Top Law Schools

Hey guys, I'm a first time poster and these are my stats:

GPA:3.77 (University of California campus)
LSAT: 168
URM: Mexican (First gen american)

My overall GPA trend in college has been upward; I had a rough time during my first few months but stepped it up and got good grades afterward. I honestly did better than I originally expected on the LSAT so I am now exploring new options to consider/actually apply. My first choice would be to stay in California but I am really open to anything right now!


Thanks you guys in advance for your time and for any suggestions provided!

Well, according to LSN, only one URM with your numbers applied in the last few cycles, but he got into Stanford, which is a good sign. I'd apply broadly to the T14. You should get fee wavers at just about all of them if you request them and note your URM status.

I think you have a good shot everywhere depending on the strength of your app outside your numbers. Y is likely out but I think you have a good shot at HS especially S, which seems to really like MAs from CA (high yield?).

Thank you guys for the replies! In all honestly Y was never in the plans, I was focusing my attention on USC, UCLA, and Boalt. Would a retake be something to consider? The score I got is the only one I have so far but I'm uncertain as to what amount of $ it can get me. I'd been playing with LSN prior to getting my scores and writing this post, but I always had trouble assessing the boost (or lack thereof in some schools?) of having URM status.

User1521 wrote:Thank you guys for the replies! In all honestly Y was never in the plans, I was focusing my attention on USC, UCLA, and Boalt. Would a retake be something to consider? The score I got is the only one I have so far but I'm uncertain as to what amount of $ it can get me. I'd been playing with LSN prior to getting my scores and writing this post, but I always had trouble assessing the boost (or lack thereof in some schools?) of having URM status.

Is there any particular reason you'd take USC or UCLA over Stanford at sticker or Boalt with $$$, because those seem like more likely targets for your numbers.

I don't think a retake is necessary to get into Stanford, which LSN indicates (albeit with a small sample size) is willing to admit people with your numbers. On the other hand, a 170+ retake might help you squeeze more money out of Boalt, which seems to be historically pretty stingy.

You'll also want to apply to other top schools in the hope of using Boalt's scholarship matching program, although they seem to be pretty stingy about that as well?

SnakySalmon wrote: Is there any particular reason you'd take USC or UCLA over Stanford at sticker or Boalt with $$$, because those seem like more likely targets for your numbers.

I don't think a retake is necessary to get into Stanford, which LSN indicates (albeit with a small sample size) is willing to admit people with your numbers. On the other hand, a 170+ retake might help you squeeze more money out of Boalt, which seems to be historically pretty stingy.

You'll also want to apply to other top schools in the hope of using Boalt's scholarship matching program, although they seem to be pretty stingy about that as well?

Well, to be honest S wasn't in my radar as I thought my numbers were not high enough, I guess it may be worth exploring now? I am admittedly debt-averse, so I would probably consider a slightly lower ranked school that offers me more $. My top choice would be Berkeley but as you mentioned they are pretty stingy about it.

Your numbers are *meh* for Stanford, you aren't totally out of the running but your'e far from certain. I would bank on UCLA/USC full rides or close. Cal should come through, although it's unpredictable.

You should apply to Michigan, Duke, and Penn at least for negotiation purposes. Berkeley requires you to submit matching scholarship applications, and they won't consider UCLA (Even full ride) or lower. I would throw an app to Harvard if you think you're getting significant need-based aid.. otherwise Berkeley with a large scholarship is probably better for your goals.

User1521 wrote:

SnakySalmon wrote: Is there any particular reason you'd take USC or UCLA over Stanford at sticker or Boalt with $$$, because those seem like more likely targets for your numbers.

I don't think a retake is necessary to get into Stanford, which LSN indicates (albeit with a small sample size) is willing to admit people with your numbers. On the other hand, a 170+ retake might help you squeeze more money out of Boalt, which seems to be historically pretty stingy.

You'll also want to apply to other top schools in the hope of using Boalt's scholarship matching program, although they seem to be pretty stingy about that as well?

Well, to be honest S wasn't in my radar as I thought my numbers were not high enough, I guess it may be worth exploring now? I am admittedly debt-averse, so I would probably consider a slightly lower ranked school that offers me more $. My top choice would be Berkeley but as you mentioned they are pretty stingy about it.

I think S is in play right now, but with a 170+ its easily in play and I think you're all but guaranteed H if the rest of your app is solid. I'm a MA who retook a 168 --> 173 because 168 was below my PT average and I didn't want to have any doubts.

One thing I will say though is that you should tailor your apps to specific schools as much as you can + apply early. Schools will likely view an URM with a 168 --> 170+ retake and a 3.7+ GPA as HYS bound and you'll probably have a good bit of YP.

aboutmydaylight wrote:

User1521 wrote:

SnakySalmon wrote: Is there any particular reason you'd take USC or UCLA over Stanford at sticker or Boalt with $$$, because those seem like more likely targets for your numbers.

I don't think a retake is necessary to get into Stanford, which LSN indicates (albeit with a small sample size) is willing to admit people with your numbers. On the other hand, a 170+ retake might help you squeeze more money out of Boalt, which seems to be historically pretty stingy.

You'll also want to apply to other top schools in the hope of using Boalt's scholarship matching program, although they seem to be pretty stingy about that as well?

Well, to be honest S wasn't in my radar as I thought my numbers were not high enough, I guess it may be worth exploring now? I am admittedly debt-averse, so I would probably consider a slightly lower ranked school that offers me more $. My top choice would be Berkeley but as you mentioned they are pretty stingy about it.

I think S is in play right now, but with a 170+ its easily in play and I think you're all but guaranteed H if the rest of your app is solid. I'm a MA who retook a 168 --> 173 because 168 was below my PT average and I didn't want to have any doubts.

One thing I will say though is that you should tailor your apps to specific schools as much as you can + apply early. Schools will likely view an URM with a 168 --> 170+ retake and a 3.7+ GPA as HYS bound and you'll probably have a good bit of YP.

This is true. IIRC, UCLA has a particularly aggressive YP policy, so if you want a full ride there you'll have to write a why UCLA, and expect to be waitlisted until you send a LOCI.

User1521 wrote:Hey guys, I'm a first time poster and these are my stats:

GPA:3.77 (University of California campus)
LSAT: 168
URM: Mexican (First gen american)

My overall GPA trend in college has been upward; I had a rough time during my first few months but stepped it up and got good grades afterward. I honestly did better than I originally expected on the LSAT so I am now exploring new options to consider/actually apply. My first choice would be to stay in California but I am really open to anything right now!


Thanks you guys in advance for your time and for any suggestions provided!

I'm also a Mexican URM (though not 1st generation), with a worse GPA and a better LSAT. I had a very waitlist-heavy cycle, but I also got into some very good schools through regular admission. My advice to you is APPLY BROADLY, because you could have a very weird cycle. Example: I was waitlisted at Penn, Michigan, and NYU, but admitted to Chicago, Stanford and UVA. I applied early to all of them. I cannot fathom any reason why GPA-centric Chicago would want me, but LSAT-centric NYU would waitlist me. But it happened, and I am very, very glad that I applied to schools throughout the T14, instead of just the schools where common sense suggested I had the best chance.

Retaking would obviously be ideal, but only if you really think that you can hit 170+. Since you said that you did better than you expected, it sounds like you may have had an LSAT that played to your strengths. If that's so, you're going to want to aggressively study for the retake. Or perhaps you just underestimate yourself, and you won't need to study that hard.

Again, thank all of you for the replies! This 'conversation' has been really helpful.

jbagelboy wrote:Your numbers are *meh* for Stanford, you aren't totally out of the running but your'e far from certain. I would bank on UCLA/USC full rides or close. Cal should come through, although it's unpredictable.

You should apply to Michigan, Duke, and Penn at least for negotiation purposes. Berkeley requires you to submit matching scholarship applications, and they won't consider UCLA (Even full ride) or lower. I would throw an app to Harvard if you think you're getting significant need-based aid.. otherwise Berkeley with a large scholarship is probably better for your goals.

Thanks for pointing this out for me as I was actually unaware of it. I actually asked my prelaw advisor about programs like this but didn't get any feedback.

Iroh wrote:
I'm also a Mexican URM (though not 1st generation), with a worse GPA and a better LSAT. I had a very waitlist-heavy cycle, but I also got into some very good schools through regular admission. My advice to you is APPLY BROADLY, because you could have a very weird cycle. Example: I was waitlisted at Penn, Michigan, and NYU, but admitted to Chicago, Stanford and UVA. I applied early to all of them. I cannot fathom any reason why GPA-centric Chicago would want me, but LSAT-centric NYU would waitlist me. But it happened, and I am very, very glad that I applied to schools throughout the T14, instead of just the schools where common sense suggested I had the best chance.

Retaking would obviously be ideal, but only if you really think that you can hit 170+. Since you said that you did better than you expected, it sounds like you may have had an LSAT that played to your strengths. If that's so, you're going to want to aggressively study for the retake. Or perhaps you just underestimate yourself, and you won't need to study that hard.

First of all, congratulations! Those are all amazing schools and I would be very happy to attend any one of them. Regarding the retake, I am confident that I can improve on the score a bit, but would it be advisable even for a small improvement (e.g. 168 -> 169)? Also, I still have a year left in school so I expect my GPA to go up (I also expect my LSDAS GPA to bit slightly higher as my school gives out A+, of which I have a few). I mention this as it may then be more advisable to focus on the GPA? I guess I'm nervous about the possibility of scoring lower on the retake and unsure how it may look.

OP - I PM'd you. I was in somewhat of a similar boat and may have some insight here.

User1521 wrote:I actually asked my prelaw advisor about programs like this but didn't get any feedback.

Take what these people tell you with a huge grain of salt. A lot of them seem to be clueless boomers.

Echo the "apply everywhere for scholarship leverage" advice.