Top Law Schools

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/ ... eckdam.pdf

Here's the relevant text:

That requirement has been eliminated in the new Standards, and there is no reason for such a change to not become immediately effective.

Oh fuck yes thank you

lacrossebrother wrote:Oh fuck yes thank you

You're very welcome.

I don't know that it really makes any difference, though. The restriction only applied to full-time law students (who are taking more than 12 credits) and for paid-positions (i.e. you could do a full-time internship/externship at a governmental organization), and you gotta be pretty crazy to be working full-time for money and taking on a full courseload of law school classes. Your grades seem to follow you around forever in that they heavily impact what doors are or aren't open for you, so I can't imagine very many full-time law students are going to be working more than 20 hours a week anyways. Even if you're a "law clerk" for a firm, that type of commitment would be crazy since your grades are inevitably going to drop, and you're then fucked if the firm doesn't hire you after graduation. In some ways, the ABA requirement helped protect TTT law students from smaller firms (which abuse the hell out of internships/clerkships since they get away with paying their clerks like $12 /hour while billing them out at $150+ /hr) requiring them to work more than 20 hours a week during the school year, because the student could hide behind the ABA rule if asked to work more (rather than having to decide between whether he should tell the firm that he isn't able to work that much, and risk not getting an offer that he so desperately will need after graduation, and whether he should focus on his grades). I don't know, I like that the ABA rule is gone, since I'm not big on restrictions like that, but I can see the negatives of not having the rule in place as well. It's not like anyone's going to "work their way through law school" at $300k for 3 years of school.

kykiske wrote:

lacrossebrother wrote:Oh fuck yes thank you

You're very welcome.

Hardest I've laughed at a post/response on TLS in quite some time.

XxSpyKEx wrote:I don't know that it really makes any difference, though. The restriction only applied to full-time law students (who are taking more than 12 credits) and for paid-positions (i.e. you could do a full-time internship/externship at a governmental organization), and you gotta be pretty crazy to be working full-time for money and taking on a full courseload of law school classes. Your grades seem to follow you around forever in that they heavily impact what doors are or aren't open for you, so I can't imagine very many full-time law students are going to be working more than 20 hours a week anyways. Even if you're a "law clerk" for a firm, that type of commitment would be crazy since your grades are inevitably going to drop, and you're then fucked if the firm doesn't hire you after graduation. In some ways, the ABA requirement helped protect TTT law students from smaller firms (which abuse the hell out of internships/clerkships since they get away with paying their clerks like $12 /hour while billing them out at $150+ /hr) requiring them to work more than 20 hours a week during the school year, because the student could hide behind the ABA rule if asked to work more (rather than having to decide between whether he should tell the firm that he isn't able to work that much, and risk not getting an offer that he so desperately will need after graduation, and whether he should focus on his grades). I don't know, I like that the ABA rule is gone, since I'm not big on restrictions like that, but I can see the negatives of not having the rule in place as well. It's not like anyone's going to "work their way through law school" at $300k for 3 years of school.

I'm a second semester 3L who is firmly within honors and firmly outside of coif so I could give a fuck about my grades. I'm hired my firm already and make my own hours --Ive certainly had the 20 hour cap on my mind...and was justifying it, kind of guility by interpreting the old rule as an "average of 20 hours a week per semester." It's not that hard to go over 20 and do well anyways, especially if youve got to finish something over the weekend

I could have done a 40 hour a week job 2L and this year without it hurting my GPA at all. Paternalism only matters for 1Ls. This is a great change imo.

I feel like I will always have need/use of someone saving me from myself for the rest of my life.

I've worked 20 hours per week since 1L year in retail to help pay for law school (I'm poor). I got on law review, honors, and am one of the top students in my class. It's definitely doable.. you just have to prioritize your time wisely.

I'm currently working more than 20 hours a week but I only get paid for 20. So yea, this could be huge if it actually will immediately impact campus policy.

jbagelboy wrote:I'm currently working more than 20 hours a week but I only get paid for 20. So yea, this could be huge if it actually will immediately impact campus policy.

Lol at a company violating federal law in order to comply with ABA standards

lacrossebrother wrote:

jbagelboy wrote:I'm currently working more than 20 hours a week but I only get paid for 20. So yea, this could be huge if it actually will immediately impact campus policy.

Lol at a company violating federal law in order to comply with ABA standards

its actually the law school itself, sadly ;/.

Ho lee fuk

Only way that could be better is if you were researching flsa cases for a prof

I worked 40-50 hours a week while a full time 3L, how would people even know that you are over the 20 hours mark?

Technically, your school can still retain a 20-hour policy if they want to; they just are no longer required to do so by the ABA. My school's policy has yet to change, but I know several people who work more than 20 hours anyway. We're all adults; we can figure out when the number of hours we are working is impacting our ability to complete our assignments for school.

MPTPWZ1026 wrote:Technically, your school can still retain a 20-hour policy if they want to; they just are no longer required to do so by the ABA. My school's policy has yet to change, but I know several people who work more than 20 hours anyway. We're all adults; we can figure out when the number of hours we are working is impacting our ability to complete our assignments for school.

Sure, schools can institute local policies limiting work hours, but they can no longer justify them on ABA rules. I think most law schools remain oblivious to this change; if they want to retain the old policy, they'll have to develop independent justifications.

Anonymous User wrote:I worked 40-50 hours a week while a full time 3L, how would people even know that you are over the 20 hours mark?

i assumed character & fitness people would call to ask

Would C&F even bother with it now? And quite frankly, how would working over 20 hours show bad character?

"He or she works too hard"; or "This person is too dedicated to his/her job."

kykiske wrote:Would C&F even bother with it now? And quite frankly, how would working over 20 hours show bad character?

"He or she works too hard"; or "This person is too dedicated to his/her job."

"This person violates clearly defined rules if they feel the behavior is justified"

bjsesq wrote:

kykiske wrote:Would C&F even bother with it now? And quite frankly, how would working over 20 hours show bad character?

"He or she works too hard"; or "This person is too dedicated to his/her job."

"This person violates clearly defined rules if they feel the behavior is justified"

I suppose so?

I just don't see working over 20 hours as a poor reflection of someone's character. Aside from it being a technical violation of a rule that has now been removed.

I don't think C&F has the resources to do much more than a cursory background check. My guess is they have access to a tool that lets them search public records, but I doubt they are doing much calling around. Doing an in depth background check is resource intensive.

Am I naive in thinking that even if you work over 20 hours--and the rule was still effective--that C&F wouldn't reject your admission?

Because now you guys have ME anxious. I'm sure over the course of these past 2.5 years, I've worked more than twenty hours in a week at a single place. And if that's enough to get you canned by C&F, well, I'm screwed--assuming they discover it through an investigation.

Nobody every told me that there was some 20 hour rule, nobody enforces the rule, and nobody investigates, especially not for C&F.