Top Law Schools

I had to recalculate the COA each school and need some advice. I place a premium on living and working in CA. (I wouldn't mind choosing to leave, but don't want to be in the position where I can't come back) I feel like going to Texas might make it difficult to get back to CA, but I'm not sure.

I want to work in PI (civil rights/liberties, poverty, housing), PD, Govt, or possibly plaintiff side work. I am NOT interested in Biglaw. All of my ties are in SoCal. I have $20k in UG loans. I am riding waitlists at Harvard, Columbia, and NYU because I applied very late (AA male with a 171 LSAT, 3.4x GPA). I'm thinking about applying again next year but I'm not sure if a T6 school is really necessary given my goals.

Right now the final cost of attending would be $115-120k at USC and $65-70k at Texas.

1. Between USC and Texas, which is the better option for someone who definitely wants work in CA?
2. Would attending Columbia or NYU off the waitlist be a good idea if it's near sticker?

If retake is not an option and it's between those two schools, then IMHO go to USC over Texas (since living/working in CA is a premium to you).

Btw I'm responding because I was in a similar scenario as you. USC/UCLA (~$120K total COA) and also waitlisted at Columbia and NYU.

If you manage to get into Columbia or NYU, then my prestige-loving mentality says go to NY. However, when rationality kicks in, you realize at sticker price ($270K-$280K total COA), it would be a financially bad choice, but for the prestige/employment % it might be worth it over USC.

But since it's between USC and Texas. Go SC for CA.

.

I think you need to reapply. An AA male with a 171 should be able to get more money somewhere or better acceptances. Are these the only options you have, or just the ones you like?

That's a really bad cycle, tbh.

Is USC giving you a 50k scholarship per year, or 50k total?

You should reapply but USC is probably the best option of the two.

worldtraveler wrote:I think you need to reapply. An AA male with a 171 should be able to get more money somewhere or better acceptances. Are these the only options you have, or just the ones you like?

The only options I have. I withdrew from Loyola and Irvine then got waitlisted at Harvard, Columbia, NYU, Penn, Michigan, and UCLA. I applied on the deadline or within a week of the deadline at every one of those schools. I didn't know applying early was a good idea until it was too late.

twenty wrote:That's a really bad cycle, tbh.

Is USC giving you a 50k scholarship per year, or 50k total?

$50k a year.

You need to sit out a year. Applying early could save you 100k or more.

You may want to take another look at your LORs and your personal statement too. Maybe I'm wrong but 3.4/171 and URM status should have gotten you into at least Michigan. That seems strange.

A couple things I think may be an issue are the fact I was in undergrad for 7 years (first 5 half time at a community college, last 2 full time at a university), have a TTTTT undergrad (145 average LSAT from here), a minor C&F issue, never graduated high school, and only had one LOR from a professor because I never built relationships with them. My personal statement is not up to what I'd want it to be, but it's not bad. Maybe I'm making excuses, but my application is far from traditional.

With 50k/yr how are you getting over 100k at repayment? Just wondering how you are getting those figures?

unodostres wrote:With 50k/yr how are you getting over 100k at repayment? Just wondering how you are getting those figures?

A somewhat conservative cost of living still puts the COA at USC at $80k in my first year and at around $86k by my third year. I used LS22's spreadsheet.

I would be willing to pull the trigger on USC or Texas, but 1) I think you could do a lot better next cycle and 2) your COA estimate for USC still seems really high.

Honestly, I don't think you could do much better, though, because for you, keeping debt as low as possible is a priori if you don't want biglaw.

twenty wrote:Honestly, I don't think you could do much better, though, because for you, keeping debt as low as possible is a priori if you don't want biglaw.

That's the thing - I would want to do "better" but for my goals I don't see what that would actually mean. I don't care about prestige or money. I just want a semi-interesting job with reasonable hours that pays me enough to be at least lower middle-class. So even if I get into Columbia or NYU I don't see what the benefit is unless it's way more likely I'll get a PI job in CA.

I think you should reapply. As an AA with a 171 LSAT, you should fix up your application and submit it at the beginning of September. I believe you will be able to get into much better schools (with much better PI prospects), don't waste the opportunity!

Yea All Right wrote:I think you should reapply. As an AA with a 171 LSAT, you should fix up your application and submit it at the beginning of September. I believe you will be able to get into much better schools (with much better PI prospects), don't waste the opportunity!

As far as I can tell the only thing getting into a better school will do is give me a better shot at "prestigious" PI which is still unlikely no matter where I go. If I'm wrong about that I'd like to know though.

Anyone else got any insight?

Don't go to UT if you want PI work in CA. Doesn't make any sense.

If you have modest career goals and a 50K a year scholarship at USC I don't think going to USC would be a bad choice at all.

worldtraveler wrote:You need to sit out a year. Applying early could save you 100k or more.

You may want to take another look at your LORs and your personal statement too. Maybe I'm wrong but 3.4/171 and URM status should have gotten you into at least Michigan. That seems strange.

Yea...that's not possible. You're just reflexively responding with "wait a cycle! retake!" apply early! without actually reading the facts.
These are already pretty much full rides, and afaik most schools don't give schollies to cover COA, so these offers are as good as it gets. If anything, waiting a year could make it worse since COA + inflation etc. would drive costs up. The only thing I would suggest is looking at the IBR LRAP etc. based programs. I don't think TX or USC have particularly good ones, whereas UCLA or the T14 may have better ones. That would fit your goals better if you could swing full rides at any of those as well.

Good point about the LRAPs. I looked over USC's and although it's not the greatest, I feel like it will suit my needs. The biggest issue is that the loans are only fully forgiven if I'm in eligible employment for 5 years. I'm quite committed to PI though so I don't see it being a problem.

I would go to USC since you got in. It's a shoe in for sure. But, Texas wouldn't be that terrible, because it's a REALLY good school and it's ranked at #15. Texas does have reach outside of Texas. USC will give you the most opportunities.

lawschoolbound94 wrote:I would go to USC since you got in. It's a shoe in for sure. But, Texas wouldn't be that terrible, because it's a REALLY good school and it's ranked at #15. Texas does have reach outside of Texas. USC will give you the most opportunities.

Please stop

A)This thread is 9 months old so it's all moot and
B)You don't know what you're talking about