Top Law Schools

How are you guys doing,I am a first generation law student here in the USA. i am currently trying to make a decision on which law school to attend. As of now, my two choices are New York Law School and Loyola in Chicago. Loyola in Chicago has a better ranking than New York Law School but New York Law School is in Manhattan,while Loyola is in downtown Chicago.

Do firms only hire local attorneys? do they search in different regions? what is or was your experience? any experience trying to find jobs or internships in any of these cities?.

Is attending NYLS over Chicago have benefits of being in the city even though Loyola is ranked higher?

Any advice or info on this subject would be greatly appreciated.

Outside the T13, schools only have regional placement power.

So where do you want to work? What are your career goals? And what's your total cost of attendance at each school?

+1 to everything Cav said and asked. Need to know a lot more info before giving you good advice.

I will say in a vacuum, Loyola is at least pretty well respected and places decently in Chicago, whereas I don't think NYLS is that well regarded or places well in NYC. But we need to know the answers to what Cav asked

I don't know where exactly to start on this, but...

1) Unless you are 100% sure you want to be a lawyer, don't go to law school. American law school is extremely expensive; it costs more that it's worth, and it is an objectively bad investment unless it is required for the career you want, i.e. practicing law.
2) Assuming you have an open mind about what you want to do, there are a relatively small number of jobs worth going to law school for, and most of those jobs (biglaw, federal govt, clerkships) hire almost exclusively from the top-ranked national and nearby schools. Other sought-after jobs (prestigious public interest fellowships, academia, anything international) really only hire from the top 3 law schools: Yale, Stanford, and Harvard.
3) Outside the top few schools (top 3 for very prestigious jobs, top 15-20 for all others), employers in cities/regions basically only recruit from law schools in their cities/region. As for your options, New York Law School will *only* place in New York City and Loyola will *only* place in Chicago.
4) Both of the law schools you listed are in competitive markets with many law schools and many law students who want to work in those cities. Neither of those schools is a high-ranked school, and both struggle to place well even in the city where the school is located. Job prospects are hard from either school, but it will be nearly impossible for you to go to NYLS and then practice in Chicago, or go to Loyola and practice in NYC. The rank difference will not overcome regional preference and the fact that, despite being ranked higher, Loyola isn't highly ranked. It places fine in Chicago, but not elsewhere.
5) With all that said, you should either go to one of the best law schools in the country or one of the best schools in the city where you want to live and work; you should not go to law school if neither option is available. If you want to work in NYC, you should shoot for t13, maybe Fordham, and maaaaaybe Brooklyn or Cardozo if it's free. Other schools do not provide good employment outcomes in NYC, especially schools hundreds or thousands of miles away.

outerinoa wrote:How are you guys doing,I am a first generation law student here in the USA. i am currently trying to make a decision on which law school to attend. As of now, my two choices are New York Law School and Loyola in Chicago. Loyola in Chicago has a better ranking than New York Law School but New York Law School is in Manhattan,while Loyola is in downtown Chicago.

Do firms only hire local attorneys? do they search in different regions? what is or was your experience? any experience trying to find jobs or internships in any of these cities?.

Is attending NYLS over Chicago have benefits of being in the city even though Loyola is ranked higher?

Any advice or info on this subject would be greatly appreciated.

Do not attend NYLS. It's a joke. Most firms in New York won't even look at an application from someone who went to NYLS, it'll go straight into the trash. You'll actually fare better going to a school no one has heard of than to NYLS.

Realistically, in New York City, the only acceptable schools are Columbia, NYU, Fordham, Brooklyn and Cardozo - and those latter two should only be considered with a hefty scholarship. (Fordham at sticker is inadvisable). T14 schools are also well-regarded in NY.

I don't know much about Chicago, but I believe Loyola is at least somewhat respectable. Could be wrong.

decimalsanddollars wrote:I don't know where exactly to start on this, but...

1) Unless you are 100% sure you want to be a lawyer, don't go to law school. American law school is extremely expensive; it costs more that it's worth, and it is an objectively bad investment unless it is required for the career you want, i.e. practicing law.

I hear this "advice" sometimes on this website, and it's a bad take. It's mechanistic, overgeneralized, oversimplified, and unrealistic. Who the hell is 100% sure they want to be a lawyer even when they're *in* law school, let alone choosing one? Your age, interests, risk aversion, financial situation, family, and living situation all play big roles, so much so that it's wrong to thing there's a simple one-condition truth like "the cost is too much unless you're 100% sure" out there.

Having a JD opens non-legal opportunities; it also opens jobs after only a few years of legal practice; it also can be a good choice if you're smart, hardworking, but also not interested in any other field (again, *obviously* money plays a role here too). I understand law school can produce upset people who didn't end up living the lives they wanted to and so play the MMQB game, but the whole "it's objectively a bad investment" notion is outdated ATL-type cookie-cutter nonsense.

A JD doesn’t really open non-legal opportunities, and if you decide you hate being a lawyer, making a career change at that point is much harder because you have to convince employers that that you don’t actually want to be a lawyer after all. I agree people can’t know exactly for 100% certain that they want to be a lawyer, but there are tons of people who, instead of actually researching what they’d like to do and would be good at, decide on law school bc they’re aware it exists, it seems respectable, and they don’t know what else to do. They’re often very unhappy with what they find, and there are enough of them that I think “don’t go unless you’re 100% sure you want to be a lawyer” is a decent starting point (where “100% sure” is more like “do some actual research about what legal jobs exist and talk to actual lawyers about what their jobs are really like so you can make an *informed* decision”).
Maybe the OP here has done that, but they sound a little uninformed about jobs (which is fine; that’s why they’re asking), so it’s probably worth checking what their basis for wanting to be a lawyer is.

Tl;dr - a JD isn’t actually very versatile, it’s designed only to get you a job as a lawyer, and it’s perfectly fair to ask people if they’re sure they want to *be a lawyer* (rather than that they want to “go to law school” which often seems to be viewed as an experience to be valued in its own right, when it’s really a means to an end).

nixy wrote:A JD doesn’t really open non-legal opportunities, and if you decide you hate being a lawyer, making a career change at that point is much harder because you have to convince employers that that you don’t actually want to be a lawyer after all. I agree people can’t know exactly for 100% certain that they want to be a lawyer, but there are tons of people who, instead of actually researching what they’d like to do and would be good at, decide on law school bc they’re aware it exists, it seems respectable, and they don’t know what else to do. They’re often very unhappy with what they find, and there are enough of them that I think “don’t go unless you’re 100% sure you want to be a lawyer” is a decent starting point (where “100% sure” is more like “do some actual research about what legal jobs exist and talk to actual lawyers about what their jobs are really like so you can make an *informed* decision”).
Maybe the OP here has done that, but they sound a little uninformed about jobs (which is fine; that’s why they’re asking), so it’s probably worth checking what their basis for wanting to be a lawyer is.

Tl;dr - a JD isn’t actually very versatile, it’s designed only to get you a job as a lawyer, and it’s perfectly fair to ask people if they’re sure they want to *be a lawyer* (rather than that they want to “go to law school” which often seems to be viewed as an experience to be valued in its own right, when it’s really a means to an end).

I disagree, I think a JD is actually very versatile. Obviously it will depend on where it's from. But even a non-top law school JD can be leveraged if you are motivated, hardworking, and intelligent (traits which are not, unfortunately, by themselves sufficient these days). It opens doors, signals a serious credential to employers, and provides you with a valuable network.

It may be that your very *first* job out of law school can only be as a lawyer (and even that isn't necessarily true), but law school is not a short-term investment. And a 1-2 year gig at a firm is not a huge cost in the scheme of your life if you are just not someone with definite, pre-formed interests or passions about what to do in life.

Joachim2017 wrote:I disagree, I think a JD is actually very versatile. Obviously it will depend on where it's from. But even a non-top law school JD can be leveraged if you are motivated, hardworking, and intelligent (traits which are not, unfortunately, by themselves sufficient these days). It opens doors, signals a serious credential to employers, and provides you with a valuable network.

It may be that your very *first* job out of law school can only be as a lawyer (and even that isn't necessarily true), but law school is not a short-term investment. And a 1-2 year gig at a firm is not a huge cost in the scheme of your life if you are just not someone with definite, pre-formed interests or passions about what to do in life.

If you're motivated, hardworking, and intelligent, you can find things to do/make opportunities without a JD. It doesn't open doors, and it signals to employers that you wanted to be a lawyer (which is presumably not the job they're hiring for). It may provide a valuable network, depending on what you want to do and the extent to which lawyers can help you do that. Or, conversely, you could have spent 3 years getting other experience and developing more pertinent networks.

And I'm not saying that people can't transition out of law after working as a lawyer. Lots of people do. But a detour of three years/lots of money in law school then working as a lawyer for a couple of years seems like a big investment to do something you didn't need a JD to do.

(And to be clear: I'm not so concerned about someone who goes to the T14 and futzes at a big firm for a few years and then decides to do something else. I'm concerned about someone like the OP who may be spending a lot of money to go to a school where it's much more difficult actually to get a job at all.)

Joachim2017 wrote:

nixy wrote:A JD doesn’t really open non-legal opportunities, and if you decide you hate being a lawyer, making a career change at that point is much harder because you have to convince employers that that you don’t actually want to be a lawyer after all. I agree people can’t know exactly for 100% certain that they want to be a lawyer, but there are tons of people who, instead of actually researching what they’d like to do and would be good at, decide on law school bc they’re aware it exists, it seems respectable, and they don’t know what else to do. They’re often very unhappy with what they find, and there are enough of them that I think “don’t go unless you’re 100% sure you want to be a lawyer” is a decent starting point (where “100% sure” is more like “do some actual research about what legal jobs exist and talk to actual lawyers about what their jobs are really like so you can make an *informed* decision”).
Maybe the OP here has done that, but they sound a little uninformed about jobs (which is fine; that’s why they’re asking), so it’s probably worth checking what their basis for wanting to be a lawyer is.

Tl;dr - a JD isn’t actually very versatile, it’s designed only to get you a job as a lawyer, and it’s perfectly fair to ask people if they’re sure they want to *be a lawyer* (rather than that they want to “go to law school” which often seems to be viewed as an experience to be valued in its own right, when it’s really a means to an end).

I disagree, I think a JD is actually very versatile. Obviously it will depend on where it's from. But even a non-top law school JD can be leveraged if you are motivated, hardworking, and intelligent (traits which are not, unfortunately, by themselves sufficient these days). It opens doors, signals a serious credential to employers, and provides you with a valuable network.

It may be that your very *first* job out of law school can only be as a lawyer (and even that isn't necessarily true), but law school is not a short-term investment. And a 1-2 year gig at a firm is not a huge cost in the scheme of your life if you are just not someone with definite, pre-formed interests or passions about what to do in life.

I looked at your profile and pretty much all the advice you’ve ever given is bad. OP, all of this poster’s advice is bad.

Dcc617 wrote:

Joachim2017 wrote:

nixy wrote:A JD doesn’t really open non-legal opportunities, and if you decide you hate being a lawyer, making a career change at that point is much harder because you have to convince employers that that you don’t actually want to be a lawyer after all. I agree people can’t know exactly for 100% certain that they want to be a lawyer, but there are tons of people who, instead of actually researching what they’d like to do and would be good at, decide on law school bc they’re aware it exists, it seems respectable, and they don’t know what else to do. They’re often very unhappy with what they find, and there are enough of them that I think “don’t go unless you’re 100% sure you want to be a lawyer” is a decent starting point (where “100% sure” is more like “do some actual research about what legal jobs exist and talk to actual lawyers about what their jobs are really like so you can make an *informed* decision”).
Maybe the OP here has done that, but they sound a little uninformed about jobs (which is fine; that’s why they’re asking), so it’s probably worth checking what their basis for wanting to be a lawyer is.

Tl;dr - a JD isn’t actually very versatile, it’s designed only to get you a job as a lawyer, and it’s perfectly fair to ask people if they’re sure they want to *be a lawyer* (rather than that they want to “go to law school” which often seems to be viewed as an experience to be valued in its own right, when it’s really a means to an end).

I disagree, I think a JD is actually very versatile. Obviously it will depend on where it's from. But even a non-top law school JD can be leveraged if you are motivated, hardworking, and intelligent (traits which are not, unfortunately, by themselves sufficient these days). It opens doors, signals a serious credential to employers, and provides you with a valuable network.

It may be that your very *first* job out of law school can only be as a lawyer (and even that isn't necessarily true), but law school is not a short-term investment. And a 1-2 year gig at a firm is not a huge cost in the scheme of your life if you are just not someone with definite, pre-formed interests or passions about what to do in life.

I looked at your profile and pretty much all the advice you’ve ever given is bad. OP, all of this poster’s advice is bad.

I'd look at your posts, but ... there's like 2500 of them? My advice to others here is informed by my experience talking to and working with actual lawyers and other business professionals in the real world, because, you know, I actually do that. Try it sometime.

Joachim2017 wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:

Joachim2017 wrote:I disagree, I think a JD is actually very versatile. Obviously it will depend on where it's from. But even a non-top law school JD can be leveraged if you are motivated, hardworking, and intelligent (traits which are not, unfortunately, by themselves sufficient these days). It opens doors, signals a serious credential to employers, and provides you with a valuable network.

Alexa, what is "underemployment?"

Aren't you the guy who other people here mentioned in the Moderation Q&A thread is "mostly combative" and "very condescending"? Over the course of literally thousands of posts? To which you said no, you're only "blunt"? Not sure how you became a moderator, but you've consistently shown that you're an asshole who's not worth taking or responding to seriously. I'll leave it at that.

Being blunt, or even combative and condescending if you prefer, doesn’t make him wrong, and criticizing his tone doesn’t dispute his argument.

There are obviously lots of people out there who’ve gone from getting a JD to doing other things. That doesn’t mean that getting a JD was the best or most efficient way to get to those other things. Talking to people who’ve successfully moved into other roles is also subject to confirmation bias - you aren’t talking with the people who’ve struggled.

nixy wrote:

Joachim2017 wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:

Joachim2017 wrote:I disagree, I think a JD is actually very versatile. Obviously it will depend on where it's from. But even a non-top law school JD can be leveraged if you are motivated, hardworking, and intelligent (traits which are not, unfortunately, by themselves sufficient these days). It opens doors, signals a serious credential to employers, and provides you with a valuable network.

Alexa, what is "underemployment?"

Aren't you the guy who other people here mentioned in the Moderation Q&A thread is "mostly combative" and "very condescending"? Over the course of literally thousands of posts? To which you said no, you're only "blunt"? Not sure how you became a moderator, but you've consistently shown that you're an asshole who's not worth taking or responding to seriously. I'll leave it at that.

There are obviously lots of people out there who’ve gone from getting a JD to doing other things. That doesn’t mean that getting a JD was the best or most efficient way to get to those other things. Talking to people who’ve successfully moved into other roles is also subject to confirmation bias - you aren’t talking with the people who’ve struggled.

Thanks for taking the time to actually engage with my point. In response: what I said was that a JD can be effectively leveraged for non-lawyer jobs (especially when you don't have many other passions/interests), not that it's always the best or most efficient way to get them. Lots of white-collar positions are made more accessible with (or even through) going to law school. Go to LinkedIn and look at the biographies of non-legal business persons working at large corporations, in politics, in sports, in publishing, in media, etc. There's definitely a lot of value in having an engineering/coding/cs background for some parts of the labor force (in tech/new media, for example), but that doesn't discount the instrumental value of the JD in the long run. Also, the confirmation bias cuts in every direction, so that's a wash.

Joachim2017 wrote:

Dcc617 wrote:

Joachim2017 wrote:

nixy wrote:A JD doesn’t really open non-legal opportunities, and if you decide you hate being a lawyer, making a career change at that point is much harder because you have to convince employers that that you don’t actually want to be a lawyer after all. I agree people can’t know exactly for 100% certain that they want to be a lawyer, but there are tons of people who, instead of actually researching what they’d like to do and would be good at, decide on law school bc they’re aware it exists, it seems respectable, and they don’t know what else to do. They’re often very unhappy with what they find, and there are enough of them that I think “don’t go unless you’re 100% sure you want to be a lawyer” is a decent starting point (where “100% sure” is more like “do some actual research about what legal jobs exist and talk to actual lawyers about what their jobs are really like so you can make an *informed* decision”).
Maybe the OP here has done that, but they sound a little uninformed about jobs (which is fine; that’s why they’re asking), so it’s probably worth checking what their basis for wanting to be a lawyer is.

Tl;dr - a JD isn’t actually very versatile, it’s designed only to get you a job as a lawyer, and it’s perfectly fair to ask people if they’re sure they want to *be a lawyer* (rather than that they want to “go to law school” which often seems to be viewed as an experience to be valued in its own right, when it’s really a means to an end).

I disagree, I think a JD is actually very versatile. Obviously it will depend on where it's from. But even a non-top law school JD can be leveraged if you are motivated, hardworking, and intelligent (traits which are not, unfortunately, by themselves sufficient these days). It opens doors, signals a serious credential to employers, and provides you with a valuable network.

It may be that your very *first* job out of law school can only be as a lawyer (and even that isn't necessarily true), but law school is not a short-term investment. And a 1-2 year gig at a firm is not a huge cost in the scheme of your life if you are just not someone with definite, pre-formed interests or passions about what to do in life.

I looked at your profile and pretty much all the advice you’ve ever given is bad. OP, all of this poster’s advice is bad.

I'd look at your posts, but ... there's like 2500 of them? My advice to others here is informed by my experience talking to and working with actual lawyers and other business professionals in the real world, because, you know, I actually do that. Try it sometime.

Getting a law degree because you think it's a general degree that opens a lot of doors outside of law is straight boomer BS. You should have a general sense of what lawyers do and have a basis for thinking you'd like that work before committing 3 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars.

OP, do you have scholarships from these schools? What is the condition of your scholarship at NYLS?

Have you looked at the Law School Transparency profiles of these schools? The information on LST about these schools can give you an idea of their historic employment, look at that, cost of attendance, and see if it's worth it. Also look at the ABA 509 for the past couple of years to see placement.

I wouldn't recommend NYLS, it doesn't have a good reputation and there are many better schools in NY, look up the news article about former students who attempted to sue NYLS. They don't have info on College Scorecard, but you can see LST for reported salaries and cost of attendance.

Not sure about the reputation of Loyola Chicago, but there are also many schools in IL and midwest sending students to Chicago every year, you can see IL placement in LST. Also, this info is from College Scorecard for Loyola Chicago: median debt: $141,244
median earnings: $64,400

Something to think about. Make sure to do thorough research before making a decision

Joachim2017 wrote:In response: what I said was that a JD can be effectively leveraged for non-lawyer jobs (especially when you don't have many other passions/interests), not that it's always the best or most efficient way to get them. Lots of white-collar positions are made more accessible with (or even through) going to law school. Go to LinkedIn and look at the biographies of non-legal business persons working at large corporations, in politics, in sports, in publishing, in media, etc. There's definitely a lot of value in having an engineering/coding/cs background for some parts of the labor force (in tech/new media, for example), but that doesn't discount the instrumental value of the JD in the long run. Also, the confirmation bias cuts in every direction, so that's a wash.

Sure, a JD *can* be so leveraged. But I don't think the fact that it's possible makes that a good backup plan to consider for someone choosing to go to law school; it's better for someone to take the steps they can to determine if they actually want to be a lawyer rather than have to take the less efficient/more circuitous path to something else. (I don't buy the "don't have many other passions/interests" point; law school is a really costly (time & money) endeavor to undertake just because you don't know what else you want to do. If you have a generic major that doesn't default you into a specific job, getting work experience first is a great way to learn more about what you want to do, rather than going to law school.) The people in politics etc. who have JDs - that's correlation, not causation.

Also, again, since we're in this specific thread - any instrumental value of a JD is likely a lot higher from YHS than from NYLS or Loyola.

Joachim2017 wrote:Thanks for taking the time to actually engage with my point. In response: what I said was that a JD can be effectively leveraged for non-lawyer jobs (especially when you don't have many other passions/interests), not that it's always the best or most efficient way to get them. Lots of white-collar positions are made more accessible with (or even through) going to law school. Go to LinkedIn and look at the biographies of non-legal business persons working at large corporations, in politics, in sports, in publishing, in media, etc. There's definitely a lot of value in having an engineering/coding/cs background for some parts of the labor force (in tech/new media, for example), but that doesn't discount the instrumental value of the JD in the long run. Also, the confirmation bias cuts in every direction, so that's a wash.

You're right that there are a lot of people with JDs doing non-lawyer work, but I think you're looking at it backwards. The JD itself doesn't open doors you can't open otherwise.

You can't just waive your JD and apply for a non-attorney job, it doesn't work that way.

Of the attorneys that I know who transitioned to the kind of non-lawyer jobs you care about, typically while working for a law firm they worked closely with a client and impressed the client enough that, when the client happened to have a need, they transitioned to the appropriate role. They weren't leveraging the J.D., they leveraged the fact that they were able to directly show their future employers what their capabilities were.

Splurgles23 wrote:I understand law school can produce upset people who didn't end up living the lives they wanted to and so play the MMQB game, but the whole "it's objectively a bad investment" notion is outdated ATL-type cookie-cutter nonsense.

It's objectively a bad investment. The ROI on law-school tuition is dogshit, especially once the opportunity cost of not working (and advancing in another career) is taken into account, and the top 13 or so schools are commendable in that, by going to one of them, you can usually break even over a multi-decade timespan. Putting $200-300k in a brokerage account, or even something silly like gold bullion, is a much safer bet than the vast majority of law schools.

If you disagree, I'd love to see your math.

The Lsat Airbender wrote:

Splurgles23 wrote:I understand law school can produce upset people who didn't end up living the lives they wanted to and so play the MMQB game, but the whole "it's objectively a bad investment" notion is outdated ATL-type cookie-cutter nonsense.

It's objectively a bad investment. The ROI on law-school tuition is dogshit, especially once the opportunity cost of not working (and advancing in another career) is taken into account, and the top 13 or so schools are commendable in that, by going to one of them, you can usually break even over a multi-decade timespan. Putting $200-300k in a brokerage account, or even something silly like gold bullion, is a much safer bet than the vast majority of law schools.

If you disagree, I'd love to see your math.

simplified math for a T14 proving break-even:

Assumptions:
Nobody ends up in sh*tlaw, everyone has a somewhat decent outcome
Scenario 1) Let's say the average person going to a T14 could easily snag a job making $100k without going to law school, and gets $10k raises every year.
Scenario 2) COI of $75k; Three-quarter of the class gets today's NYC scale (plus bonus)
Scenario 3) two-third switch to in-house or a very good govt job after 4 years, making $200k/year with $10k raises. (this accounts for the 16% attrition rate in biglaw)
Scenario 4) the other quarter of the class makes $100k/year with $10k raises
decent govt jobs, midlaw, boutiques, etc.

Year - Cashflow 1 - Cashflow 2 - Cashflow 3 - Cashflow 4
01 - $0,100,000 = -$0,075,000 = -$0,075,000 = -$0,075,000
02 - $0,210,000 = -$0,150,000 = -$0,150,000 = -$0,150,000
03 - $0,330,000 = -$0,225,000 = -$0,225,000 = -$0,225,000
04 - $0,460,000 = -$0,020,000 = -$0,020,000 = -$0,125,000
05 - $0,600,000 = +$0,205,000 = +$0,205,000 = -$0,015,000
06 - $0,750,000 = +$0,475,000 = +$0,475,000 = +$0,135,000
07 - $0,910,000 = +$0,795,000 = +$0,795,000 = +$0,275,000
08 - $1,080,000 = +$1,155,000 = +$0,995,000 = +$0,425,000
09 - $1,260,000 = +$1,550,000 = +$1,205,000 = +$0,585,000
10 - $1,450,000 = +$1,975,000 = +$1,425,000 = +$0,755,000
11 - $1,650,000 = +$2,410,000 = +$1,655,000 = +$0,935,000

Weighted average of scenarios 2-4 = $1,663,750. Not including time-value of money, going to a T14 is only marginally better than skipping law school altogether.
If you keep going, and make a reasonable estimation for partners, it'll probably even out the time-value of money. For those who do make partner, particularly equity partner at the top few firms, yeah, it'll absolutely be worthwhile. For the vast majority, it'll at best be a wash.

nixy wrote:Also, again, since we're in this specific thread - any instrumental value of a JD is likely a lot higher from YHS than from NYLS or Loyola.

This is really the key point. A "JD advantage" job from NYLS is a paralegal with a slight salary bump, not a congressional aide.

So again, the one word reply of "underemployment" seems pretty damn applicable. Brevity is the soul of wit, etc.

Neither. It's silly to think a law degree from Loyola Chicago or NYLS is going to open doors outside of law, when neither does a great job of placing students even into the legal profession.