Less desirable/popular markets Forum

[QContinuum]

I don’t think doctors are quite analogous. For one thing, they do rank where they want to do their residency, so while they can’t be too picky, they have a bit more choice and can have a better shot at identifying a place that would work for both them and, say, their working spouse. For another, they’re entering a profession that guarantees them a job in a way that law doesn’t, and also, it’s clear from the start that a residency ends and you will be able to leave and move on to something else. (On top of all that, I don’t think medical licensing is as restrictive as bar admission, although I don’t know enough to say that for certain.)

A residency to me is much more like a clerkship. And I would recommend pretty much anyone move anywhere for a year for a clerkship wherever. I’m not saying lawyers shouldn’t be willing to move for jobs; just they shouldn’t be expected to move for ANY job.

Law school grads can also "rank" where they want a job. No one is saying OP - or any J.D. grad - must be New Mexico or bust. Only that they must be willing to be geographically flexible - very flexible. Of course "very flexible" does not mean they have to be okay with moving to Nome, Alaska. And of course they can (and absolutely should!) still prioritize certain states/locations over others.

That law doesn't offer the same job stability as medicine supports the case for law school grads needing to be flexible.

It is fine to set an "end date" for working, say, in rural NM. The whole argument has been that, if a job in rural NM would help jumpstart one's legal career, and that person isn't able to find a first legal job in a more desirable (to them) locale, they ought to be willing to take that rural NM job for 2-3 years. No one is arguing that they ought to be willing to stay in rural NM for the rest of their career.

Re: bar admission being restrictive, that did use to be the case, but not so much anymore. The UBE has been adopted by 34 U.S. jurisdictions (soon to be 36, with Ohio and Texas coming on board soon). That opens up more than two-thirds of the country without a need to take another bar exam. (Yes, scores expire, but a new law school grad looking for their first job will have a fresh enough UBE score that they'd be able to port it to any UBE jx.)

[nixy]

No one is saying OP - or any J.D. grad - must be New Mexico or bust.

So my issue is really that these kinds of statement,

People who leave the law rather than take a job in a gross town for 2 years baffle me.

If you’d rather be a non lawyer in a cool town than a lawyer in a gross town for a year who then leverages that to a job in a cool town I don’t get why you’d go to law school. I also don’t get being so rigid in those preferences you’d throw away all that time and all that money. If you spent 3 years in law school you can spend a year in a town without an ikea to work as a lawyer.

If you’d rather teach middle school/work as a bank teller (jobs my classmates took) in Chicago than live in a town without an NFL team for a year in order to be a lawyer, then you shouldn’t go to law school.

when the specific example that andythefir always uses isn't just "a town without a NFL team" or "a town without an IKEA" but is specifically rural NM, for a position that doesn't have a one-year time limit, actually does seem to suggest that grads should be rural NM or bust.

My other issue, which is probably also coloring my arguments, is that these comments shit all over people's actual preferences by presuming those people are simply spoiled urbanites, which I think is unfair. (For instance: many LGBT or people of color would be rightfully nervous about moving to many rural small towns. Some people with medical conditions need to be near major medical centers.) How about talking about the advantages of moving around rather than telling people who don't want to that they should never have gone to law school in the first place?

(also, yet again, if the job in rural NM will jumpstart someone's career, I've already said they should take it. I disagree with the implication that a job in rural NM will jumpstart every unemployed lawyer's career.)

[lavarman84]

No one is saying OP - or any J.D. grad - must be New Mexico or bust.

So my issue is really that these kinds of statement,

People who leave the law rather than take a job in a gross town for 2 years baffle me.

If you’d rather be a non lawyer in a cool town than a lawyer in a gross town for a year who then leverages that to a job in a cool town I don’t get why you’d go to law school. I also don’t get being so rigid in those preferences you’d throw away all that time and all that money. If you spent 3 years in law school you can spend a year in a town without an ikea to work as a lawyer.

If you’d rather teach middle school/work as a bank teller (jobs my classmates took) in Chicago than live in a town without an NFL team for a year in order to be a lawyer, then you shouldn’t go to law school.

when the specific example that andythefir always uses isn't just "a town without a NFL team" or "a town without an IKEA" but is specifically rural NM, for a position that doesn't have a one-year time limit, actually does seem to suggest that grads should be rural NM or bust.

My other issue, which is probably also coloring my arguments, is that these comments shit all over people's actual preferences by presuming those people are simply spoiled urbanites, which I think is unfair. (For instance: many LGBT or people of color would be rightfully nervous about moving to many rural small towns. Some people with medical conditions need to be near major medical centers.) How about talking about the advantages of moving around rather than telling people who don't want to that they should never have gone to law school in the first place?

(also, yet again, if the job in rural NM will jumpstart someone's career, I've already said they should take it. I disagree with the implication that a job in rural NM will jumpstart every unemployed lawyer's career.)

It's New Mexico. In a lot of these places, it's majority POC.

[Anonymous User]

OP, while a lot of people say that more regional cities will prefer to take local law school grads, I tend to disagree to an extent.

I believe if you tried Providence or Worcester, you’d have a better shot than the local law school grads. The only “real” competition would be BU/BC grads (who are either from those cities or also did not do that well in school), or T-14 grads who are trying to return home. Compared to a BU student with no ties to Worcester/Providence, I’d say it’d be a tossup.

I think the same could be said for Manchester, NH; Baltimore; Charlotte; some Florida markets; and other cities that don’t really have good law schools.

At the end of the day, many employers would prefer to hire a T14 student over a tier 4, no matter how weak the ties.

My first firm job was in Florida. I did not graduate from a T14, but my school was better than most of the people applying for the job. My school is a top-50 school. Most of the people looking for jobs at that point (November after graduation) were Nova Southeastern and Barry law grads. My firm had a handful of Nova grads, but the firm was/is trying to move away from that and is hiring people from more “national” schools (many recent hires in all cities are T-14 grads).

Don’t underestimate the pedigree of your T-14 degree.

Edit: school no longer top 30.

[White Dwarf]

For instance: many LGBT or people of color would be rightfully nervous about moving to many rural small towns.

I'm sure places like this exist, but it is wildly exaggerated by people from coastal bubbles (I graduated with a girl who was worried about spending two nights in Saratoga Springs, NY for the bar exam for this reason). This notion that every town with a population under 30,000 is a KKK hellscape is childish and stupid.

EDIT: I know that's not what you said, but it is a common attitude I've encountered since moving to NYC for law school.

[lavarman84]

OP, while a lot of people say that more regional cities will prefer to take local law school grads, I tend to disagree to an extent.

I believe if you tried Providence or Worcester, you’d have a better shot than the local law school grads. The only “real” competition would be BU/BC grads (who are either from those cities or also did not do that well in school), or T-14 grads who are trying to return home. Compared to a BU student with no ties to Worcester/Providence, I’d say it’d be a tossup.

I think the same could be said for Manchester, NH; Baltimore; Charlotte; some Florida markets; and other cities that don’t really have good law schools.

At the end of the day, many employers would prefer to hire a T14 student over a tier 4, no matter how weak the ties.

My first firm job was in Florida. I did not graduate from a T14, but my school was better than most of the people applying for the job. My school is a top-50 school. Most of the people looking for jobs at that point (November after graduation) were Nova Southeastern and Barry law grads. My firm had a handful of Nova grads, but the firm was/is trying to move away from that and is hiring people from more “national” schools (many recent hires in all cities are T-14 grads).

Don’t underestimate the pedigree of your T-14 degree.

Edit: school no longer top 30.

I think your Florida experience is more the exception than the norm. The Florida market is pretty oversaturated with lawyers, and many of the the "regional" cities (Orlando, Tampa, Jax, Pensacola, etc.) tend to be insular.

I'm not saying don't look. It can't hurt to try. Just being realistic.

[QContinuum]

For instance: many LGBT or people of color would be rightfully nervous about moving to many rural small towns.

I'm sure places like this exist, but it is wildly exaggerated by people from coastal bubbles (I graduated with a girl who was worried about spending two nights in Saratoga Springs, NY for the bar exam for this reason). This notion that every town with a population under 30,000 is a KKK hellscape is childish and stupid.

EDIT: I know that's not what you said, but it is a common attitude I've encountered since moving to NYC for law school.

Agree. I think it goes both ways. There are rural folks who think of big coastal cities as dens of sin and iniquity where there are no Christians and everyone's unemployed, in a gang, having orgies and hoovering up every illegal drug in existence, all at the same time. That's not true any more than the stereotype of small town America having a burning hatred for everyone aside from heterosexual, able-bodied WASP men.

[Hopefullitassociate]

For instance: many LGBT or people of color would be rightfully nervous about moving to many rural small towns.

I'm sure places like this exist, but it is wildly exaggerated by people from coastal bubbles (I graduated with a girl who was worried about spending two nights in Saratoga Springs, NY for the bar exam for this reason). This notion that every town with a population under 30,000 is a KKK hellscape is childish and stupid.

EDIT: I know that's not what you said, but it is a common attitude I've encountered since moving to NYC for law school.

Agree. I think it goes both ways. There are rural folks who think of big coastal cities as dens of sin and iniquity where there are no Christians and everyone's unemployed, in a gang, having orgies and hoovering up every illegal drug in existence, all at the same time. That's not true any more than the stereotype of small town America having a burning hatred for everyone aside from heterosexual, able-bodied WASP men.

But it's not just avoiding people with a burning hatred for everyone aside from heterosexual, able-bodied WASP men. It's also about what sort of resources and community you'll have. Ithaca is a very progressive and welcoming place to live - as a gay person, I certainly didn't feel uncomfortable or unwelcome there. People were supportive of my sexual orientation. But the gay scene was tiny, and it sucks going to the same few bars that aren't really gay bars and having a very small social network of gay people. The percentage of people in Ithaca who are liberal and celebratory of LGBT people is probably pretty similar to that of NYC, but being gay in NYC is going to be an extremely different life than being gay in Ithaca. There can still be a huge difference between progressive areas of vastly different sizes for minorities.

[legalpotato]

For instance: many LGBT or people of color would be rightfully nervous about moving to many rural small towns.

I'm sure places like this exist, but it is wildly exaggerated by people from coastal bubbles (I graduated with a girl who was worried about spending two nights in Saratoga Springs, NY for the bar exam for this reason). This notion that every town with a population under 30,000 is a KKK hellscape is childish and stupid.

EDIT: I know that's not what you said, but it is a common attitude I've encountered since moving to NYC for law school.

Agree. I think it goes both ways. There are rural folks who think of big coastal cities as dens of sin and iniquity where there are no Christians and everyone's unemployed, in a gang, having orgies and hoovering up every illegal drug in existence, all at the same time. That's not true any more than the stereotype of small town America having a burning hatred for everyone aside from heterosexual, able-bodied WASP men.

Grew up in rural America. They definetly have their own warped view of coastal cities, but don’t think it is near as crazy as you suggest. Think the view is more that coastal cities are full of out of touch elitists who look down on rural America and hate their way of life.

Also why did you get out white dwarf? He offered some personally identifying info.

[JOThompson]

I have some inside information on the rural NM market. Absolutely true that rural New Mexico ADA and PD offices are desperate.

I have several close friends who have worked at those offices, and there are stories about literally anyone with a pulse being hired -- regardless of grades, interview skills, competency, connections, or prior legal experience / interest. Many new hires were fired from their previous jobs for a variety of reasons, but it doesn't matter.

That said, there is a reason why these agencies are willing to overlook imperfect applications. The elected DAs are very aggressive and conservative. Even though these are low population areas, the caseload is heavy because ADAs are not allowed much negotiation discretion. I have a friend with over 50 felony jury trials in about four years there, including several murder trials. Burnout is high, there isn't a lot of support, and many people are lucky to make it past the first year.

If you are going to apply, research the particular office. Dysfunction and cronyism are rampant. There has been a lot of drama in recent years, including purging of entire offices due to political differences and favoritism.

There are times I wish I'd taken one of these jobs. For people that strike out in their home markets, rural ADA jobs may even be desirable, if you want trial experience at an accelerated pace. It's going to be sink or swim / on the job training though and people are considered expendable. There are ample opportunities to grow and take on complex cases at an early point in your career. People with 1-2 years of experience there are being hired for rural AUSA jobs, for instance. Rural NM ADA positions are feeder jobs for AUSA offices in NM, west Texas, etc.

[QContinuum]

For instance: many LGBT or people of color would be rightfully nervous about moving to many rural small towns.

I'm sure places like this exist, but it is wildly exaggerated by people from coastal bubbles (I graduated with a girl who was worried about spending two nights in Saratoga Springs, NY for the bar exam for this reason). This notion that every town with a population under 30,000 is a KKK hellscape is childish and stupid.

EDIT: I know that's not what you said, but it is a common attitude I've encountered since moving to NYC for law school.

Agree. I think it goes both ways. There are rural folks who think of big coastal cities as dens of sin and iniquity where there are no Christians and everyone's unemployed, in a gang, having orgies and hoovering up every illegal drug in existence, all at the same time. That's not true any more than the stereotype of small town America having a burning hatred for everyone aside from heterosexual, able-bodied WASP men.

Grew up in rural America. They definetly have their own warped view of coastal cities, but don’t think it is near as crazy as you suggest. Think the view is more that coastal cities are full of out of touch elitists who look down on rural America and hate their way of life.

Also why did you get out white dwarf? He offered some personally identifying info.

I said "there are rural folks", not "all rural folks". I have personally met multiple rural folks, from multiple parts of the country, who viewed big coastal cities as Godless hellscapes. It's the inverse of the girl worried about Saratoga Springs. When you've never been outside a big city, or you've never been to a big city, and you live in a social media echo chamber, it's all too easy to become untethered from rationality. Obviously (and thankfully) the majority of people, urban or rural, aren't disconnected from reality to that extent.

"Moving to NYC for law school" is not remotely "personally identifying" in any reasonable sense (this is not like "moving to Ithaca for law school"), nor is happening to know someone with a warped view of Saratoga Springs.

[JOThompson]

For instance: many LGBT or people of color would be rightfully nervous about moving to many rural small towns.

I'm sure places like this exist, but it is wildly exaggerated by people from coastal bubbles (I graduated with a girl who was worried about spending two nights in Saratoga Springs, NY for the bar exam for this reason). This notion that every town with a population under 30,000 is a KKK hellscape is childish and stupid.

EDIT: I know that's not what you said, but it is a common attitude I've encountered since moving to NYC for law school.

Agree. I think it goes both ways. There are rural folks who think of big coastal cities as dens of sin and iniquity where there are no Christians and everyone's unemployed, in a gang, having orgies and hoovering up every illegal drug in existence, all at the same time. That's not true any more than the stereotype of small town America having a burning hatred for everyone aside from heterosexual, able-bodied WASP men.

Grew up in rural America. They definetly have their own warped view of coastal cities, but don’t think it is near as crazy as you suggest. Think the view is more that coastal cities are full of out of touch elitists who look down on rural America and hate their way of life.

Also why did you get out white dwarf? He offered some personally identifying info.

I said "there are rural folks", not "all rural folks". I have personally met multiple rural folks, from multiple parts of the country, who viewed big coastal cities as Godless hellscapes. It's the inverse of the girl worried about Saratoga Springs. When you've never been outside a big city, or you've never been to a big city, and you live in a social media echo chamber, it's all too easy to become untethered from rationality. Obviously (and thankfully) the majority of people, urban or rural, aren't disconnected from reality to that extent.

"Moving to NYC for law school" is not remotely "personally identifying" in any reasonable sense (this is not like "moving to Ithaca for law school"), nor is happening to know someone with a warped view of Saratoga Springs.

This concern is overhyped regarding the rural midwest and southwest. I have worked in towns that were 15,000 to 40,000 population, and very culturally conservative. The types of places where I would get lambasted for having any type of moderate leaning. But I very rarely saw racial or sexual orientation discrimination overtly. I have LGBT / POC law colleagues and friends who moved to tiny towns also and felt very welcomed / not discriminated against. Related to this thread, even rural New Mexico was not a problem in that regard. I know it's still an issue but I don't think it's one that should prevent people from trying to live in smaller, less diverse markets.

[nixy]

Yeah, I don’t want to encourage people to stereotype or make assumptions about parts of the country they don’t know. But some places are definitely friendlier than others, and just being one of the only (insert relevant identifiers here) in a given community can be really hard. Not like physical danger hard, but psychologically/emotionally hard, and I’m not going to knock someone who doesn’t want to do it. (I also think it’s hard for a white person to comment on what a person of color is going to experience in such towns.) I agree that being nervous to go to Saratoga Springs is taking it way too far, though, so some assumptions are just wrong.

[andythefir]

I have some inside information on the rural NM market. Absolutely true that rural New Mexico ADA and PD offices are desperate.

I have several close friends who have worked at those offices, and there are stories about literally anyone with a pulse being hired -- regardless of grades, interview skills, competency, connections, or prior legal experience / interest. Many new hires were fired from their previous jobs for a variety of reasons, but it doesn't matter.

That said, there is a reason why these agencies are willing to overlook imperfect applications. The elected DAs are very aggressive and conservative. Even though these are low population areas, the caseload is heavy because ADAs are not allowed much negotiation discretion. I have a friend with over 50 felony jury trials in about four years there, including several murder trials. Burnout is high, there isn't a lot of support, and many people are lucky to make it past the first year.

If you are going to apply, research the particular office. Dysfunction and cronyism are rampant. There has been a lot of drama in recent years, including purging of entire offices due to political differences and favoritism.

There are times I wish I'd taken one of these jobs. For people that strike out in their home markets, rural ADA jobs may even be desirable, if you want trial experience at an accelerated pace. It's going to be sink or swim / on the job training though and people are considered expendable. There are ample opportunities to grow and take on complex cases at an early point in your career. People with 1-2 years of experience there are being hired for rural AUSA jobs, for instance. Rural NM ADA positions are feeder jobs for AUSA offices in NM, west Texas, etc.

Agree with all of this. I’d add that generally the secretaries are amazing, so there’s a ton of support in that sense. The problem is the bosses tend to be folks who couldn’t get other jobs, so they run the gamut from nice people but bad bosses to truly toxic.

That said, as long as you go in looking to max out what you can get from the experience and get out at the 18-24 month mark, you generally will be fine.