Page 1 of 2

177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:28 pm
by cvnrssm
Are there any law schools that I shouldn't bother applying to?

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:29 pm
by Kohinoor
cvnrssm wrote:Are there any law schools that I shouldn't bother applying to?
Out at Berkeley. They're notorious for requiring a high GPA.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:29 pm
by IHaveDietMoxie
enjoy going anywhere you please

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:29 pm
by guyincognito
Yes. Cooley.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:31 pm
by sternc
If I were you, I would not bother even applying anywhere. Also, I hear if you had happened to graduate in December but am planning to basically sit around your undergraduate town hanging out with your squirrel/girlfriend that schools look very negatiely at that. Take it for what it's worth...

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:34 pm
by APimpNamedSlickback
you won't get into yale.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:37 pm
by los blancos
Kohinoor wrote:
cvnrssm wrote:Are there any law schools that I shouldn't bother applying to?
Out at Berkeley. They're notorious for requiring a high GPA.

OP is URM.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:38 pm
by APimpNamedSlickback
boilercat wrote:
Kohinoor wrote:
cvnrssm wrote:Are there any law schools that I shouldn't bother applying to?
Out at Berkeley. They're notorious for requiring a high GPA.

OP is URM.
see proposition 209

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:42 pm
by Dignan
talibkweli wrote:
boilercat wrote:
Kohinoor wrote:
cvnrssm wrote:Are there any law schools that I shouldn't bother applying to?
Out at Berkeley. They're notorious for requiring a high GPA.

OP is URM.
see proposition 209
Won't matter. If the OP's personal statement is connected in a meaningful way to his or her URM status, then Berkeley will accept in a heartbeat.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:57 pm
by Trifles
Michigan banned affirmative action, but you wouldn't know it from looking at their LSN graph. :lol:

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:32 pm
by FuturehoyaLawya
Trifles wrote:Michigan banned affirmative action, but you wouldn't know it from looking at their LSN graph. :lol:
yes they did, now they have something called "holistic review." berkeley has that too...and ucla.....so your probably in everywhere, excluding yale and stanford.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:42 pm
by BenJ
Nowhere. You're not guaranteed at Yale, but you're definitely favored. Berkeley is an interesting case, but they really do practice affirmative action though it's technically banned. Your numbers are good enough for Michigan even without the URM, and of course they also practice affirmative action despite it being banned. (In both cases, they just call it "holistic judgement", which just a euphemism.)

For the record, Law School Predictor, which has a reputation for understating URMs, puts you at "Consider" for Yale and "Admit" everywhere else.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:00 pm
by postitnotes
FuturehoyaLawya wrote:
Trifles wrote:Michigan banned affirmative action, but you wouldn't know it from looking at their LSN graph. :lol:
yes they did, now they have something called "holistic review." berkeley has that too...and ucla.....so your probably in everywhere, excluding yale and stanford.
titcr. He might have a decent shot at Stanford too.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:00 pm
by Kohinoor
BenJ wrote:Nowhere. You're not guaranteed at Yale, but you're definitely favored. Berkeley is an interesting case, but they really do practice affirmative action though it's technically banned. Your numbers are good enough for Michigan even without the URM, and of course they also practice affirmative action despite it being banned. (In both cases, they just call it "holistic judgement", which just a euphemism.)

For the record, Law School Predictor, which has a reputation for understating URMs, puts you at "Consider" for Yale and "Admit" everywhere else.
Fie on you sir. Berkeley and it's quasi-peer school Michigan haven't practiced affirmative action in years. It's time for people to wake up and realize that essay writing matters and is a valid metric in the law school admissions process.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:16 pm
by tomhobbes
jayzon wrote:--ImageRemoved--
Is it just me or is a burning book a bad symbol for a school?

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:18 am
by newyorker88
Depends what kind of URM you are.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:25 am
by EzraStiles
Affirmative action was considered unconstitutional in Michigan's undergraduate admissions process, but it's still allowed in law school admissions. That's why you see such things in its LSN graph.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:28 am
by APimpNamedSlickback
tomhobbes wrote:
jayzon wrote:--ImageRemoved--
Is it just me or is a burning book a bad symbol for a school?

that it is liberty's of all places makes this just hilarious

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:29 am
by APimpNamedSlickback
EzraStiles wrote:Affirmative action was considered unconstitutional in Michigan's undergraduate admissions process, but it's still allowed in law school admissions. That's why you see such things in its LSN graph.

you are wrong

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:32 am
by 02082010
Yale supposed has a firm 3.5 cutoff, URM or not. Save YLS, you'll be in everywhere.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:32 am
by EzraStiles
http://umich.edu/news/index.html?Releas ... remecourt2

notably the phrase "In two lawsuits challenging University of Michigan admissions policies, the court ruled 5-4 in favor of the Law School"

Maybe not affirmative action in all it encompasses, but the law school was not forced to change its previous method of evaluation.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:35 am
by DoubleChecks
im confused, i thought SC ruling was all about AA being okay again (note, not yet in law school lol)

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:36 am
by APimpNamedSlickback
EzraStiles wrote:http://umich.edu/news/index.html?Releas ... remecourt2

notably the phrase "In two lawsuits challenging University of Michigan admissions policies, the court ruled 5-4 in favor of the Law School"

Maybe not affirmative action in all it encompasses, but the law school was not forced to change its previous method of evaluation.

is justice rehnquist still the chief justice?

which came first: the gratz/grutter cases, or michigan's ballot initiative?

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:50 am
by newyorker88
EzraStiles wrote:Affirmative action was considered unconstitutional in Michigan's undergraduate admissions process, but it's still allowed in law school admissions. That's why you see such things in its LSN graph.
No, the point system was thrown out but they can still weigh race in the admissions process.

Re: 177/3.49/URM Where won't I get in

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:58 am
by Kohinoor
talibkweli wrote:
EzraStiles wrote:http://umich.edu/news/index.html?Releas ... remecourt2

notably the phrase "In two lawsuits challenging University of Michigan admissions policies, the court ruled 5-4 in favor of the Law School"

Maybe not affirmative action in all it encompasses, but the law school was not forced to change its previous method of evaluation.

is justice rehnquist still the chief justice?

which came first: the gratz/grutter cases, or michigan's ballot initiative?
Pretty sure the ballot initiative came after and negated gratz/grutter.