Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Here's To A Great 2013

The last year has been a banner year for this site and the law school scam in general. A lot of important work has been done by the contributors on this site. We have directly engaged professors and shown that we will not be silenced until there is meaningful change in how law schools operate. The end of the year is a good time for reflection. So, we all want to share our thoughts on what we feel was the most important development this past year.

MA: The continued precipitous decline in law school enrollment was an encouraging sign that more and more people are unwilling to swallow the lies being disseminated by deans and professors. Since 2010, some schools’ entering classes have been cut in half. We must be vigilant though. Law profs take every negative story and try to spin it so that it looks like law school is still a good option for students. Law professors are now writing articles telling students that the drop in enrollment means that the job market will reach an equilibrium by 2020. We must continue to fight these falsehoods in 2014 and we cannot stop until the worst schools are either shuttered or forced to cut tuition to the point that attending law school is no longer an albatross that hangs around graduates’ necks for the rest of their lives.

dybbuk:  Happy New Year!  2014 will almost certainly be the fourth consecutive year of substantial declines in law school applications, declines I believe are due in significant measure to the scamblogs. A few more years of truth-telling in our online forums should rip away any lingering illusions about prestige or versatility, and drive down applications even further. When University and law school trustees realize that the law school scam can no longer generate enough money to meet expenses, let alone support a professorial Dolce Vita, they will be compelled to develop and implement a much less expensive and training-oriented model of legal education, perhaps run by the practicing bar instead of by six-figure salaried pseudoscholars who are lawyers in name only. Either that or they will have to shutter their law schools altogether-- in my imagination to the musical accompaniment of Ode to Joy.

dupednontraditional:  Friends, the burden of proof is shifting away from indebted graduates and disillusioned practitioners, and back to the purveyors of the law school scam themselves, where it squarely belongs.  I think we can safely say that gone are the days where ScamDeans and LawProfs can regurgitate a pithy, half-baked article or a dismissive interview with no data, and that be enough in and of itself to put critics on the defensive.  The pain is real, and more and more people are getting the message.  While some commenters complain that the scamblogs rarely have anything "new" to say, it is precisely the need to repeat the tried-and-true message that helps us win the information war and alert new readers before they become new statistics.  Onward and upward into 2014!

OTLSS:  This year has seen yet another decline in student interest in attending law school, and also a commensurate increase in interest in the message that law school (and in many cases higher education) is a broken system that is run for the benefit of profiteers, not students.  The focus has started to shift from education to money.  The conversation is changing from highlighting the victims to instead highlighting the scammers.  You'll note that this blog (and blogs like Third Tier Reality) are at their most effective when highlighting the personal greed and stupidity of those professors who are desperately trying to hide behind their titles and degrees and scholarship.  While we need to continue to press the message that a JD is a worthless degree and that there are still no jobs for law grads, we also need to focus on highlighting the personal stories of professorial malfeasance - these stories generate interest, and they focus the attention on exactly where the student loan money is going.  And by following the money, following each and every one of the hundreds of thousands of dollars borrowed in non-dischargeable debt as it flutters from student to professor, we can really bring into focus the sheer madness of the system.

LSTC:  Happy New Year!  2013 was a great year in that the next few dominoes towards real reform in the legal education sector fell.  Whereas 2011 and 2012 were largely about raising consciousness of the issues that had been existing and worsening for some time, 2013 saw state bar associations begin to question legal education and applications dropping to levels that threaten sustainability for mid- and lower-level law schools.  Whereas deans and administrators could easily dismiss verbalized complaints and courtroom allegations of fraud, they cannot fight against the dwindling supply of money in the pot.  Stakeholders will not indefinitely support law schools when they're a money-losing proposition spitting out graduates that the market cannot bear.  Budgets can only be slashed so much before several law schools will be staring closure in the face.  The most entitled and least-networked professors will be whining rather loudly.

Charles Cooper:  540,000 page views; that speaks for itself.  I think the most important development in 2013 was the fact that the message turned from dismissable myth to undeniable reality in the eyes of many professors, students and lawyers.  They finally woke up and realized that the scambloggers were right after all, and that there is a problem with the system.  But there's still a massive disconnect between the acknowledgement of the problem and the reality of its effects, rather like an addict knowing that he takes too much cocaine but thinks that it's not a problem because he still gets to work on time, pays the mortgage, and puts the kids to bed in the evening.  There's plenty of work to do in 2014, and I'm looking forward to playing my part - it's a worthwhile cause, and one in which I wish more people would become actively involved.

AdamB:  I just wanted to thank the original admin for starting this project to fill the void of the mostly inactive Inside the Law School Scam.  Without that moment of inspiration, the scamblog circuit would have started to weaken.  Now, we wield a power that many in the law school world fear.  The recent retaliation by certain professors shows how much power we have.  The tables will continue to turn this year.

28 comments:

  1. One year until 2015, which Back to the Future part II promised flying cars and a world without lawyers.

    ReplyDelete
  2. To channel the great Elegant Elliot..."These law school deans and professsors are nothing more than two bit four bit troglodyte bedlamite Loogaroos!"

    ReplyDelete
  3. As 2014 progresses, work to expose another truth:

    This country doesn’t need, can’t support, and isn’t now supporting the EXISTING number of professional attorneys --i.e., lawyers who intend to be paid for their work. Adding more to the oversurplus is pointless, and paying money and expending life's precious capital in order to be redundant is not the formula for a satisfying life. More to the point, the justice system and the economy can no longer tolerate a rising tide of hungry solos looking to propel lawsuits in order to feed themselves. In most quarters, tort reform remains popular and no one's talking about rolling it back.

    As a result, many law schools must and will wither. It doesn't matter if they slash tuition by 60%, hire litigation-tested profs who consistently publish Harvard-level research that is repeatedly cited by courts, offer outstanding clinics, and transform the third year into a symposium that lets students intern for courts by day and work for top firms by night. There's no need for any more lawyers. There's no need for all those we already have.

    Don’t let the Potemkin village of the first Associateship or first Clerkship convince you otherwise. Many law firms' operating models have long involved hiring young meat to perform the laborious --but necessary-- grunt work, yet keep them from ever getting too close to the clients in order to protect the firms' precious hold on their cash cow: the Revolving Door. Even if there are some revolving associateships and clerkships out there, they aren’t stable jobs... and certainly not careers.

    Too many lawyers is bad for lawyering. And there have been far too many for far too long. The current state of affairs isn't a blip on the radar, an Obama-created anomaly, or a correction. It's the new normal.

    In 2014, work to ensure the public understands that the JD isn’t a desirable degree because it’s not in demand. Acceptable long-term outcomes –let alone careers-- in law are now rare as hen’s teeth. Improving the law schools and refashioning the professoriate can’t and won’t change that one iota.

    Find something else to do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. After 20 years of observation, you are entirely correct "Acceptable long term outcomes- let alone careers- in law are now as rare as hen's teeth" !!!! completely true!

      Delete
    2. "This country doesn’t need, can’t support, and isn’t now supporting the EXISTING number of professional attorneys"

      Maybe that is why they abolished them in 2015 in Back to the Future Part II.

      Delete
  4. FYI folks, good old professor Leiter is going after scambloggers on Huffington Post-

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-leiter/american-law-schools_b_4508504.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's his usual MO: paint scambloggers as malcontents who are denigrating a perfectly working system. He's a joke.

      Delete
    2. Leiter more or less talks like a politician and never really says anything, and drones on about a history and large trends and a big macroeconomic picture.

      But where does he go after scambloggers? All I saw was a link to the old NY Times article. He has a part II coming up so wait and see.

      Delete
    3. @ 8:35
      You're right, this first article looks to be setting up his argument (the recession caused the problem, and students should have known better).

      I'm anticipating an attack based on the foreshadowing in his final sentences:
      "What was surprising was a new "meme" that took hold in cyberspace: that this economic catastrophe was actually the fault of law schools and law professors! I return to that topic in Part II."

      Might be worthwhile to get out in front of this one. Would HuffPo publish a counter-argument...?

      Delete
    4. I agree that he's re-hashing myths (i.e., lies) that law school supporters argue:

      1. Everything was just fine before the 2008 recession hit. The legal job market was bad way before that.

      2. Student loans became non-dischargable in 2005. Clearly, student loans were non-dischargable way before 2005.

      3. It's not the fault of law schools. Apparently, they shouldn't be blamed for the high tuition.

      Lastly, I don't think he was joking when he suggested that his salary should be doubled to increase the prestige of his law school.

      Delete
    5. When does part II come out?

      Delete
    6. Things Leiter ignores:

      1. Tuition was escalating relative to CPI prior to the recession.
      2. Law professor salaries were escalating relative to market value prior to the recession.
      3. Job opportunities and billable opportunities per capita have been dropping since prior to the recession thanks to technological advances that began 30 years ago.
      4. Twenty-one (21) ABA-accredited or seeking-accreditation law schools have opened in the last 20 years.
      5. Law schools and law professors are the only entities that have profited immensely from the situation of legal education for the past 25-30 years.
      6. Large law firms started closing partnership ranks prior to the recession.

      Delete
    7. Leiter writes: "(Ironically, it may have become too steep: we are on track to have more jobs than graduates seeking work by 2016, according to The National Jurist.)"

      Let's just say this does happen (it won't of course), but say it does - couldn't underemployed graduates from previous years take those jobs? Leiter would probably say no, because he seems to believe the vast majority of lawyers, even those who graduated over the past six years, are all doing very well thank you very much, and would have no interest in taking entry level jobs.

      In the Leiter-verse law has been, and always will be, an extremely rewarding and lucrative career, even for recent graduates. All these complaints from scambloggers and others are just a tiny disaffected minority of slackers who probably wouldn't do well even in boom times.

      Delete
    8. Bloggers be proud. This article is exhibit A that your work has had a tremendous impact. The Huff Post article is the desperate rambling of a desperate man. It's clear the scam is now common knowledge and he is trying to control the message. His characterization of Dybbuk is so exaggerated because he wants so badly to contaminate the messenger, but the truth is the message cannot be refuted, and they have no choice but to fight to obscure it.

      Clearly in a silent place the dominoes have already begun falling. Cry as they might, they only appear as fools. A barrel of ink can't save you Brian

      Delete
    9. Let me point out exactly how Leiter's fantasy world will fall apart within the next few years.

      (1) Incoming students to Chicago will tend to be less willing to pay enormous amounts in tuition, along with the annual unjustified increases that have caused so much poverty and misery among law students. Chicago will reduce its tuition and Leiter's salary will decrease.

      (2) Very few Chicago law graduates will get hired anywhere as law professors. Since Leiter, like most law professors at Top 10 schools, derives satisfaction and prestige from teaching future professors, his satisfaction and prestige will decrease. Hopefully, this will decrease his arrogance as well, or at least put an end to enormous and unjustified increases in his arrogance.

      Delete
  5. Great work OTLSS contributors!

    The large decline in law school enrollment is especially striking because the population is peaking for the general grad school age group. In the next few years, the population of this vulnerable age group will decrease . With continued scamblogging, enrollment should fall even further even faster. Keep up the great work!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Even Harvard Law professor Elizabeth Warren was forced to admit in 2012 that "the system is rigged." That was when Campos was still scamblogging, and the progress since then has been monumental.

    Congratulations to all our contributors, especially those who have "directly engaged professors" about urgent issues of public concern. There are some pampered and conceited buffoons out there who've never had to answer to taxpayers, former students, and the general public about "what's going on in there." I hope the New Year brings enlightenment to a few professors, and that others find out exactly how obnoxious their actions and attitudes are to normal working people.

    Keep up the good work. There are thousands of lives every year that need to be saved, and this blog is like a crisis line to prevent financial suicide. All the best to everyone in 2014.

    ReplyDelete
  7. My goal for 2014 is to engage the leadership of my state bar association and encourage the bar to take a stand on the issue(s) raised by the contributors on this blog. I will be attending a meeting with the new bar president in January. Unfortunately, the deans of the two law schools in the state appear to have a lot of influence with leadership. I will report back in late January. Happy New year all!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you BoCo. States bars must raise the level of state bar exams like Michigan has done. The bar pass rate for the commode law schools will plummet. Law schools produce too many lawyers that cannot write and think. Only the state bars can be proactive because ABA has no vision and no control of the legal profession. They are going to accredit 4 more schools.

      Delete
  8. Leiter expects "more jobs than graduates" in 2016 folks, so this is the best time in decades to apply to apply to Law School. LOL. You really almost have to feel bad for this little man. His entire ego and identity are wrapped up in being a big shot Prof at UC, and he sees his entire world being demeaned by the law school crises. Even UC is reducing admission standards. My cousin got in with a 165 LSAT. Not bad, but not typically UC material. On the other hand he is full pay . . so helping to pay Leiter's salary (and he is from a poor background, which means he is borrowing every penny for tuition and costs). I'm sure Leiter has no problems taking his money so he can enter this Narcissistic and Psychopathic profession.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Leiter is an uebermensch, a superior being, and the destiny of an uebermensch is to demand that the untermenschen, the inferior beings, give him whatever he wants. If they have to borrow to do it, that's their problem. He's far above all that.

      Delete
  9. Two jobs for every grad. Yippee!! Happy days are here again. Kool aid will flow in the streams.

    But what about all those 9 year lawyers struggling to launch a microfirm having been dumped from big law over the past 25 years??

    Unemployment and underemployment. They're not just for newly minted lawyers anymore.

    Happy new year.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Leiter couldn't let 2013 slip away without having the last word!

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-leiter/law-schools-cyber-hysteria_b_4517107.html

    Happy New Year to everyone here. Please keep up the good work. 2014 will be an even better year.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Happy New Year to all of you. It has been fun putting the pigs up against the ropes, and beating them in the face and snout with brutal left hooks and right crosses. The goal is to put their faces and asses in the ground.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Given your boxing metaphor, I'd prefer to see their snouts and asses "on the canvas."

      Delete
  12. Leiter erroneously says or glosses that the scambloggers are unemployed in his part 2.

    He also presented a full 2 part nervous wreck jumping from subject to subject display and with hardly any comments to follow.

    Is that the best Leiter can do? Kind of sad

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think Leiter's reasoning would be that anyone who spends a lot of time posting online can't be spending much time doing their job.

      And since Leiter spends a lot of time posting online...

      Delete
  13. Great Job to you all. It gives me such satisfaction to see these law school pigs with their backs up against the wall.

    ReplyDelete