Top Law Schools

So we've all heard that there are too many lawyers, there are too many law schools admitting people for money, and that the ABA has claimed that they have no real power to stop the schools from being accredited as long as the law schools meet certain requirements.

Here's an idea for a rule that the ABA can create and enforce that would solve the "too many lawyers" problem dead in its tracks:

Law schools may not admit students with LSAT scores under 1XX (150ish?) and must have an average incoming LSAT average of 1XX (155ish?).

Let's not be picky about the exact numbers - I'm sure someone can do some research and come up with good minimum and average numbers. In fact, to prevent a shock to the legal education system, the ABA could even set the standards really low and declare that they will rise by 1 pt every year orevery other year for 5 or 10 years or something.
The point is that this would solve 2 issues:
1. It would prevent low scoring candidates from attending law school. If the LSAT is a good measure of skills of becoming a lawyer, this would be a good thing. Yes, it may keep a few passionate people out of the profession. Yes, the LSAT isn't a perfect measure. Overall though, wouldn't this probably be a good thing to prevent less "LSAT qualified" people from entering the job market for both them and everyone else?
2. This would eventually force the TTT law schools that have low admission standards. It seems most everyone on this forum hates them anyway. This would prevent those schools from taking students money while providing educations of questionable reputation and value.

Any thoughts guys?

no

Get the government out of the student loan business and the problem is solved.

150 would be too low of a cutoff because ~75,000 people every year score 150 or higher on an LSAT. Only 50,000 attend law school.

Mandatory cutoffs for admission into undergrad/grad programs are pretty much always unconstitutional.

If the government stopped guaranteeing loans college loans, the market would correct itself.

If the ABA did what it is supposed to do, the market would correct itself.

If law schools abolished tenure, the market could (not would) correct itself.

If the ranking system cared less about the LSAT, the market would not (not could/would) correct itself.

Think about it. Even if there was a constitutional mandatory floor, it would do nothing for the market. Universities would just offer more LSAT prep programs on campus; this would lead to the median LSAT being raised, and the program would just begin all over again.

Aberzombie1892 wrote:Mandatory cutoffs for admission into undergrad/grad programs are pretty much always unconstitutional.

If the government stopped guaranteeing loans college loans, the market would correct itself.

If the ABA did what it is supposed to do, the market would correct itself.

If law schools abolished tenure, the market could (not would) correct itself.

If the ranking system cared less about the LSAT, the market would not (not could/would) correct itself.

Think about it. Even if there was a constitutional mandatory floor, it would do nothing for the market. Universities would just offer more LSAT prep programs on campus; this would lead to the median LSAT being raised, and the program would just begin all over again.

LSAT is on a curve, so the median would always be 150?

No. The current median (or mean, I don't know) for all test takers is 152/153. If someone said only people with 155+ can get in, undergraduate schools would do their best to ensure their students made above a 155 (Kaplan/testmasters/etc. on campus) - thus, the cycle would continue.

The only difference a constitutionally mandated floor would make would be that most URMs and many disadvantaged ORMs wouldn't be in law school.

I don't know anything about it really, but all my friends in medical school have told me that the AMA regulates the # of seats available in American medical schools to prevent a glut of doctors and ensure a high admittance standard. How do they do it?

MumofCad wrote:I don't know anything about it really, but all my friends in medical school have told me that the AMA regulates the # of seats available in American medical schools to prevent a glut of doctors and ensure a high admittance standard. How do they do it?

Yes, that would be the way to do it. The AMA does not allow new schools to start or current school to enlarge their class without permission, and uses that to regulate the total number of students in the country.
That is why your doctor was foreign educated.