Top Law Schools

Based on cost of living and tuition, Columbia and NYU would cost about $150k more over the three years... Is that really worth the rank?

where do you want to work? / what do you want to do?

All of these options suck if you don't want to work in Texas.

If you want to work in Texas, go to UT.

If not, retake and reapply unless you'll be getting financial support from some source. I cannot imagine sinking $290k into a Columbia degree.

I don't really mind where I work, but I would like to pursue a clerkship and (long-term) the federal bench.

Thanks for your input!

penguin2011 wrote:I don't really mind where I work, but I would like to pursue a clerkship and (long-term) the federal bench.

Thanks for your input!

Then the answer is retake for HYS or Chi or UVA or Duke, all three of your options are poor for clerkships.

OR you could do Columbia, work in Biglaw to pay off debt, and then shoot for a clerkship and move into govt (lol at "federal bench").

jselson wrote:

penguin2011 wrote:I don't really mind where I work, but I would like to pursue a clerkship and (long-term) the federal bench.

Thanks for your input!

Then the answer is retake for HYS or Chi or UVA or Duke, all three of your options are poor for clerkships.

You just looked at one year of placement data, saw that CVD placed a few percent more into federal clerkships, and determined that CLS and NYU are "poor for clerkships." I wonder how the creators of LST feel when they see their hard work abused like this.

Yeah, YS have a real tangible difference for clerkships then H to some degree and Chi to an even lesser degree then Duke and Virginia to a lesser degree that is almost nonexistent vs NYU/CLS.

You should retake and reapply because these schools cost way too much at sticker price/UT isn't worth it at that price

eta: if you can get a better deal.


If you are set on attending, yes it is worth the rank unless your only goal from graduating law school is to work in Texas (Not biglaw specifically, just within the boundary of the state)

banjo wrote:

jselson wrote:

penguin2011 wrote:I don't really mind where I work, but I would like to pursue a clerkship and (long-term) the federal bench.

Thanks for your input!

Then the answer is retake for HYS or Chi or UVA or Duke, all three of your options are poor for clerkships.

You just looked at one year of placement data, saw that CVD placed a few percent more into federal clerkships, and determined that CLS and NYU are "poor for clerkships." I wonder how the creators of LST feel when they see their hard work abused like this.

Columbia 2009: 7.9%, 2010: 9.8%, 2011: 8.1%, 2012: 7.9% - Avg: 8.425%
NYU 2009: 7.9%, 2010: 10.3%, 2011: 10.9%, 2012: 5.6% - Avg: 8.675%
UT 2009: 7.4%, 2010: 10.5%, 2011: 7.1%, 2012: 8.3% - Avg: 8.325%

Chicago 2009: 8.7%, 2010: 12.3%, 2011: 9.4%, 2012: 14.4% - Avg: 11.2%
UVA 2009: 10.9%, 2010: 9.9%, 2011: 10.6%, 2012: 14.3% - Avg: 11.425%
Duke 2009: 11.4%, 2010: 12.7%, 2011: 11.1%, 2012: 12.9% - Avg: 12.025%

some of that is self-selection. I highly doubt median Duke kids are beating out top 1/3 CLS kids (all other things equal)

jselson wrote:

banjo wrote:

jselson wrote:

penguin2011 wrote:I don't really mind where I work, but I would like to pursue a clerkship and (long-term) the federal bench.

Thanks for your input!

Then the answer is retake for HYS or Chi or UVA or Duke, all three of your options are poor for clerkships.

You just looked at one year of placement data, saw that CVD placed a few percent more into federal clerkships, and determined that CLS and NYU are "poor for clerkships." I wonder how the creators of LST feel when they see their hard work abused like this.

Columbia 2009: 7.9%, 2010: 9.8%, 2011: 8.1%, 2012: 7.9% - Avg: 8.425%
NYU 2009: 7.9%, 2010: 10.3%, 2011: 10.9%, 2012: 5.6% - Avg: 8.675%
UT 2009: 7.4%, 2010: 10.5%, 2011: 7.1%, 2012: 8.3% - Avg: 8.325%

Chicago 2009: 8.7%, 2010: 12.3%, 2011: 9.4%, 2012: 14.4% - Avg: 11.2%
UVA 2009: 10.9%, 2010: 9.9%, 2011: 10.6%, 2012: 14.3% - Avg: 11.425%
Duke 2009: 11.4%, 2010: 12.7%, 2011: 11.1%, 2012: 12.9% - Avg: 12.025%

Lol at a) the idea that 3% of clerkship placement should affect choice of law school at all b) the idea that these 3% differences are do to objectively better clerkship placement ability.

JamMasterJ wrote:some of that is self-selection. I highly doubt median Duke kids are beating out top 1/3 CLS kids (all other things equal)

Always thought duke and uva get some regional love for clerkships

OP, unlike most, I think these are pretty solid options for someone who either wants NYC biglaw or to work in Texas, but you need to learn more about the legal profession and decide what you actually want to do before committing to either. Neither clerking (a 1 year job) or being a federal judge (a career capstone after you're already successful at something else) are near-term career options. They're also not particularly likely from anywhere. Honestly, you should probably work for a little and then reapply.

JamMasterJ wrote:some of that is self-selection. I highly doubt median Duke kids are beating out top 1/3 CLS kids (all other things equal)

No one thinks you're likely to get a clerkship at median. But it's rare for CVD to have a lower percentage than CN clerk, and there are quite a few years where the difference is substantial. I mean, self-selection occurs because the people selecting into that school thinks it's better for what they want to do. Using "self-selection" to say this differences don't matter is tautological. But in any case, unless there's info on how many students at each school gun for clerkships vs. how many get them (which might give you a slightly better idea of your chances, but idk), that percentage is the best we got.

Elston Gunn wrote:

jselson wrote:

banjo wrote:

jselson wrote:Then the answer is retake for HYS or Chi or UVA or Duke, all three of your options are poor for clerkships.

You just looked at one year of placement data, saw that CVD placed a few percent more into federal clerkships, and determined that CLS and NYU are "poor for clerkships." I wonder how the creators of LST feel when they see their hard work abused like this.

Columbia 2009: 7.9%, 2010: 9.8%, 2011: 8.1%, 2012: 7.9% - Avg: 8.425%
NYU 2009: 7.9%, 2010: 10.3%, 2011: 10.9%, 2012: 5.6% - Avg: 8.675%
UT 2009: 7.4%, 2010: 10.5%, 2011: 7.1%, 2012: 8.3% - Avg: 8.325%

Chicago 2009: 8.7%, 2010: 12.3%, 2011: 9.4%, 2012: 14.4% - Avg: 11.2%
UVA 2009: 10.9%, 2010: 9.9%, 2011: 10.6%, 2012: 14.3% - Avg: 11.425%
Duke 2009: 11.4%, 2010: 12.7%, 2011: 11.1%, 2012: 12.9% - Avg: 12.025%

Lol at a) the idea that 3% of clerkship placement should affect choice of law school at all b) the idea that these 3% differences are do to objectively better clerkship placement ability.

While you may disagree about a, "objectively" b is true.

jselson wrote:

Elston Gunn wrote: Lol at a) the idea that 3% of clerkship placement should affect choice of law school at all b) the idea that these 3% differences are do to objectively better clerkship placement ability.

While you may disagree about a, "objectively" b is true.

It isn't necessarily true. Placement and placement ability are distinct.

Not to derail the *excellent* clerkship discussion, but who in the world is voting NYU here? This is clearly a UT vs. Columbia debate.

sinfiery wrote:Yeah, YS have a real tangible difference for clerkships then H to some degree and Chi to an even lesser degree then Duke and Virginia to a lesser degree that is almost nonexistent vs NYU/CLS.

You should retake and reapply because these schools cost way too much at sticker price/UT isn't worth it at that price

eta: if you can get a better deal.


If you are set on attending, yes it is worth the rank unless your only goal from graduating law school is to work in Texas (Not biglaw specifically, just within the boundary of the state)

OP will be paying between 12-15K a year on tuition (depending on if they got that 3K grant or not). You really think UT isn't worth that for someone who wants to work in Texas?

jselson wrote:

Elston Gunn wrote:

jselson wrote:

banjo wrote:You just looked at one year of placement data, saw that CVD placed a few percent more into federal clerkships, and determined that CLS and NYU are "poor for clerkships." I wonder how the creators of LST feel when they see their hard work abused like this.

Columbia 2009: 7.9%, 2010: 9.8%, 2011: 8.1%, 2012: 7.9% - Avg: 8.425%
NYU 2009: 7.9%, 2010: 10.3%, 2011: 10.9%, 2012: 5.6% - Avg: 8.675%
UT 2009: 7.4%, 2010: 10.5%, 2011: 7.1%, 2012: 8.3% - Avg: 8.325%

Chicago 2009: 8.7%, 2010: 12.3%, 2011: 9.4%, 2012: 14.4% - Avg: 11.2%
UVA 2009: 10.9%, 2010: 9.9%, 2011: 10.6%, 2012: 14.3% - Avg: 11.425%
Duke 2009: 11.4%, 2010: 12.7%, 2011: 11.1%, 2012: 12.9% - Avg: 12.025%

Lol at a) the idea that 3% of clerkship placement should affect choice of law school at all b) the idea that these 3% differences are do to objectively better clerkship placement ability.

While you may disagree about a, "objectively" b is true.

Eh. A lot of CLS/NYU people have jobs lined up in NYC and have lives there, and don't want to go clerk in South Carolina or something. Duke and UVA graduates are already going to move for their new jobs, since I would guess roughly none of them work in Durham or Charlottesville. I think their students are probably much more geographically flexible, which is a HUGE deal with clerkships. It's a whole hell of a lot easier to get a federal clerkship in Arkansas than in NYC, whether you go to CLS or Duke.

More to the point, OP's desired career trajectory is highly unlikely from any school, so we really need to know some goals more realistic than "be a federal judge."

UT might be fine if OP is from Texas and wants to stay, otherwise CLS or NYU is really the better choice, but it's a whole lot of money.

BigZuck wrote:
OP will be paying between 12-15K a year on tuition (depending on if they got that 3K grant or not). You really think UT isn't worth that for someone who wants to work in Texas?

No, it totally is. In fact I say pretty often id go to UT in state at sticker. Not sure what I was thinking.

I'd still pick CLS here unless the goal is to live in Texas

jselson wrote:

JamMasterJ wrote:some of that is self-selection. I highly doubt median Duke kids are beating out top 1/3 CLS kids (all other things equal)

No one thinks you're likely to get a clerkship at median. But it's rare for CVD to have a lower percentage than CN clerk, and there are quite a few years where the difference is substantial. I mean, self-selection occurs because the people selecting into that school thinks it's better for what they want to do. Using "self-selection" to say this differences don't matter is tautological. But in any case, unless there's info on how many students at each school gun for clerkships vs. how many get them (which might give you a slightly better idea of your chances, but idk), that percentage is the best we got.

What I'm ACTUALLY saying is that people here and at CLS have a big enough biglaw gap that I think it accounts for 3% or whatever the difference is. My 1/2 v. 1/3 statement was a little glib, but it's also not the case that those 12% are the top 12% of the class, or even necessarily top 25%. And I really don't think that a top 25% student at Duke is in a better clerkship spot than top 18% or w/e at CLS/NYU.

TripTrip wrote:Not to derail the *excellent* clerkship discussion, but who in the world is voting NYU here? This is clearly a UT vs. Columbia debate.

People who want a spot in Columbia's class freed up?

moonman157 wrote:

TripTrip wrote:Not to derail the *excellent* clerkship discussion, but who in the world is voting NYU here? This is clearly a UT vs. Columbia debate.

People who want a spot in Columbia's class freed up?

I didn't vote, but the difference is fungible enough to say this isn't "clearly" CLS v. UT

moonman157 wrote:

TripTrip wrote:Not to derail the *excellent* clerkship discussion, but who in the world is voting NYU here? This is clearly a UT vs. Columbia debate.

People who want a spot in Columbia's class freed up?

I mean, the schools really are identical for all intents and purposes, even though it's sacrilege to suggest. Basically identical percentages of students who try to get firm jobs get them. It really should be UT versus CLS/NYU.

JamMasterJ wrote:

moonman157 wrote:

TripTrip wrote:Not to derail the *excellent* clerkship discussion, but who in the world is voting NYU here? This is clearly a UT vs. Columbia debate.

People who want a spot in Columbia's class freed up?

I didn't vote, but the difference is fungible enough to say this isn't "clearly" CLS v. UT

If OP wants PI, then NYU sure. Otherwise I think CLS beats out NYU (even if only by a slight margin) on just about every front. At equal cost, wouldn't you pick CLS?

TripTrip wrote:

JamMasterJ wrote:

moonman157 wrote:

TripTrip wrote:Not to derail the *excellent* clerkship discussion, but who in the world is voting NYU here? This is clearly a UT vs. Columbia debate.

People who want a spot in Columbia's class freed up?

I didn't vote, but the difference is fungible enough to say this isn't "clearly" CLS v. UT

If OP wants PI, then NYU sure. Otherwise I think CLS beats out NYU (even if only by a slight margin) on just about every front. At equal cost, wouldn't you pick CLS?

I didn't.