DAVIS v ASU Forum

[GrapeSurgeon]

Hello all, I'm more regularly on reddit, but I figured it can't hurt to ask a different crowd. Please no T14 or bust comments. I'm going to law school in August and these are my options.

Goal: I have no clue. Hopefully civil rights, ideally appellate. Most likely gonna do criminal law though, just out of practicality.

Stats: 164/3.60

I got $135k from Davis (idfk how) and about half tuition from ASU. I got so much more money from Davis, but cost of attendance difference is about $14500 per year.

I visited ASU and I really really like the people I met. I'm visiting Davis next week.

If you're THAT guy who doesn't like binary choices, my other options are BC ($60k), GMU ($108k), Maryland ($120k), W&L ($120k), Dickinson (full).

I'd appreciate any input.

[objctnyrhnr]

Hello all, I'm more regularly on reddit, but I figured it can't hurt to ask a different crowd. Please no T14 or bust comments. I'm going to law school in August and these are my options.

Goal: I have no clue. Hopefully civil rights, ideally appellate. Most likely gonna do criminal law though, just out of practicality.

Stats: 164/3.60

I got $135k from Davis (idfk how) and about half tuition from ASU. I got so much more money from Davis, but cost of attendance difference is about $14500 per year.

I visited ASU and I really really like the people I met. I'm visiting Davis next week.

If you're THAT guy who doesn't like binary choices, my other options are BC ($60k), GMU ($108k), Maryland ($120k), W&L ($120k), Dickinson (full).

I'd appreciate any input.

None of these options are ideal.

That said, instead of giving you the retake you idiot speech, I’m going to start by making two inferences that might or might not be correct from your post:

1. You’re spending a lot of time with those idiotic usnwr rankings.

2. You don’t care where you live.

With those things in mind, I am going to tell you that BC at 60k is absolutely TCR of these options (assuming you’re okay with making your life in boston).

And this isn’t a situation where “dickenson for free because they all suck and all you’re wasting is your time” is TCR because I wholeheartedly believe that BC at 60k isn’t a completely horrific option.

BC is in a different class than these other spots (though still probably doesn’t crack 40% biglaw/fedclerk in the best of years). Go look at a legitimate ranking (LST or ATL for example...or are those the same?) and you’ll realize this.

[GrapeSurgeon]

None of these options are ideal.

That said, instead of giving you the retake you idiot speech, I’m going to start by making two inferences that might or might not be correct from your post:

1. You’re spending a lot of time with those idiotic usnwr rankings.

2. You don’t care where you live.

With those things in mind, I am going to tell you that BC at 60k is absolutely TCR of these options (assuming you’re okay with making your life in boston).

And this isn’t a situation where “dickenson for free because they all suck and all you’re wasting is your time” is TCR because I wholeheartedly believe that BC at 60k isn’t a completely horrific option.

BC is in a different class than these other spots (though still probably doesn’t crack 40% biglaw/fedclerk in the best of years). Go look at a legitimate ranking (LST or ATL for example...or are those the same?) and you’ll realize this.

I'm not sure I'm convinced... I never even considered BC as a real choice just cause of the COA. If you have the time, could you tell me more? Attending BC would require me to borrow $170k, as opposed to $122k from ASU and $79k from Davis.

[beinghuman]

https://www.lstreports.com/schools/
Check this website out.
See how your schools perform in terms of employment outcomes, you'll get an idea of what you might able to achieve coming out of those.
You need to do some research because you don't seem to know enough about legal employment.

[Sls17]

OP do you know where you want to live long-term?

[objctnyrhnr]

None of these options are ideal.

That said, instead of giving you the retake you idiot speech, I’m going to start by making two inferences that might or might not be correct from your post:

1. You’re spending a lot of time with those idiotic usnwr rankings.

2. You don’t care where you live.

With those things in mind, I am going to tell you that BC at 60k is absolutely TCR of these options (assuming you’re okay with making your life in boston).

And this isn’t a situation where “dickenson for free because they all suck and all you’re wasting is your time” is TCR because I wholeheartedly believe that BC at 60k isn’t a completely horrific option.

BC is in a different class than these other spots (though still probably doesn’t crack 40% biglaw/fedclerk in the best of years). Go look at a legitimate ranking (LST or ATL for example...or are those the same?) and you’ll realize this.

I'm not sure I'm convinced... I never even considered BC as a real choice just cause of the COA. If you have the time, could you tell me more? Attending BC would require me to borrow $170k, as opposed to $122k from ASU and $79k from Davis.

Usnwr rankings are a joke because they don’t adequately weigh employment outcomes. Google above the law rankings. I believe BC was something like 15 last year and is something like 19 this year. If you take any of these options, you’re taking a risk...but it seems like maybe you appreciate that or maybe you don’t care.

Either way I promise you that your best bet is BC at 60k of these options and assuming you’re too stubborn to retake. Frankly (and I don’t say this often with school choice), I don’t even think this is a question about which reasonable minds can differ.

Op I think you’re dead wrong to narrow it down to those two crap holes to the exclusion of BC because of several thousand k in living expenses. Relative to the risk you’ll be taking with any of these options, that is not a high enough number to qualify as a significant consideration.

[AdieuCali]

I'm not sure I'm convinced... I never even considered BC as a real choice just cause of the COA. If you have the time, could you tell me more? Attending BC would require me to borrow $170k, as opposed to $122k from ASU and $79k from Davis.

Either way I promise you that your best bet is BC at 60k of these options and assuming you’re too stubborn to retake. Frankly (and I don’t say this often with school choice), I don’t even think this is a question about which reasonable minds can differ.

Op I think you’re dead wrong to narrow it down to those two crap holes to the exclusion of BC because of several thousand k in living expenses. Relative to the risk you’ll be taking with any of these options, that is not a high enough number to qualify as a significant consideration.

BC would be the obvious choice for biglaw, but OP’s goals are vague PI. Federal appellate and top-tier civil rights work aren’t available from any of these schools, but OP also mentioned criminal law. If s/he would be happy as a public defender in Sacramento or inland NorCal, Davis at that price is defensible.

[Golradaer]

Davis is actually the clear choice here.

I agree that BC would be the only option if OP were aiming for big law, but Davis for cheap is a good outcome if you're fine with a local government job (DA/PD) in NorCal. If you find yourself in the top 10-20% after 1L, more options will open up for you, but just don't count on that going in.

ASU is an inferior option to Davis even if the money were equal, because of its poor placement into big law/clerkships/elite public interest. You should only choose it if you would prefer to live in Phoenix over living in NorCal. Because the money is decidedly not equal, Davis is better.

Another reason not to attend BC at that level of debt: it would suck to get into big law and realize that you hate it, but be forced to stick around to pay off your loans. Don't get yourself into that situation unless you're dead-set on the big law path.

[GrapeSurgeon]

None of these options are ideal.

That said, instead of giving you the retake you idiot speech, I’m going to start by making two inferences that might or might not be correct from your post:

1. You’re spending a lot of time with those idiotic usnwr rankings.

2. You don’t care where you live.

With those things in mind, I am going to tell you that BC at 60k is absolutely TCR of these options (assuming you’re okay with making your life in boston).

And this isn’t a situation where “dickenson for free because they all suck and all you’re wasting is your time” is TCR because I wholeheartedly believe that BC at 60k isn’t a completely horrific option.

BC is in a different class than these other spots (though still probably doesn’t crack 40% biglaw/fedclerk in the best of years). Go look at a legitimate ranking (LST or ATL for example...or are those the same?) and you’ll realize this.

I'm not sure I'm convinced... I never even considered BC as a real choice just cause of the COA. If you have the time, could you tell me more? Attending BC would require me to borrow $170k, as opposed to $122k from ASU and $79k from Davis.

Usnwr rankings are a joke because they don’t adequately weigh employment outcomes. Google above the law rankings. I believe BC was something like 15 last year and is something like 19 this year. If you take any of these options, you’re taking a risk...but it seems like maybe you appreciate that or maybe you don’t care.

Either way I promise you that your best bet is BC at 60k of these options and assuming you’re too stubborn to retake. Frankly (and I don’t say this often with school choice), I don’t even think this is a question about which reasonable minds can differ.

Op I think you’re dead wrong to narrow it down to those two crap holes to the exclusion of BC because of several thousand k in living expenses. Relative to the risk you’ll be taking with any of these options, that is not a high enough number to qualify as a significant consideration.

If I am to look at ATL rankings (which I had), wouldn't Washington & Lee be the best option? Since I at least have $120k from them, as opposed to BC's $60k

[cavalier1138]

Either way I promise you that your best bet is BC at 60k of these options and assuming you’re too stubborn to retake. Frankly (and I don’t say this often with school choice), I don’t even think this is a question about which reasonable minds can differ.

Wait, is OP's COA at BC $60k, or was that the total scholarship offer? Because I read the post as saying the latter, and BC is not worth taking on $200k of debt.

[AdieuCali]

If I am to look at ATL rankings (which I had), wouldn't Washington & Lee be the best option? Since I at least have $120k from them, as opposed to BC's $60k

W&L at $90k COA is a good outcome if you're comfortable living in Virginia (potentially rural SW Virginia) long-term. It does send a small percentage of its classes to DC and NY, but that may end if the economy slows down.

OP, you're choosing between great (BC) and good (UCD, ASU, W&L) regional schools as well as some decent local schools (GMU, UMD). [ignore Dickinson]. All of these schools offer similar employment outcomes and all are going to keep you in your respective regions for at least 5 years after graduation and probably long-term. So rankings may be useful insofar as you're making apples-to-apples comparisons (e.g. W&L v. W&M, UMD v. GMU). But W&L v. UCD v. ASU v. BC are all apples-to-oranges comparison. Your life will be quite different depending whether you live in Boston, SAC, PHX, or Va.

So I think the most important question at this point, and one you haven't answered, is where do you want to live for the next decade? If Va -> W&L; if non-Bay NorCal -> Davis; if PHX -> ASU (but you should negotiate a larger scholarship).

PS 3-4 extra points on your LSAT would give you a shot at the T14 and a good chance at $$$ at Vandy, UCLA, and USC. https://mylsn.info/hn5ylk/.

[objctnyrhnr]

OP obviously doesn’t really know what s/he wants to do, other than lit type work it sounds like. He should go to a school that gives him best chance of biglaw or alternatively of regional midlaw with the potential to lateral up to biglaw if he plays his cards right.

OP biglaw will allow you to pay down debt and exit into some sort of niche PI if you still want that.

All word in the industry is that boston market is booming, and seems to be trending upwards with the appearance of new offices of large and mid shops frequently. The other day through a friend I learned of a sub median Bc grad who struck out at oci then graduated and worked for a solo for 6 months then started aiming for junior lit biglaw positions in boston. She got 3 first interviews from biglaw firms within a couple months.

Perhaps it was that anecdote that drive the Bc thing for me, but that would be my advice.

But of course TCR is retake and improve your options.

[jsnow212]

The array of schools you have applied to indicates a "I'm just going to apply to all the schools I recognize in my stat range and hope for the best..." approach. This is akin to how many people apply to UGs, but doesn't work or make sense for law school unless you are blanketing the T14. None of your choices are worth it at the given COAs in a vacuum, let alone the added risk of not having a clear job/location goal.

If you came here saying you 100% want to do PD work near Sacramento, I wouldn't be against USD. However, it seems like you have no realistic goal except the most immediate one (if one could call it a goal): going to law school.

Davis is actually the clear choice here.

Another reason not to attend BC at that level of debt: it would suck to get into big law and realize that you hate it, but be forced to stick around to pay off your loans. Don't get yourself into that situation unless you're dead-set on the big law path.

This would be good wisdom in a regular case, but the same reasoning can be applied if OP ends up in a PD office and can't handle constantly defending criminals accused of heinous crimes. OP doesn't know whether they want private lit work or PD work here, either can end up being soul-sucking. However, it's much easier to do a couple years in BL (assuming you can land a job) and then transition to a decent-paying, less stressful employment than it is to unhappily defend criminals for a paycheck (since PD is a pigeon hole).

Additionally, it is easier to pay back 180k debt with a 200k BL salary + 30k 2L SA than it is to pay back 80k debt with a 50k PD salary.

----
OP, is there any reason why retake is not an option here?

[GrapeSurgeon]

The array of schools you have applied to indicates a "I'm just going to apply to all the schools I recognize in my stat range and hope for the best..." approach. This is akin to how many people apply to UGs, but doesn't work or make sense for law school unless you are blanketing the T14. None of your choices are worth it at the given COAs in a vacuum, let alone the added risk of not having a clear job/location goal.

If you came here saying you 100% want to do PD work near Sacramento, I wouldn't be against USD. However, it seems like you have no realistic goal except the most immediate one (if one could call it a goal): going to law school.

Davis is actually the clear choice here.

Another reason not to attend BC at that level of debt: it would suck to get into big law and realize that you hate it, but be forced to stick around to pay off your loans. Don't get yourself into that situation unless you're dead-set on the big law path.

This would be good wisdom in a regular case, but the same reasoning can be applied if OP ends up in a PD office and can't handle constantly defending criminals accused of heinous crimes. OP doesn't know whether they want private lit work or PD work here, either can end up being soul-sucking. However, it's much easier to do a couple years in BL (assuming you can land a job) and then transition to a decent-paying, less stressful employment than it is to unhappily defend criminals for a paycheck (since PD is a pigeon hole).

Additionally, it is easier to pay back 180k debt with a 200k BL salary + 30k 2L SA than it is to pay back 80k debt with a 50k PD salary.

----
OP, is there any reason why retake is not an option here?

I hate to snap out at you specifically, well at anyone really, since I appreciate all the time everyone's taking out of their day to give me advice, but you're assuming a bit too much. I applied to 19 schools. NINETEEN schools. I've been rejected to Penn, Berkeley, UCLA, and USC. I'm waitlisted at UVA, WUSTL, BU, and W&M. I worked extremely hard on my written materials and I slaved under professors just to make sure I get strong letters of rec.

Anyway, I'm just a naturally no-preference guy. I know what I DON'T want to do; tax, mergers, bankruptcy, start ups, but beyond the things I hate I'm honestly seriously going to be happy wherever I land. Public defender sounds great. I'm going into law, I know what I'm signing up for. I developed an unhealthy amount of idolatry for the Constitution, and that helps me not care about defending criminals accused of heinous crimes. I mean that's literally all they are; accused. As far as I am concerned they are innocent until proven guilty. Even beyond that, I think prisons should solely focus on rehabilitation, not retribution. I think luck plays a lot on what kind of people we become, and you can't blame someone for luck (at least I wouldn't). Enough of my soap box. I'm only telling you this because I think you shouldn't assume that everyone wants the same thing. I really could care less about big law. Sure money is GREAT but not having money is absolutely fine with me too. I've been through much much worse situations in my past than being broke and in debt, and I did fine. I find it hard to believe that the hundreds of law grads every year are confined to big law or a life of misery.

To your question, retake isn't an option because I've had enough of the LSAT. I'm morally against the exam. I knoe that's very petty to say but I really think the LSAT is full of shit. Also, I've taken it numerous times already. I have 3 scores on record (156, 157, 164) and a cancelled score. I'm not down to spend another 3 to 4 months of laboring through prep work just for a test. LSAT prep is very very costly. I can't work as much, and I have to spend a lot. It's not an option for me.

[beinghuman]

The problem is that you have no idea what you will like and what you will not like.
People are trying to warn you that coming out of the schools you are considering, you will not have options unless you perform exceptionally well.
Your love of the Constitution will not make happy at a job you might despise.
Unless you have a specific realistic plan coming out of any of these schools, you should take a couple years to explore other career options and return to the law if you still think you want it. There's a non negligible chance you might regret your choice in a few years.

[QContinuum]

I worked extremely hard on my written materials and I slaved under professors just to make sure I get strong letters of rec.

No one is disputing this. The issue is that for law school admissions, your written materials and LORs are of relatively minimal value. Law school admissions turns almost entirely on applicants' LSAC GPA and (highest) LSAT score. This may not be fair; it may not be logical; but it's how it works. So when TLS talks about trying to get a higher LSAT score, we aren't implying anything bad about the quality of your Personal Statement or the strength of your rec letters. We're merely being realistic about what matters to law school admissions officers.

Anyway, I'm just a naturally no-preference guy. I know what I DON'T want to do; tax, mergers, bankruptcy, start ups, but beyond the things I hate I'm honestly seriously going to be happy wherever I land.

The schools you mentioned ITT place their graduates almost exclusively in their local market, and life in Boston vs. northern CA vs. Phoenix vs. D.C. is very different. Very few people are truly agnostic about which of these cities they'd prefer to live & work in for the next several decades.

Public defender sounds great. I'm going into law, I know what I'm signing up for. I developed an unhealthy amount of idolatry for the Constitution, and that helps me not care about defending criminals accused of heinous crimes. I mean that's literally all they are; accused. As far as I am concerned they are innocent until proven guilty.

What if your client straight-up tells you they're guilty? That they're in a gang, that they've mugged people, committed domestic violence, trafficked drugs? And now they want you to get them off so they can return to the streets to commit more crimes? Teach their SO a "lesson"? Revenge themselves upon the "snitch" that got them arrested? Would you still feel good about defending them in court even though you know they're guilty, and even though they plan to commit more crimes if/when they walk free?

The "system" is far from perfect, and far from fair; but the majority of your clients as a public defender are going to be actual criminals. Don't go into this with any illusions about the majority - or even plurality - of criminal defendants being innocent, law-abiding citizens.

Enough of my soap box. I'm only telling you this because I think you shouldn't assume that everyone wants the same thing. I really could care less about big law. Sure money is GREAT but not having money is absolutely fine with me too. I've been through much much worse situations in my past than being broke and in debt, and I did fine. I find it hard to believe that the hundreds of law grads every year are confined to big law or a life of misery.

No one is saying that law grads face a binary choice of "big law or a life of misery." No one is saying you ought to want BigLaw.

I'm morally against the exam. I knoe that's very petty to say but I really think the LSAT is full of shit. Also, I've taken it numerous times already. I have 3 scores on record (156, 157, 164) and a cancelled score. I'm not down to spend another 3 to 4 months of laboring through prep work just for a test. LSAT prep is very very costly. I can't work as much, and I have to spend a lot. It's not an option for me.

You know what else is commonly said to be "full of shit," stops you from working, and forces you to spend orders of magnitude more money than the LSAT? That's right: Law school. If you're "morally against" the LSAT, you're soon going to find that you're also "morally against" law school.

[cavalier1138]

I'm going into law, I know what I'm signing up for. I developed an unhealthy amount of idolatry for the Constitution, and that helps me not care about defending criminals accused of heinous crimes. I mean that's literally all they are; accused. As far as I am concerned they are innocent until proven guilty.

I know I'm piling on, but you are in for an extremely rude awakening if this is your concept of criminal defense. If you're not prepared to grapple with defending clients who are--the vast majority of the time--guilty as charged, you're going to burn out within a year of PD work.

To your question, retake isn't an option because I've had enough of the LSAT. I'm morally against the exam. I knoe that's very petty to say but I really think the LSAT is full of shit. Also, I've taken it numerous times already. I have 3 scores on record (156, 157, 164) and a cancelled score. I'm not down to spend another 3 to 4 months of laboring through prep work just for a test. LSAT prep is very very costly. I can't work as much, and I have to spend a lot. It's not an option for me.

How much does LSAT prep cost? Is it more than $200k?

And as was already highlighted, many law students find that they are deeply opposed to law school in a number of ways (pedagogy, subjects, lack of focus on practice, etc.). Based on your "moral" opposition to a logic test, I predict you're going to be "morally" opposed to having to learn property law when all you really want is to defend all the innocent lambs accused of committing crimes.

I've been through much much worse situations in my past than being broke and in debt, and I did fine. I find it hard to believe that the hundreds of law grads every year are confined to big law or a life of misery.

How much debt will you have after graduation? And how much do you expect to earn? Once you get over six figures of debt, it becomes very, very difficult to pay off without relying on PSLF or LRAP. The schools you're looking at likely don't offer the latter (especially not one that's distinct from PSLF), and the former only works if you're able to last 10 years in PI work, which is much harder than most 0Ls think when they begin school.

[jsnow212]

OP, just want to point out that no one here takes pride in smashing dreams or brushing off your stated motives/goals/beliefs.

There's just a lot of contradiction here that you may not have been aware of that others are pointing out. Being agnostic about location, viewing the LSAT as dumb when law school is dumber, being open to different jobs and not "minding" PD work, etc. are things practicing lawyers, current students and graduates have seen work out horribly for the prospective candidate.

It is your choice to do as you wish with the harsh, but truthful and well-meaning opinions provided. Good luck!

[nixy]

I think people here have read way too much into your comments about the constitution/criminal defense. And being a public defender is doable from any of these schools.

That said, appellate/civil rights (the first options you mentioned) are pretty different from public defender.

If you are absolutely dead set on going this year, it’s going to boil down to really looking closely at the LST employment numbers and balancing what opportunities you’re comfortable with vs. how much debt you’re willing to assume. While people are probably right that BC opens the most doors, in the end you are going to have to do that balancing/calculus for yourself, as all of your options have issues.

[Qtc]

Penn state full ride seems like the best choice. None of these schools will open doors for you.

[Wubbles]

At least you know what you have to do to score higher on the LSAT, law school exams are an absolute crapshoot where you submit a trash exam in property and pull down an A and turn in absolute gold in torts and get a B. Both are kind of dumb tests when looking at their direct application to being a lawyer, but at least one is easier to predictably know how to improve

[GrapeSurgeon]

Update to y'all:

Alright, I've decided to ignore just about every single advice I got from you guys. I'm pessimistic myself but I'm pretty sure I have a reasonable chance of getting out of this content. I appreciate all the thoughtful input, but the reasons you gave for deciding a certain are not reasons I care about. It seems like the stereotypes are true; unless you got a 179/3.98 tls is just gonna tell you to retake. I find it hard to think that every successful attorney out there came out of a T13. Thanks again for the time!

[QContinuum]

I'm pessimistic myself but I'm pretty sure I have a reasonable chance of getting out of this content.

Not sure what this means. What "content" are you trying to get out of? And how are you simultaneously "pessimistic" yet also "pretty sure [you] have a reasonable chance"?

but the reasons you gave for deciding a certain are not reasons I care about.

You don't care about the reality of a public defender's workload? The reality of law school? The reality of the schools you mention limiting their graduates to their respective local markets?

No one ITT is trying to tell you what you should want. Quite the opposite: We're taking what you want at face value, and telling you 1) whether what you want is even possible (e.g., the kind of public defender position you want simply doesn't exist), and 2) if it is possible, what you need to do to achieve it (e.g., appellate practice exists, but you need to attend a T13, preferably a T6, to have a realistic shot at it).

It seems like the stereotypes are true; unless you got a 179/3.98 tls is just gonna tell you to retake.

This is not remotely true. TLS has never advised any 0L that they need a near-perfect GPA plus a near-perfect LSAT score. I can't recall us ever telling a single 0L to "give up" on law school due to having a low GPA.

I find it hard to think that every successful attorney out there came out of a T13.

Again, not remotely true. TLS has frequently advised folks to attend T20/T1/T2 schools when their goals are realistic out of those schools and they're able to attend at a reasonable cost. TLS has never been BigLaw-or-bust. If it seems that way, it's only because the vast majority of the 0Ls here come in with goals that realistically require the T13 to achieve - appellate work, national PI, DoJ/AUSA/other competitive federal roles, an in-house F500 legal position, a six-figure starting salary. If we had more 0Ls coming in wanting to work in SmallLaw or join local/state government or enter the trenches as public defenders, we'd be doling out more "attend a local T1/T2 at a reasonable cost" advice in response.

[cavalier1138]

Alright, I've decided to ignore just about every single advice I got from you guys.

At least you're honest.