Top Law Schools

I am a current 3L and was recently accepted to Georgetown's Law's National Security Law LLM. This is a program I have a strong interest in, but I am somewhat hesitant to enroll. Has anyone heard anything good/bad about this program, or have any idea about hiring statistics for those who have completed the program? Unfortunately I have been unable to receive "hard numbers" from Georgetown regarding employment/placement statistics for LLM graduates. I have spoken personally with an individual who completed the program while attending part-time, and he has assured me that every student he has interacted with has had no problem finding meaningful employment, even with the current market. I just wanted to check to see if anyone knows if his assessment seems to be accurate.

I have a few interviews lined up for firms next week, but none of them deal with this type of law. I know that taking a full-time position with a firm would be the logical thing to do, but I don't want to be kicking myself 5 years down the road for passing up this program. Thank you in advance for any comments/suggestions.

I cannot imagine anyone regretting passing on this program.

CleGer wrote:I don't want to be kicking myself 5 years down the road for passing up this program.

[Agent here. Accidental anon]

[Mod here. FTFY.]

The program first admitted students in the Fall 2011, meaning the first class would have graduated in the Spring 2012, meaning they wouldn't have the seven month employment stats yet, making claims of full employment suspect. They also ended up doing a weird joint-journal with some other place instead of something for getting students a resume line. Plus, outside of DHS/DOD/CIA, there aren't really specific hiring programs for national security lawyers that will hire straight out of law school and those programs don't like LLMs. There are non-law masters programs at other schools in the region that actually track into analyst jobs and are better established. I have no idea why anyone would do this program. Most of the people I know in specialized LLM programs work or worked in the industry before and are getting the LLM because their job description requires it for the next level, not because their employer values it.

If you turned down a job for a useless, expensive LLM, you would most definitely be kicking yourself.

This LLM is a great opportunity for someone who is already working for the government and is being paid to do it (I've heard one agency does this but I can't remember which). Can't imagine it being a good choice for 95% of other people.

LawIdiot86 wrote:The program first admitted students in the Fall 2011, meaning the first class would have graduated in the Spring 2012, meaning they wouldn't have the seven month employment stats yet, making claims of full employment suspect. They also ended up doing a weird joint-journal with some other place instead of something for getting students a resume line. Plus, outside of DHS/DOD/CIA, there aren't really specific hiring programs for national security lawyers that will hire straight out of law school and those programs don't like LLMs. There are non-law masters programs at other schools in the region that actually track into analyst jobs and are better established. I have no idea why anyone would do this program. Most of the people I know in specialized LLM programs work or worked in the industry before and are getting the LLM because their job description requires it for the next level, not because their employer values it.

First of all, this is interesting and possibly true for the entry-level honors programs. Although, I would argue that someone who would have been competitive right out of law school, seemingly these agencies would just go off of that, rather than discriminating for getting an LLM. I'm assuming OP is competitive in national security b/c he got into the GT program. Also, some of the entry-level jobs on USAJobs accept LLMs, so that wouldn't put you out of contention necessarily.
======

Thanks to OP for the question...I'm considering the program as well, although I'm thinking of the PT program as I've been working for 2 yrs as a policy analyst. But the question remains, is it worth it?

In terms of outcomes, I know someone from the program who got a Big Law job after going straight from law school and he is doing absolutely nothing related to national security. He got the gig based on his solid law school record and excellent work at GT (Top 60 LS).

For me, the long-term prospect of working at the top levels of National security policy is the appeal and also being able to teach is part of my motivation. With a Georgetown LLM in Natl Security, working at the WH National Security Staff or National Security Council is a reasonable long-term goal. Or even working national security div at DOJ is attainable. For the long-term, it's a solid investment in terms of doing national security work, however, in the short term, the prospects of employment are undetermined. If you're risk averse, the choice is obvious, otherwise, it depends.

Anonymous User wrote:

LawIdiot86 wrote:The program first admitted students in the Fall 2011, meaning the first class would have graduated in the Spring 2012, meaning they wouldn't have the seven month employment stats yet, making claims of full employment suspect. They also ended up doing a weird joint-journal with some other place instead of something for getting students a resume line. Plus, outside of DHS/DOD/CIA, there aren't really specific hiring programs for national security lawyers that will hire straight out of law school and those programs don't like LLMs. There are non-law masters programs at other schools in the region that actually track into analyst jobs and are better established. I have no idea why anyone would do this program. Most of the people I know in specialized LLM programs work or worked in the industry before and are getting the LLM because their job description requires it for the next level, not because their employer values it.

First of all, this is interesting and possibly true for the entry-level honors programs. Although, I would argue that someone who would have been competitive right out of law school, seemingly these agencies would just go off of that, rather than discriminating for getting an LLM. I'm assuming OP is competitive in national security b/c he got into the GT program. Also, some of the entry-level jobs on USAJobs accept LLMs, so that wouldn't put you out of contention necessarily.
======

Thanks to OP for the question...I'm considering the program as well, although I'm thinking of the PT program as I've been working for 2 yrs as a policy analyst. But the question remains, is it worth it?

In terms of outcomes, I know someone from the program who got a Big Law job after going straight from law school and he is doing absolutely nothing related to national security. He got the gig based on his solid law school record and excellent work at GT (Top 60 LS).

For me, the long-term prospect of working at the top levels of National security policy is the appeal and also being able to teach is part of my motivation. With a Georgetown LLM in Natl Security, working at the WH National Security Staff or National Security Council is a reasonable long-term goal. Or even working national security div at DOJ is attainable. For the long-term, it's a solid investment in terms of doing national security work, however, in the short term, the prospects of employment are undetermined. If you're risk averse, the choice is obvious, otherwise, it depends.

I repeat, the program graduated its first class in May 2012. What basis do you have for predicting the long-term benefits of pursuing a program which hasn't even existed for an entry-level reporting cycle? It's not about being risk averse. It's about looking at a brand new program in a degree-type that has universally proven to be a sucker's bet outside of foreign-JD/tax programs.

LawIdiot86 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

LawIdiot86 wrote:The program first admitted students in the Fall 2011, meaning the first class would have graduated in the Spring 2012, meaning they wouldn't have the seven month employment stats yet, making claims of full employment suspect. They also ended up doing a weird joint-journal with some other place instead of something for getting students a resume line. Plus, outside of DHS/DOD/CIA, there aren't really specific hiring programs for national security lawyers that will hire straight out of law school and those programs don't like LLMs. There are non-law masters programs at other schools in the region that actually track into analyst jobs and are better established. I have no idea why anyone would do this program. Most of the people I know in specialized LLM programs work or worked in the industry before and are getting the LLM because their job description requires it for the next level, not because their employer values it.

First of all, this is interesting and possibly true for the entry-level honors programs. Although, I would argue that someone who would have been competitive right out of law school, seemingly these agencies would just go off of that, rather than discriminating for getting an LLM. I'm assuming OP is competitive in national security b/c he got into the GT program. Also, some of the entry-level jobs on USAJobs accept LLMs, so that wouldn't put you out of contention necessarily.
======

Thanks to OP for the question...I'm considering the program as well, although I'm thinking of the PT program as I've been working for 2 yrs as a policy analyst. But the question remains, is it worth it?

In terms of outcomes, I know someone from the program who got a Big Law job after going straight from law school and he is doing absolutely nothing related to national security. He got the gig based on his solid law school record and excellent work at GT (Top 60 LS).

For me, the long-term prospect of working at the top levels of National security policy is the appeal and also being able to teach is part of my motivation. With a Georgetown LLM in Natl Security, working at the WH National Security Staff or National Security Council is a reasonable long-term goal. Or even working national security div at DOJ is attainable. For the long-term, it's a solid investment in terms of doing national security work, however, in the short term, the prospects of employment are undetermined. If you're risk averse, the choice is obvious, otherwise, it depends.

I repeat, the program graduated its first class in May 2012. What basis do you have for predicting the long-term benefits of pursuing a program which hasn't even existed for an entry-level reporting cycle? It's not about being risk averse. It's about looking at a brand new program in a degree-type that has universally proven to be a sucker's bet outside of foreign-JD/tax programs.

Here's how this prediction works...first of all, as you get higher up the food chain in the policy world, specializedknowledge is required. Say you do the LLM and write your thesis on x topic. Not only that, but you take courses specializing in natl security, y, z, et. al. Moreover, you get to take classes from faculty and top practitioners in natl security (relevant agencies). You'd be considered something of an expert with an LLM, bc far as I can tell there's no other law program like this, which would give you an in for this type of policy work. And, of course, part of the benefit is the GT network. GT law dominates in DC at highest levels of law/policy and the name is obviously respected. Nothing will be laid out for you of course, but with an intensive study of natl security at GT and a bit of hustling, certainly making it to the highest levels of natl security policy is attainable. This discussion is challenging because at some level a person has to believe they will be successful and believing in success can't always be a function of what other people have done. But I take note of the reality of job markets and finite positions available. But becoming part of the GT law network and gaining a specialized law degree for an area that is dynamic and growing, is hardly a fool's errand. But like I said, if you're risk averse, the choice is obvious.

Anonymous User wrote:

LawIdiot86 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

LawIdiot86 wrote:The program first admitted students in the Fall 2011, meaning the first class would have graduated in the Spring 2012, meaning they wouldn't have the seven month employment stats yet, making claims of full employment suspect. They also ended up doing a weird joint-journal with some other place instead of something for getting students a resume line. Plus, outside of DHS/DOD/CIA, there aren't really specific hiring programs for national security lawyers that will hire straight out of law school and those programs don't like LLMs. There are non-law masters programs at other schools in the region that actually track into analyst jobs and are better established. I have no idea why anyone would do this program. Most of the people I know in specialized LLM programs work or worked in the industry before and are getting the LLM because their job description requires it for the next level, not because their employer values it.

First of all, this is interesting and possibly true for the entry-level honors programs. Although, I would argue that someone who would have been competitive right out of law school, seemingly these agencies would just go off of that, rather than discriminating for getting an LLM. I'm assuming OP is competitive in national security b/c he got into the GT program. Also, some of the entry-level jobs on USAJobs accept LLMs, so that wouldn't put you out of contention necessarily.
======

Thanks to OP for the question...I'm considering the program as well, although I'm thinking of the PT program as I've been working for 2 yrs as a policy analyst. But the question remains, is it worth it?

In terms of outcomes, I know someone from the program who got a Big Law job after going straight from law school and he is doing absolutely nothing related to national security. He got the gig based on his solid law school record and excellent work at GT (Top 60 LS).

For me, the long-term prospect of working at the top levels of National security policy is the appeal and also being able to teach is part of my motivation. With a Georgetown LLM in Natl Security, working at the WH National Security Staff or National Security Council is a reasonable long-term goal. Or even working national security div at DOJ is attainable. For the long-term, it's a solid investment in terms of doing national security work, however, in the short term, the prospects of employment are undetermined. If you're risk averse, the choice is obvious, otherwise, it depends.

I repeat, the program graduated its first class in May 2012. What basis do you have for predicting the long-term benefits of pursuing a program which hasn't even existed for an entry-level reporting cycle? It's not about being risk averse. It's about looking at a brand new program in a degree-type that has universally proven to be a sucker's bet outside of foreign-JD/tax programs.

Here's how this prediction works...first of all, as you get higher up the food chain in the policy world, specializedknowledge is required. Say you do the LLM and write your thesis on x topic. Not only that, but you take courses specializing in natl security, y, z, et. al. Moreover, you get to take classes from faculty and top practitioners in natl security (relevant agencies). You'd be considered something of an expert with an LLM, bc far as I can tell there's no other law program like this, which would give you an in for this type of policy work. And, of course, part of the benefit is the GT network. GT law dominates in DC at highest levels of law/policy and the name is obviously respected. Nothing will be laid out for you of course, but with an intensive study of natl security at GT and a bit of hustling, certainly making it to the highest levels of natl security policy is attainable. This discussion is challenging because at some level a person has to believe they will be successful and believing in success can't always be a function of what other people have done. But I take note of the reality of job markets and finite positions available. But becoming part of the GT law network and gaining a specialized law degree for an area that is dynamic and growing, is hardly a fool's errand. But like I said, if you're risk averse, the choice is obvious.

I continue to get the sense you have no idea what you are talking about.

First, the LL.M. program does not have a thesis requirement. https://www.law.georgetown.edu/academic ... rogram.cfm There is a writing requirement course, but that isn't a thesis in any meaning of the word.

Second, it's GU or GULC, I have never heard anyone refer to it as GT.

Third, GU does not "dominate" DC at the "highest levels." Harvard/Yale dominate DC at the highest levels. GU may have the largest numbers in the DC region, but that's by virtue of its class size and location, not because it's uniquely respected out of the T-14. I would wager that most people in DC have H/Y/S in one tier, UVA/C/C in another tier, and then the remainder of the T-14 in a third tier.

Fourth, where exactly is national security law growing? The CIA/NSA budgets aren't public, but DOD/DHS/State aren't exactly rolling in money or going on massive hiring binges. If anything, the field is more competitive than most because so many ex-military/contractors went to law school after serving. A high level security clearance with a couple tours of duty overseas is worth far more being considered an "expert" by virtue of an LL.M.

Fifth, I checked the Leadership Directories for the intelligence agencies to find out about GU's amazing network. Top three at CIA are H/S/South Carolina-GW LLM, GC at NSA is H, DOD is H/GU/Iowa-Wash LLM/UVA/UVA/Georgia-GW LLM/Columbia/Alabama. Also, to believe you can be successful is one thing, to blindly ignore factual evidence of the prior success of similarly situated and skilled persons is another thing altogether.

I continue to get the sense you have no idea what you are talking about.

First, the LL.M. program does not have a thesis requirement. https://www.law.georgetown.edu/academic ... rogram.cfm There is a writing requirement course, but that isn't a thesis in any meaning of the word.

Second, it's GU or GULC, I have never heard anyone refer to it as GT.

Third, GU does not "dominate" DC at the "highest levels." Harvard/Yale dominate DC at the highest levels. GU may have the largest numbers in the DC region, but that's by virtue of its class size and location, not because it's uniquely respected out of the T-14. I would wager that most people in DC have H/Y/S in one tier, UVA/C/C in another tier, and then the remainder of the T-14 in a third tier.

Fourth, where exactly is national security law growing? The CIA/NSA budgets aren't public, but DOD/DHS/State aren't exactly rolling in money or going on massive hiring binges. If anything, the field is more competitive than most because so many ex-military/contractors went to law school after serving. A high level security clearance with a couple tours of duty overseas is worth far more being considered an "expert" by virtue of an LL.M.

Fifth, I checked the Leadership Directories for the intelligence agencies to find out about GU's amazing network. Top three at CIA are H/S/South Carolina-GW LLM, GC at NSA is H, DOD is H/GU/Iowa-Wash LLM/UVA/UVA/Georgia-GW LLM/Columbia/Alabama. Also, to believe you can be successful is one thing, to blindly ignore factual evidence of the prior success of similarly situated and skilled persons is another thing altogether.[/quote]


Ok, credentials check: How many people on this board have actually studied full-time at GULC, spoken to the director of the National Security LLM program and has a sense of what the alumni community in DC is doing and how extensive it is at the highest levels of government? *raises hand*

In response:

1. Yes, I was aware of that, when I wrote "thesis", but did so to make a point. I was trying to emphasize the idea that the writing requirement can approximate a thesis, that is, an involved, intensive analysis of an issue if one wants it to be, the type of thing that can allow one develop an expertise and to demonstrate to employers that one is serious about working in Natl Security. Further, having written a graduate thesis, I'd say the difference between the writing requirement and a thesis is in name only.

2. As evidenced by my actual experience at GULC (can send you an email from my GULC email account if you'd like), I clearly know that is how it is referred to. "GT" is common when referring to the school in other contexts, primarily the sports programs (espn anyone?). In fact, "GT" is used on their athletic gear. For effect, I'm wearing my georgetown shirt that has a gigantic "GT" on it right now! I know the basketball team and the law school are diff entities, but they fall under the same "GT" umbrella. Didn't know this was such a major point. But whatevs...

3. See cred statement above. Further, while H/Y are prominent in DC, it defies logic to suggest that H/Y alums dominate in DC when NY has the highest concentration of these alums, from which we can then infer that these schools dominate in these markets and do not dominate in DC vis-a-vis GULC. More so, based on my personal experience of interacting with GULC alum in DC, I can say with great confidence that they do dominate DC. You're welcome to disagree, but please have something to back up your claim. The evidence you offered was not convincing. Pervasiveness is what qualifies for domination, not necessarily the people (at one moment in time) who are at the top. And at the top is not limited to the top three at an agency. There are department/division heads at agencies that I would consider leaders, which underscores my "dominate" and "pervasive" argument. I can also attest that GULC does well at DoD in DC - I've worked at DoD as well.

4. Do you not read the news or follow world affairs. National security is by far the most pressing legal issue today. Drones anyone? Killing americans overseas perphaps? The southwestern border? Terrorism financing? Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula...the ambassador killed in Benghazi? North Korea? C'mon, are you serious? DoD's budget is enormous and they need lawyers for all sorts of stuff. DHS has to expand to meet these new and emerging threats, which of course means more lawyers. And there's always the non-profit policy world (think tanks, etc), there's always work to do on this front.

Just go already. You're not going to find anyone to justify your shitty decision.

Anonymous User wrote: Ok, credentials check: How many people on this board have actually studied full-time at GULC, spoken to the director of the National Security LLM program and has a sense of what the alumni community in DC is doing and how extensive it is at the highest levels of government? *raises hand*

In response:

1. Yes, I was aware of that, when I wrote "thesis", but did so to make a point. I was trying to emphasize the idea that the writing requirement can approximate a thesis, that is, an involved, intensive analysis of an issue if one wants it to be, the type of thing that can allow one develop an expertise and to demonstrate to employers that one is serious about working in Natl Security. Further, having written a graduate thesis, I'd say the difference between the writing requirement and a thesis is in name only.

2. As evidenced by my actual experience at GULC (can send you an email from my GULC email account if you'd like), I clearly know that is how it is referred to. "GT" is common when referring to the school in other contexts, primarily the sports programs (espn anyone?). In fact, "GT" is used on their athletic gear. For effect, I'm wearing my georgetown shirt that has a gigantic "GT" on it right now! I know the basketball team and the law school are diff entities, but they fall under the same "GT" umbrella. Didn't know this was such a major point. But whatevs...

3. See above. Further, while H/Y are prominent in DC, it defies logic to suggest that H/Y alums dominate in DC when NY has the highest concentration of these alums, from which we can then infer that these schools dominate in these markets and do not dominate in DC vis-a-vis GULC. More so, based on my personal experience of interacting with GULC alum in DC, I can say with great confidence that they do dominate DC. You're welcome to disagree, but please have something to back up your claim. The evidence you offered was not convincing. Pervasiveness is what qualifies for domination, not necessarily the people (at one moment in time) who are at the top. I can also attest that GULC does well at DoD in DC - I've worked at DoD as well.

4. Do you not read the news or follow world affairs. National security is by far the most pressing legal issue today. Drones anyone? Killing americans overseas perphaps? The southwestern border? Terrorism financing? Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula...the ambassador killed in Benghazi? North Korea? C'mon, are you serious? DoD's budget is enormous and they need lawyers for all sorts of stuff. DHS has to expand to meet these new and emerging threats, which of course means more lawyers. And there's always the non-profit policy world (think tanks, etc), there's always work to do on this front.

I see that you have no actual statistics to support your claims beyond anecdotes or conversations with non-impartial persons. I'm in nearly an identical position, *raises hand*, but I can see that nothing I say will convince you to change your course. I would have been remiss not to engage you though, lest some other person read this thread and decided it was a good idea due to a lack of disagreement.

Anonymous User wrote:This LLM is a great opportunity for someone who is already working for the government and is being paid to do it (I've heard one agency does this but I can't remember which). Can't imagine it being a good choice for 95% of other people.

This program reeks of scamming tuition reimbursements from State, DOD, FBI, DHS, and CIA.

I assume it's too late to actually help, but as a current legal intern in DOJ's NSD, I can tell you that they are NOT looking for LLM grads to fill honors attorney positions. About 95% of the attorneys I have met, especially the younger ones, had experience interning with the NSD prior to applying to the honors attorney program. A few came from big firms, but all initial hires that I have spoken to had NSD internships on their Resume. I'm not sure if it works the same way with other agencies, but your Nat'l Security LLM will not make you more marketable for NSD unless you're planning on applying as a lateral down the road. DOJ works hard to "groom" their interns to take their honors attorney positions as well, so that is your best, and possibly only, way into an entry level attorney position. If you are considering an LLM, I'm assuming you did not get this experience as a law student. Possibly consider doing the LLM program part-time while you work at the firm (if that's possible with the crazy hours you will likely have).

Also, I'm not sure why you think that Georgetown "rules" DC besides having the best shot at landing firm positions. Maybe there are interns/attorneys from Georgetown in other divisions, but there is not a single intern from Georgetown in NSD this summer and other DC law schools (and non-DC schools suprisingly) feed well into government programs with H/Y/S having their pick of positions as expected. Experience is key, and spending 60-70k on another year of school is not going to help.

Anything new for this topic? Has there been a quantitative and/or qualitative study/survey on the subject?

,

Don't do this. If law school hasn't helped you find a job yet, more law school certainly won't do the trick.

Here for an update LLM at GULC, is it worth it?