirmed that you would receive a yellow ribbon scholarship? I ask because they limit the number of awards to ten, while GULC gives the scholarship (a much smaller amount, as you noted) to all eligible vets.
http://www.gibill.va.gov/GI_Bill_Info/C ... t_2009.htm
Of course, I have no idea how many eligible vets are likely to apply/be accepted by either program.

As you stand right now, there's no real dilemma: go to UCLA. All "T13" chatter aside, GULC will not travel to CA well enough to offset UCLA's home field advantage in your preferred legal market.

As you stand right now, there's no real dilemma: go to UCLA. All "T13" chatter aside, GULC will not travel to CA well enough to offset UCLA's home field advantage in your preferred legal market.

This really isn't true for biglaw.

For other fields, yes there will be a home-field advantage. The question is how badly the OP wants to say in CA and what the OP's career goals are.


The T13 thing is just a troll started by Desert Fox.

nealric wrote:

As you stand right now, there's no real dilemma: go to UCLA. All "T13" chatter aside, GULC will not travel to CA well enough to offset UCLA's home field advantage in your preferred legal market.

This really isn't true for biglaw.

Got any evidence of that? (in all seriousness). GULC put 43% in NLJ 250, UCLA put 36%. Even accounting for self-selection, I would bet the access to CA biglaw from UCLA is better. In fact, I'm willing to bet that more than a few CA offices bailed out of GULC's OCI due to the distance - that won't happen at UCLA. Does GULC have better overall national placement? Sure. But to argue that a T17's local school bump doesn't hold up against the cross-country reach of the weakest T14 member is a pretty bold statement.

relmeligy wrote:This is the current in state tuition rate at UCLA for students admitted in 2008 or later:
$35,328

I don't know where people are getting all these crazy numbers about 45k or 50k. That sounds outlandish.

+1,000,000

The people making outlandish claims about UCLA's tuition are morons and were probably rejected. (That is the most inflammatory thing I have ever said, but I don't feel too bad about it.)