I will openly admit I
could be wrong about CPT/OPT. I never researched it well enough to be sure of what I've heard. However, I think it's important for OP to be aware of, as is the issue of what they plan on doing post-graduation, and firms may still not want to make offers for summer employment to someone not authorized to work here when they graduate. It's something important to find the right answer to, and open dialogue can't harm that.
PriOSky wrote:vanwinkle wrote:
1) If you want a degree that is internationally portable, you definitely want to be shooting for H/Y/C IMO. Lower-ranked schools just won't be as well-recognized or valuable abroad.
vanwinkle,
I'm quite interested in what you wrote. What do you mean by "internationally portable"? How hard is it to practice business/corporate law in Singapore, London, and Hong Kong with a JD from HYS CCN?
There are two separate problems for using any American law degree abroad:
1) These degrees are designed to prepare you for American law. Even Harvard, which is massive and has a relatively large number of international students, has few international law courses. Their programs are designed less to prepare you to practice law anywhere and more to prepare anyone from anywhere to practice law here. The basic skills are still regarded as valuable, if you went to a school prestigious enough that they recognize the value of it abroad, but you can't just expect to take any American law degree and be employable anywhere.
2) Internationally there's not much awareness, let alone recognition, of law school prestige below the top. Harvard is just known everywhere, and there are constantly international tourists visiting the campus as a tourist attraction while they're in the U.S. Yale, Stanford, and Columbia are names that can carry some real weight even internationally, but not as universally, and below that the drop-off is steep. I mean, to put this in perspective, the people I knew in Texas weren't aware that Virginia or Michigan are prestigious law schools. Prestige works different among lawyers than laypeople, but lawyers in Hong Kong or London (for example) just won't have much exposure to lawyers from schools below the top and thus aren't likely to know what they even are.
And prestige matters with clients, too; if they're paying good money for representation, they're going to want to know they're getting good work, and they don't know legal rankings like lawyers do. "He went to Harvard" is enough in Asia and Europe, where the school is well-known and well-regarded. The more you have to explain the value of the degree the less valuable it is.
If, here in America, someone goes "He went to Oxford," you know instantly you're speaking to someone who was accepted to and trained at one of England's most historic and prestigious academic institutions. But how do you respond if you hear, "He went to East London"? Wouldn't your first thought be to question what East London is, what makes it impressive, if it's impressive in the first place? Imagine that, but in reverse.
Really, the most valuable jobs for people with American JDs abroad are with firms that handle international business between America and that country. Those are often high-dollar jobs handling high-dollar issues, and prestige matters as a selling point for those firms. While much work can be handled domestically on each side, there are some lawyers employed overseas to help with international business there. Where those jobs exist, they typically go to people from the top few law schools.