Securities law for a conservative Forum

[tomtom23]

Hello,

I'm new here and I wanted to say hello and ask a couple question.

I recently started my law school search. I have a 3.2 undergrad GPA, experience working at 2 mega wall street I-banks full time, and based on my trials (taking real thing in Oct), prob ~170 LSAT.

I'm looking for some reach, safety, and backup schools that have good programs in securities law. I do not want to become a lawyer to do many of the traditional things lawyers do, I want to add to my finance skills and work strictly in banking.

I lived in NYC for a few years after college (a big midwestern state school -- I got to wall street because UPenn kids didn't have the combination of finance and programming skills I had), but am now in Chicago. Location does not matter very much to me, I'm open to anywhere for the most part.

Finally, I am a conservative. I can fake a bleeding heart pretty well, but maybe I won't have to. From what I read, daring to be Republican can be an issue in some admission offices. Am I wrong?

Thanks in advance for any replies. I hope to be able to learn a lot from this forum and eventually contribute back to help others.

- Tom

[SisyphusHappy]

Finally, I am a conservative. I can fake a bleeding heart pretty well, but maybe I won't have to. From what I read, daring to be Republican can be an issue in some admission offices. Am I wrong?

Yes, you are wrong. Every group wants to play the victim card. Stop listening to the victim propaganda.

[prezidentv8]

Finally, I am a conservative. I can fake a bleeding heart pretty well, but maybe I won't have to. From what I read, daring to be Republican can be an issue in some admission offices. Am I wrong?

Yes, you are wrong. Every group wants to play the victim card. Stop listening to the victim propaganda.

If TLS had a facebook-style "like" button, I'd "like" this.

But I guess I'll just have to like it.

[kk19131]

Everyone's just going to tell you to go to Northwestern...

[schmohawk]

Why is your political stance relevant?

[randomperson]

Everyone's just going to tell you to go to Northwestern...

+1

With that said, apply to Northwestern if your LSAT is anywhere in that 170 range.

[Tautology]

Finally, I am a conservative. I can fake a bleeding heart pretty well, but maybe I won't have to. From what I read, daring to be Republican can be an issue in some admission offices. Am I wrong?

Yes, you are wrong. Every group wants to play the victim card. Stop listening to the victim propaganda.

+ eleventy

[NayBoer]

I'm not a Republican, but I worked on a GOP election campaign and got one of my LORs from the candidate (who knows me pretty well). Didn't seem to affect anything.

Just don't make your PS about your beliefs, since having beliefs doesn't really add to your resume, but discussing it can make you come off badly. The exception might be if it's an issue that is central to your identity somehow and that you've worked on. But the focus then is not on your beliefs, but your actions.

[rman1201]

If you have no interest in becoming a lawyer why not just go to B school and shave off 1.5 years (and about $80k)?

[gwuorbust]

to answer you question for securities law the best choice is like other versions of law.. go to the best school you can get into. specialties are irreverent compared to the overall ranking of the school. for a splitter like yourself that is prob going to be Northwestern (assuming u get the LSAT score) or maybe UVA ED. btw, if you come across the securities law ranking it isn't worth shit. all that matters is overall ranking.

[schmohawk]

If you have no interest in becoming a lawyer why not just go to B school and shave off 1.5 years (and about $80k)?

No kidding. As if to say I'm going to go to art school, not to become an artist, but just to sort of broaden my horizons and give me perspective. Come on, doesn't anyone want to work anymore? I get that a J.D. opens many doors, but why go into this whole ordeal if you aren't even sure about it? If it were quick, cheap, and easy, I'd get it.

[Mickey Quicknumbers]

go to the best school you can get into. specialties are irreverent compared to the overall ranking of the school.

[tomtom23]

Hey all,

Thanks for all the great (and fast) replies.

I'll look into NW'stern.

I guess in this "US News Best Tier 1 Nose-trimmer For Pointy Noses" world we live in, I figured there must be a "best" securities law program.

The reason I am not taking GMATs (right now) is because I know exactly what I want to do. I want to work on making deals that involve massive amounts of legal details. I'm not as interested in the breadth that an MBA program requires. I do have 2 undergrad degrees (one in finance, the other in accounting) that are enough business education for now.

I guess with the realization that I won't find a "best" securities school, my question is for the most part moot.

Thanks again for all the replies.

[vamedic03]

Hey all,

Thanks for all the great (and fast) replies.

I'll look into NW'stern.

I guess in this "US News Best Tier 1 Nose-trimmer For Pointy Noses" world we live in, I figured there must be a "best" securities law program.

The reason I am not taking GMATs (right now) is because I know exactly what I want to do. I want to work on making deals that involve massive amounts of legal details. I'm not as interested in the breadth that an MBA program requires. I do have 2 undergrad degrees (one in finance, the other in accounting) that are enough business education for now.

I guess with the realization that I won't find a "best" securities school, my question is for the most part moot.

Thanks again for all the replies.

You need to make the decision of what part of the deal do you want to be on - do you want to be on the banking side or the legal side? The bankers don't deal with the legal aspects - they pay transactional lawyers a lot of money to deal with that. Likewise, the lawyers don't handle the banking side.

Realize that law school will train you to be a generalist, and if you worry about getting bored with the breadth of an MBA program, you'll be bored out of your mind in law school.

An important consideration for you is that if you're not in the top 10-20% of your class at a T14 school, you're not going to get into a transactional practice of a V20 law firm that's doing the sort of deals you want to be in on.

[funkyturds]

Hey all,

Thanks for all the great (and fast) replies.

I'll look into NW'stern.

I guess in this "US News Best Tier 1 Nose-trimmer For Pointy Noses" world we live in, I figured there must be a "best" securities law program.

The reason I am not taking GMATs (right now) is because I know exactly what I want to do. I want to work on making deals that involve massive amounts of legal details. I'm not as interested in the breadth that an MBA program requires. I do have 2 undergrad degrees (one in finance, the other in accounting) that are enough business education for now.

I guess with the realization that I won't find a "best" securities school, my question is for the most part moot.

Thanks again for all the replies.

You need to make the decision of what part of the deal do you want to be on - do you want to be on the banking side or the legal side? The bankers don't deal with the legal aspects - they pay transactional lawyers a lot of money to deal with that. Likewise, the lawyers don't handle the banking side.

Realize that law school will train you to be a generalist, and if you worry about getting bored with the breadth of an MBA program, you'll be bored out of your mind in law school.

An important consideration for you is that if you're not in the top 10-20% of your class at a T14 school, you're not going to get into a transactional practice of a V20 law firm that's doing the sort of deals you want to be in on.

credited.

i think law school would be a waste of time and money for you. but if you still decide to go, Northwestern is tcr.

[b.j.]

An important consideration for you is that if you're not in the top 10-20% of your class at a T14 school, you're not going to get into a transactional practice of a V20 law firm that's doing the sort of deals you want to be in on.

That's it? Those are the only people involved in securities law? That's not the impression I've gotten.

[motiontodismiss]

170 or above on the LSAT+Northwestern ED=Win.

[vamedic03]

An important consideration for you is that if you're not in the top 10-20% of your class at a T14 school, you're not going to get into a transactional practice of a V20 law firm that's doing the sort of deals you want to be in on.

That's it? Those are the only people involved in securities law? That's not the impression I've gotten.

OP makes it sound like he wants to be involved in the massive, complex M&A transactions - which are dominated by the V20 (its how the V20 got to be the V20). Do many firms deal with securities? yes. But, do many firms handle the massive, complex deals? No.

[theghostofDrewTate]

Hey OP - you better think long and hard about precisely what it is you want to do. Do you want to sit in an office proofing indentures and registration statements for several years? How about conducting diligence of selling stockholders and registrants in connection with your firm offering opinion letters? It sounds like you want to go work for a bank, but you'd probably need to put in the time in the salt mines at Davis Polk or SullCrom for a few years first and it wouldn't be prestigious. Then, when you got to the bank, you might be one of the small-penised law wonks, not one of the BSD bankers. You should maybe consider a JD/MBA from NU or just an MBA. To some extent, any securities offering is going to have a ton of "legal details" - see e.g., the Securities Act of 1933 and go on EDGAR and read some S-1 or S-4 registration statements.

Your ability to sort through all the wonkish securities laws will come not from a few semesters of securities law classes, but rather from sitting in the salt mines and actually reading and applying the Securities Act and the Exchange Act to specific fact patterns. The added legal complexity in securities transactions often comes into play from the business guys or the bankers. Sure, there are many deals where the comlpiance with legal requirements (for instance Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act) will drive structuring, but from your brief posts that I've read, you don't seem like you want to get down into the nitty gritty of preparing the memo to the client of how such a deal would work and would rather be involved at a higher level. I think reasonably intelligent people can do that higher level work that relates to the securities laws without sitting through countless mind-numbing hours of civil procedure, torts, evidence, criminal law, etc.

Forget what I wrote above. Can you provide us with a concrete example of what type of transaction you want to work on and what specifically you envision your role on said transaction to be? Then we can give you some advice.

[Azmatt]

Hey OP - you better think long and hard about precisely what it is you want to do. Do you want to sit in an office proofing indentures and registration statements for several years? How about conducting diligence of selling stockholders and registrants in connection with your firm offering opinion letters? It sounds like you want to go work for a bank, but you'd probably need to put in the time in the salt mines at Davis Polk or SullCrom for a few years first and it wouldn't be prestigious. Then, when you got to the bank, you might be one of the small-penised law wonks, not one of the BSD bankers. You should maybe consider a JD/MBA from NU or just an MBA. To some extent, any securities offering is going to have a ton of "legal details" - see e.g., the Securities Act of 1933 and go on EDGAR and read some S-1 or S-4 registration statements.

Your ability to sort through all the wonkish securities laws will come not from a few semesters of securities law classes, but rather from sitting in the salt mines and actually reading and applying the Securities Act and the Exchange Act to specific fact patterns. The added legal complexity in securities transactions often comes into play from the business guys or the bankers. Sure, there are many deals where the comlpiance with legal requirements (for instance Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act) will drive structuring, but from your brief posts that I've read, you don't seem like you want to get down into the nitty gritty of preparing the memo to the client of how such a deal would work and would rather be involved at a higher level. I think reasonably intelligent people can do that higher level work that relates to the securities laws without sitting through countless mind-numbing hours of civil procedure, torts, evidence, criminal law, etc.

Forget what I wrote above. Can you provide us with a concrete example of what type of transaction you want to work on and what specifically you envision your role on said transaction to be? Then we can give you some advice.

TITCR

With that respectful, in depth response, I would like to add...

If I have to hear another fucking conservative cry about being disenfranchised or concerned about "liberal bias," I might just shoot myself.

Fiscally, I will sometimes align to conservative policy, but these kind of tears make me went to throw people down long staircases. The audacity to claim victimhood because you're a conservative is just hilarious. Politics of the status-quo has convinced their constituents that they're victims?

...

With that said, consider Berkeley. John Yoo is a law professor in one of the most liberal campuses in America. Does that seem indicative of bias towards conservatives?

[vanwinkle]

With that respectful, in depth response, I would like to add...

If I have to hear another fucking conservative cry about being disenfranchised or concerned about "liberal bias," I might just shoot myselfthem.