Folks who chose HLS over SLS - do you regret it? Forum

[redleader6]

I'm lucky enough to be in the position of choosing between HLS and SLS. I'm interested in clerking after graduating and then working in PI, ideally either through a fellowship or at a federal public defenders service (or PDS in DC). Somewhere down the road I have fantasies of teaching, but those are pretty nebulous. I had gotten myself all set on HLS, but I just got into SLS off the wait list and I'm pretty tempted by it, despite the fact that I'm from the east coast and my family is pushing for HLS.

The thing is, every SLS alum I've spoken to has raved about the school. A lot of the HLS alums also loved their time there, but a significant portion of the people I've spoken too have had a more "muted" opinion of the school. And I've definitely gotten more of a gunner vibe from a lot of HLS students and alums. I'm tempted by HLS's reputation (even though I know that's not the most important thing), but I'm worried if I go to HLS that a year down the road I'll end up regretting it. To anyone faced with a similar choice - what did you choose and do you think you made the right choice for yourself?

[CassiusX]

Rising 2L who Chose Harvard. No regrets. My professors were great, I loved my section, and I performed very well - to the point that I feel few career options are out of reach. Even the winter wasn't as cold as I expected lol Of course, all of these things could have been possible at Stanford, but it might not have gone the same way. But you will probably enjoy either school you attend. Your career outlook will have much more to do with what you do once you get there rather than which school you choose, so go where you feel most comfortable.

[gamerish]

I would keep in mind that HLS is literally more than 3x the size of SLS so you're going to encounter more feedback, including negative, about H by its nature. If you can afford to and if SLS gives you enough time to, I'd take a visit and gauge the atmosphere of both schools for yourself. If you like SLS more, go there and vice versa for H. There isn't really a bad decision here unless you really want the West Coast after graduation since SLS will make up for the lack of ties (assuming you don't have any) or really hate the cold.

That your family is pushing for HLS is irrelevant unless they're paying for it (and won't pay for SLS for some dumb reason). Go where you want to. HLS' reputation isn't going to do much for you either as compared to SLS, especially in the legal field since everyone in it knows they're peer schools.

Amongst my friends who made the decision (both ways), it was pretty much entirely an East Coast vs. West Coast or class size decision.

[dirac]

Stanford is a great school and SLS is definitely awesome. That said, HLS is a better law school and is the right place to study law, especially considering your long term career plan. I have spent one year at HLS and I love it so much. The reasons you get some negative feedback from some HLS alumni is tangible: first a few people prefer technology law over traditional law (one friend of mine falls into this group). SLS is no doubt a better place to study IP law; second Harvard is more conservative and Stanford is more liberal, some people might prefer liberal to conservative and these people are often more active in expressing their dissatisfaction; third Harvard has the traditional of being very honest with every applicant and this spirit is the essence of crimson. To the opposite, Stanford would like to show every applicant its best part and would not expose its weakness to the external world. This can be explained by the statement released by Stanford University over the Brock Turner case:

https://news.stanford.edu/2016/06/06/st ... rner-case/

If this were a statement from Harvard, Harvard would first apologize to the whole world and reflect on the deficiency in its internal system; it would even find out what could have been done better in this specific case.

From the large amount of HLS 1L in my class who chose HLS over SLS, only one regretted to a limited extent (he is a guy who would like to study venture capital law and technology law as I just mentioned above).

One thing you should definitely consider is the large alumni network of HLS, especially the federal judges and supreme court justices. Do not let the clerkship percentage fool you: SLS has a higher percentage, but much less headcount in federal clerkship. In addition, 19 supreme court justices (20 if Judge Garland can be confirmed after November) are 10 times SLS produced. Not to mention alumni from HLS who are working in other public sectors. As long as DC is still the center stage of politics, YLS and HLS will always be the two best law schools in the country.

[nothingtosee]

Stanford is a great school and SLS is definitely awesome. That said, HLS is a better law school and is the right place to study law, especially considering your long term career plan. I have spent one year at HLS and I love it so much. The reasons you get some negative feedback from some HLS alumni is tangible: first a few people prefer technology law over traditional law (one friend of mine falls into this group). SLS is no doubt a better place to study IP law; second Harvard is more conservative and Stanford is more liberal, some people might prefer liberal to conservative and these people are often more active in expressing their dissatisfaction; third Harvard has the traditional of being very honest with every applicant and this spirit is the essence of crimson. To the opposite, Stanford would like to show every applicant its best part and would not expose its weakness to the external world. This can be explained by the statement released by Stanford University over the Brock Turner case:

https://news.stanford.edu/2016/06/06/st ... rner-case/

If this were a statement from Harvard, Harvard would first apologize to the whole world and reflect on the deficiency in its internal system; it would even find out what could have been done better in this specific case.

From the large amount of HLS 1L in my class who chose HLS over SLS, only one regretted to a limited extent (he is a guy who would like to study venture capital law and technology law as I just mentioned above).

One thing you should definitely consider is the large alumni network of HLS, especially the federal judges and supreme court justices. Do not let the clerkship percentage fool you: SLS has a higher percentage, but much less headcount in federal clerkship. In addition, 19 supreme court justices (20 if Judge Garland can be confirmed after November) are 10 times SLS produced. Not to mention alumni from HLS who are working in other public sectors. As long as DC is still the center stage of politics, YLS and HLS will always be the two best law schools in the country.

This is a bad post overall, but the bolded makes me think you have literally never opened an email from Dean Minow.

[EliPedDH]

If you do well at HLS (top 20% or so), nothing (not SLS, not YLS) would beat HLS. You would have stronger, larger networks in the business and political spheres in addition to all the options in law available to top students at SLS and YLS (yes, top students can be distinguished at these places too). The problem is most people don't know how they will do before entering law school, making HLS a much riskier proposition compared to SLS and YLS. Most students who do well at HLS would never admit this, but attending HLS is a gamble.

[A. Nony Mouse]

To the opposite, Stanford would like to show every applicant its best part and would not expose its weakness to the external world. This can be explained by the statement released by Stanford University over the Brock Turner case:

https://news.stanford.edu/2016/06/06/st ... rner-case/

If this were a statement from Harvard, Harvard would first apologize to the whole world and reflect on the deficiency in its internal system; it would even find out what could have been done better in this specific case.

Oh, honey, no. Just no. This is one of the most naive things I've ever seen.

[ValeVale]

I chose HLS over SLS. Honestly it just comes down to two factors:

Do you want to spend 3 years in Cambridge or Palo Alto?
Do you want to go to a small school or a big one, and the pros and cons that come with the size.

I am happy with my choice. I sometimes think "what if", but I still wouldn't change anything because my answer to those two factors remain the same, in Harvard's favor.

[redleader6]

Stanford is a great school and SLS is definitely awesome. That said, HLS is a better law school and is the right place to study law, especially considering your long term career plan. I have spent one year at HLS and I love it so much. The reasons you get some negative feedback from some HLS alumni is tangible: first a few people prefer technology law over traditional law (one friend of mine falls into this group). SLS is no doubt a better place to study IP law; second Harvard is more conservative and Stanford is more liberal, some people might prefer liberal to conservative and these people are often more active in expressing their dissatisfaction; third Harvard has the traditional of being very honest with every applicant and this spirit is the essence of crimson. To the opposite, Stanford would like to show every applicant its best part and would not expose its weakness to the external world. This can be explained by the statement released by Stanford University over the Brock Turner case:

https://news.stanford.edu/2016/06/06/st ... rner-case/

If this were a statement from Harvard, Harvard would first apologize to the whole world and reflect on the deficiency in its internal system; it would even find out what could have been done better in this specific case.

From the large amount of HLS 1L in my class who chose HLS over SLS, only one regretted to a limited extent (he is a guy who would like to study venture capital law and technology law as I just mentioned above).

One thing you should definitely consider is the large alumni network of HLS, especially the federal judges and supreme court justices. Do not let the clerkship percentage fool you: SLS has a higher percentage, but much less headcount in federal clerkship. In addition, 19 supreme court justices (20 if Judge Garland can be confirmed after November) are 10 times SLS produced. Not to mention alumni from HLS who are working in other public sectors. As long as DC is still the center stage of politics, YLS and HLS will always be the two best law schools in the country.

This is exactly the type of attitude that makes me question whether I should attend HLS lol

[Single-Malt-Liquor]

To the opposite, Stanford would like to show every applicant its best part and would not expose its weakness to the external world. This can be explained by the statement released by Stanford University over the Brock Turner case:

https://news.stanford.edu/2016/06/06/st ... rner-case/

If this were a statement from Harvard, Harvard would first apologize to the whole world and reflect on the deficiency in its internal system; it would even find out what could have been done better in this specific case.

Oh, honey, no. Just no. This is one of the most naive things I've ever seen.

I picked HLS over SLS but I have to agree with this 100%. And I also <3 Minow.

Perhaps we're being whooshed.

[gamerish]

Stanford is a great school and SLS is definitely awesome. That said, HLS is a better law school and is the right place to study law, especially considering your long term career plan. I have spent one year at HLS and I love it so much. The reasons you get some negative feedback from some HLS alumni is tangible: first a few people prefer technology law over traditional law (one friend of mine falls into this group). SLS is no doubt a better place to study IP law; second Harvard is more conservative and Stanford is more liberal, some people might prefer liberal to conservative and these people are often more active in expressing their dissatisfaction; third Harvard has the traditional of being very honest with every applicant and this spirit is the essence of crimson. To the opposite, Stanford would like to show every applicant its best part and would not expose its weakness to the external world. This can be explained by the statement released by Stanford University over the Brock Turner case:

https://news.stanford.edu/2016/06/06/st ... rner-case/

If this were a statement from Harvard, Harvard would first apologize to the whole world and reflect on the deficiency in its internal system; it would even find out what could have been done better in this specific case.

From the large amount of HLS 1L in my class who chose HLS over SLS, only one regretted to a limited extent (he is a guy who would like to study venture capital law and technology law as I just mentioned above).

One thing you should definitely consider is the large alumni network of HLS, especially the federal judges and supreme court justices. Do not let the clerkship percentage fool you: SLS has a higher percentage, but much less headcount in federal clerkship. In addition, 19 supreme court justices (20 if Judge Garland can be confirmed after November) are 10 times SLS produced. Not to mention alumni from HLS who are working in other public sectors. As long as DC is still the center stage of politics, YLS and HLS will always be the two best law schools in the country.

Don't forget that Harvard was the setting for Legally Blonde.

Way to blow that one, STTTanford.

[redleader6]

I guess it's fair to ask the opposite question too - if anyone who went to SLS over HLS regretted it?

[Barack O'Drama]

If you do well at HLS (top 20% or so), nothing (not SLS, not YLS) would beat HLS. You would have stronger, larger networks in the business and political spheres in addition to all the options in law available to top students at SLS and YLS (yes, top students can be distinguished at these places too). The problem is most people don't know how they will do before entering law school, making HLS a much riskier proposition compared to SLS and YLS. Most students who do well at HLS would never admit this, but attending HLS is a gamble.

Why is it such a gamble? I mean I'm assuming even if you do mediocre or bottom of your class you can still get meaningful law related employment?

I could be wrong, but that is my thinking.

[EliPedDH]

If you do well at HLS (top 20% or so), nothing (not SLS, not YLS) would beat HLS. You would have stronger, larger networks in the business and political spheres in addition to all the options in law available to top students at SLS and YLS (yes, top students can be distinguished at these places too). The problem is most people don't know how they will do before entering law school, making HLS a much riskier proposition compared to SLS and YLS. Most students who do well at HLS would never admit this, but attending HLS is a gamble.

Why is it such a gamble? I mean I'm assuming even if you do mediocre or bottom of your class you can still get meaningful law related employment?

I could be wrong, but that is my thinking.

People strike out at OCI more than is admitted on TLS. Offers from top firms (W&C, WLRK, S&C, Cravath, Ropes, etc.) go to the same group of 80-100 people.

[Single-Malt-Liquor]

If you do well at HLS (top 20% or so), nothing (not SLS, not YLS) would beat HLS. You would have stronger, larger networks in the business and political spheres in addition to all the options in law available to top students at SLS and YLS (yes, top students can be distinguished at these places too). The problem is most people don't know how they will do before entering law school, making HLS a much riskier proposition compared to SLS and YLS. Most students who do well at HLS would never admit this, but attending HLS is a gamble.

Why is it such a gamble? I mean I'm assuming even if you do mediocre or bottom of your class you can still get meaningful law related employment?

I could be wrong, but that is my thinking.

People strike out at OCI more than is admitted on TLS. Offers from top firms (W&C, WLRK, S&C, Cravath, Ropes, etc.) go to the same group of 80-100 people.

If you strike out at HLS then I'm sorry, there's no school that's going to make a meaningful difference.

[rpupkin]

If you do well at HLS (top 20% or so), nothing (not SLS, not YLS) would beat HLS.

This is ridiculous. Someone who is top 20% at YLS still has a shot at clerking on SCOTUS. Someone who is top 20% at HLS is basically in the same position as someone who is in the top 20% at the rest of the T6—big law secure and competitive for non-feeder clerkships.

[EliPedDH]

If you do well at HLS (top 20% or so), nothing (not SLS, not YLS) would beat HLS.

This is ridiculous. Someone who is top 20% at YLS still has a shot at clerking on SCOTUS. Someone who is top 20% at HLS is basically in the same position as someone who is in the top 20% at the rest of the T6—big law secure and competitive for non-feeder clerkships.

This is not how clerkship hiring work. Chance of getting a SCOTUS clerkship is slim for 20% both HLS and YLS.

[EliPedDH]

If you do well at HLS (top 20% or so), nothing (not SLS, not YLS) would beat HLS. You would have stronger, larger networks in the business and political spheres in addition to all the options in law available to top students at SLS and YLS (yes, top students can be distinguished at these places too). The problem is most people don't know how they will do before entering law school, making HLS a much riskier proposition compared to SLS and YLS. Most students who do well at HLS would never admit this, but attending HLS is a gamble.

Why is it such a gamble? I mean I'm assuming even if you do mediocre or bottom of your class you can still get meaningful law related employment?

I could be wrong, but that is my thinking.

People strike out at OCI more than is admitted on TLS. Offers from top firms (W&C, WLRK, S&C, Cravath, Ropes, etc.) go to the same group of 80-100 people.

If you strike out at HLS then I'm sorry, there's no school that's going to make a meaningful difference.

If you get a LP (which many professors routinely give) at HLS, your chance of striking out increases. No matter what people or career services say, LP is a serious blemish on the transcript. No equivalent of LPs at SLS/YLS.

[rpupkin]

If you do well at HLS (top 20% or so), nothing (not SLS, not YLS) would beat HLS.

This is ridiculous. Someone who is top 20% at YLS still has a shot at clerking on SCOTUS. Someone who is top 20% at HLS is basically in the same position as someone who is in the top 20% at the rest of the T6—big law secure and competitive for non-feeder clerkships.

This is not how clerkship hiring work.

Enlighten me, EliPedDH. How does clerkship hiring "work"?

[EliPedDH]

If you do well at HLS (top 20% or so), nothing (not SLS, not YLS) would beat HLS.

This is ridiculous. Someone who is top 20% at YLS still has a shot at clerking on SCOTUS. Someone who is top 20% at HLS is basically in the same position as someone who is in the top 20% at the rest of the T6—big law secure and competitive for non-feeder clerkships.

This is not how clerkship hiring work.

Enlighten me, EliPedDH. How does clerkship hiring "work"?

Chance of getting a SCOTUS clerkship is slim for 20% both HLS and YLS. No meaningful difference. Depending on the applicant and judge at that level, not the difference between HLS and YLS. That's how clerkship hiring works.

[rpupkin]

Chance of getting a SCOTUS clerkship is slim for 20% both HLS and YLS. No meaningful difference. Depending on the applicant and judge at that level, not the difference between HLS and YLS. That's how clerkship hiring work.

No. It's quite easy to figure out where someone is in the class at HLS—it's easy to distinguish between top 10% and top 25%. It's basically impossible to do that at YLS, where you have only one semester of curved grades. Because of that, prof recommendations matter way more at YLS. As a percentage of the class, more students at YLS are competitive for feeder clerkships and SCOTUS. This is reflected in SCOTUS clerkship placement: YLS places roughly the same of number of clerks on SCOTUS as HLS despite being only a third of the size.

[EliPedDH]

Chance of getting a SCOTUS clerkship is slim for 20% both HLS and YLS. No meaningful difference. Depending on the applicant and judge at that level, not the difference between HLS and YLS. That's how clerkship hiring work.

No. It's quite easy to figure out where someone is in the class at HLS—it's easy to distinguish between top 10% and top 25%. It's basically impossible to do that at YLS, where you have only one semester of curved grades. Because of that, prof recommendations matter way more at YLS. As a percentage of the class, more students at YLS are competitive for feeder clerkships and SCOTUS. This is reflected in SCOTUS clerkship placement: YLS places roughly the same of number of clerks on SCOTUS as HLS despite being only a third of the size.

It's not hard to figure out whether someone tops the class at YLS, even if it's less dependent on grades. Respected, well-connected professors don't write glowing letters for everyone. People enter YLS with different education pedigrees and work experiences. Feeder judges are smart. They know how to compare. Look, if getting 1% chance of getting hired as SCOTUS clerk as a top 20% student at HLS vs. 2% chance at YLS is the type of "calculated risk" that you think people should take or the type of probability assessment that makes you proud of attending YLS, then good for you. For all we know, these probabilities could be reversed. I reiterate what I wrote before, as a top student at HLS, you will not be disadvantaged compared to top students at YLS or SLS.

[rpupkin]

Look, if getting 1% chance of getting hired as SCOTUS clerk as a top 20% student at HLS vs. 2% chance at YLS is the type of "calculated risk" that you think people should take or the type of probability assessment that makes you proud of attending YLS, then good for you. For all we know, these probabilities could be reversed. I reiterate what I wrote before, as a top student at HLS, you will not be disadvantaged compared to top students at YLS or SLS.

Again, this is all wrong. How do you explain YLS's superior clerkship placement on SCOTUS? On a per capita basis, YLS places three times as many clerks on SCOTUS as HLS. Is this a statistical anomaly that just happens to recur year after year?

[jbagelboy]

Stanford is a great school and SLS is definitely awesome. That said, HLS is a better law school and is the right place to study law, especially considering your long term career plan. I have spent one year at HLS and I love it so much. The reasons you get some negative feedback from some HLS alumni is tangible: first a few people prefer technology law over traditional law (one friend of mine falls into this group). SLS is no doubt a better place to study IP law; second Harvard is more conservative and Stanford is more liberal, some people might prefer liberal to conservative and these people are often more active in expressing their dissatisfaction; third Harvard has the traditional of being very honest with every applicant and this spirit is the essence of crimson. To the opposite, Stanford would like to show every applicant its best part and would not expose its weakness to the external world. This can be explained by the statement released by Stanford University over the Brock Turner case:

https://news.stanford.edu/2016/06/06/st ... rner-case/

If this were a statement from Harvard, Harvard would first apologize to the whole world and reflect on the deficiency in its internal system; it would even find out what could have been done better in this specific case.

From the large amount of HLS 1L in my class who chose HLS over SLS, only one regretted to a limited extent (he is a guy who would like to study venture capital law and technology law as I just mentioned above).

One thing you should definitely consider is the large alumni network of HLS, especially the federal judges and supreme court justices. Do not let the clerkship percentage fool you: SLS has a higher percentage, but much less headcount in federal clerkship. In addition, 19 supreme court justices (20 if Judge Garland can be confirmed after November) are 10 times SLS produced. Not to mention alumni from HLS who are working in other public sectors. As long as DC is still the center stage of politics, YLS and HLS will always be the two best law schools in the country.

This is exactly the type of attitude that makes me question whether I should attend HLS lol

Its a stunningly bad post, enough to lead me to question whether the person actually attends HLS. None of the statements indicate the poster has actually spent any time in Cambridge or at the school.

[jbagelboy]

If you do well at HLS (top 20% or so), nothing (not SLS, not YLS) would beat HLS.

This is ridiculous. Someone who is top 20% at YLS still has a shot at clerking on SCOTUS. Someone who is top 20% at HLS is basically in the same position as someone who is in the top 20% at the rest of the T6—big law secure and competitive for non-feeder clerkships.

This is not how clerkship hiring work.

Enlighten me, EliPedDH. How does clerkship hiring "work"?

Chance of getting a SCOTUS clerkship is slim for 20% both HLS and YLS. No meaningful difference. Depending on the applicant and judge at that level, not the difference between HLS and YLS. That's how clerkship hiring works.

Lol, no. Have you clerked for SCOTUS or a feeder COA judge? There's a material difference here.