Top Law Schools

I dunno if this has been brought up yet, but there's an awesome profile of UC Irvine here.

Didnt UC irvine give free tuition to the whole first class? So all that nonsense about the high tuition is unapplicable to them.

BeachandRun23 wrote:Didnt UC irvine give free tuition to the whole first class? So all that nonsense about the high tuition is unapplicable to them.

First class, not every class.

Desert Fox wrote:

BeachandRun23 wrote:Didnt UC irvine give free tuition to the whole first class? So all that nonsense about the high tuition is unapplicable to them.

First class, not every class.

Didnt they give a 40% scholarship to everyone this year? So to date, no one has paid anything close to sticker. So why they are mentioning that, I have no idea.

BeachandRun23 wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

BeachandRun23 wrote:Didnt UC irvine give free tuition to the whole first class? So all that nonsense about the high tuition is unapplicable to them.

First class, not every class.

Didnt they give a 40% scholarship to everyone this year? So to date, no one has paid anything close to sticker. So why they are mentioning that, I have no idea.

Because the school is going to eventually charge people that. Probably within a year or two.

Desert Fox wrote: Because the school is going to eventually charge people that. Probably within a year or two.

Yes, but they will almost certainly be accredited by then, so most of the logic of that post fails.

Reedie wrote:

Desert Fox wrote: Because the school is going to eventually charge people that. Probably within a year or two.

Yes, but they will almost certainly be accredited by then, so most of the logic of that post fails.

True. The shtick about it being unaccredited is silly. It will be.

Reedie wrote:

Desert Fox wrote: Because the school is going to eventually charge people that. Probably within a year or two.

Yes, but they will almost certainly be accredited by then, so most of the logic of that post fails.

Eaxctly. Plus they also knock the school for charging so much and having no alumni/career stats which they will also have by that time. As for the people that attended now, when they have no alumni/career stats, they havent paid anything near the sticker.

BeachandRun23 wrote:

Reedie wrote:

Desert Fox wrote: Because the school is going to eventually charge people that. Probably within a year or two.

Yes, but they will almost certainly be accredited by then, so most of the logic of that post fails.

Eaxctly. Plus they also knock the school for charging so much and having no alumni/career stats which they will also have by that time. As for the people that attended now, when they have no alumni/career stats, they havent paid anything near the sticker.

They won't have an alumni network worth a damn for 10 years.

Desert Fox wrote:

BeachandRun23 wrote:

Reedie wrote:

Desert Fox wrote: Because the school is going to eventually charge people that. Probably within a year or two.

Yes, but they will almost certainly be accredited by then, so most of the logic of that post fails.

Eaxctly. Plus they also knock the school for charging so much and having no alumni/career stats which they will also have by that time. As for the people that attended now, when they have no alumni/career stats, they havent paid anything near the sticker.

They won't have an alumni network worth a damn for 10 years.

As long as they keep the class sizes REALLY SMALL for the first decade or so, I think theyll be fine.

When they stop bribing people to choose UCI over UCLA and USC, they'll stop having students with UCLA/USC numbers. Not drinking the UCI koolaid at all

the truth is California didn't need another law school, good or not, privately funded or not...

Borhas wrote:the truth is California didn't need another law school, good or not, privately funded or not...

That is true. If UC Irvine makes it into the top 20 (i think this was the dean's goal, wasnt it?) then there will be 5 law schools from california in the top 20 lol.

BeachandRun23 wrote:

Borhas wrote:the truth is California didn't need another law school, good or not, privately funded or not...

That is true. If UC Irvine makes it into the top 20 (i think this was the dean's goal, wasnt it?) then there will be 5 law schools from california in the top 20 lol.

Will not happen.

SBL wrote:When they stop bribing people to choose UCI over UCLA and USC, they'll stop having students with UCLA/USC numbers. Not drinking the UCI koolaid at all

this. but i'd go UCI w/ $$$ over USC/UCLA no $$$ if I wanted socal.

SrLaw wrote:

BeachandRun23 wrote:

Borhas wrote:the truth is California didn't need another law school, good or not, privately funded or not...

That is true. If UC Irvine makes it into the top 20 (i think this was the dean's goal, wasnt it?) then there will be 5 law schools from california in the top 20 lol.

Will not happen.

These claims (top 20, top 8, top 14...) are really irritating. I would have noting against UCI--beyond the fact that it's a new law school in an era when we need to be eliminating law schools--were it not for these speculations.

Is this hype a necessary component of Chemerinsky's plan?

SrLaw wrote:

BeachandRun23 wrote:

Borhas wrote:the truth is California didn't need another law school, good or not, privately funded or not...

That is true. If UC Irvine makes it into the top 20 (i think this was the dean's goal, wasnt it?) then there will be 5 law schools from california in the top 20 lol.

Will not happen.

Who cares if it happens. The more law schools in the top 20 then the more the degree is degraded. Your average interviewer at any biglaw firm wont be able to tell the difference between Irvine, Hastings, and UCLA for that matter.

University of California pretty clearly is an absolutely mismanaged organization. Prime example is the embarrassing tuition fiasco.

MrAnon wrote:

SrLaw wrote:

BeachandRun23 wrote:

Borhas wrote:the truth is California didn't need another law school, good or not, privately funded or not...

That is true. If UC Irvine makes it into the top 20 (i think this was the dean's goal, wasnt it?) then there will be 5 law schools from california in the top 20 lol.

Will not happen.

Who cares if it happens. The more law schools in the top 20 then the more the degree is degraded. Your average interviewer at any biglaw firm wont be able to tell the difference between Irvine, Hastings, and UCLA for that matter.

University of California pretty clearly is an absolutely mismanaged organization. Prime example is the embarrassing tuition fiasco.

Future lawyers are bad at math.

MrAnon wrote:Who cares if it happens. The more law schools in the top 20 then the more the degree is degraded.

Well, it would probably have to replace another school. So I dont see how it would degrade the degree. You cant have 25 schools ranked in the top 20 lol

MrAnon wrote:Who cares if it happens. The more law schools in the top 20 then the more the degree is degraded. Your average interviewer at any biglaw firm wont be able to tell the difference between Irvine, Hastings, and UCLA for that matter.

University of California pretty clearly is an absolutely mismanaged organization. Prime example is the embarrassing tuition fiasco.

Is this like an experimental piece to see how many logical fallacies you can fit into a paragraph?

That blog is pretty terrible.

MrAnon wrote:Your average interviewer at any biglaw firm wont be able to tell the difference between Irvine, Hastings, and UCLA for that matter.

LOLOLOLOLOL

d34dluk3 wrote: Is this like an experimental piece to see how many logical fallacies you can fit into a paragraph?

This comment did not get nearly enough love. Well done, d34dluk3.

badfish wrote:

d34dluk3 wrote: Is this like an experimental piece to see how many logical fallacies you can fit into a paragraph?

This comment did not get nearly enough love. Well done, d34dluk3.

<3

The most curious thing to me is why the blog states that the top 8 is worth going to at sticker and anything else you should have full ride or job lined up before going to school. It's off topic but I haven't really seen anyone say top 8 or full ride before.