The law-school scam reaches the Philippines?

Manila, one of the largest cities in the world, is home to an über-toilet law school that has been ordered by the Legal Education Board to close down. Specifically, the University of Manila College of Law can no longer operate because, according to the article, "the college failed to meet prescribed curriculum and academic requirements, performed poorly in the Bar Exams, and lacked adequate facilities and resources".

This law school was ordered to close its doors in June of last year, but it continues to accept new students. Enrolling there is quite unsafe: the LEB has reminded the public that it does not recognize the law school, so presumably a graduate might not be eligible for admission to the bar.

Unlike the pusillanimous, scam-enabling ABA, the LEB seems willing to take on what must be a prominent university. It is well known that numerous law schools in the US exhibit all of the defects listed above and more (something tells me that the U of Manila doesn't offer courses on law & hip-hop or publish self-indulgent crapola about The Open Road), yet hardly ever does the ABA do anything about them. 

Four million readers

OTLSS has now been read more than four million times. The anti-scam movement certainly faces challenges, but we continue to mount a strong resistance to the law-school scam. Thanks to our readers and posters for their support. 

Law school does not teach essential skills

This report from Canada would apply to the US, too: lawyers find that they never learned basic business skills during law school.

Indeed, who would teach such skills? Scam-professors look down their noses at the practice of law. Few of them have any real experience in it. No course on anything practical was offered throughout my time n law school.

Imagine medical school without any practical training: graduates would not know rudimentary first aid. That is reality in the legal realm: people are thrown into the practice of law with no experience, no guidance, nothing. And most of them do not even know very much law. 

Scam-fostering publication promotes law school to older people

As if it had not misled the public badly enough with its "rankings", You Ass News has run an article promoting law school to people well beyond the typical age range.

Long-standing readers OTLSS will know that age-based discrimination is very real in the so-called legal profession. Old Guy in particular has written about his experience as a law student past forty: he came in at the top of the class at his élite law school only to find that he could not get so much as an interview anywhere—except for a federal clerkship that did not help him to find other work. He went through lengthy periods of unemployment before ending up in an unsatisfactory role as a lawyer. 

Do not suppose that Old Guy's case is unusual. On the contrary, it reflects the reality of widespread age-based discrimination in the legal realm. But the article cited above mentions this little detail only in passing, near the end: "While you may face hurdles like age discrimination in the legal field, you may also benefit from greater life experience, more resources and connections, and higher clarity of purpose." You will experience age discrimination, and you won't benefit much from those other traits when the time comes to look for work.

Old Guy is an example of someone who Did Everything Right yet still turned out badly because of entrenched discrimination in law. A typical law student beyond age 29, without an élite law school or an élite law review or a federal clerkship or the other nominal advantages that Old Guy had, can expect to fare even worse. If you are over 29, law school is not for you. You can scream about human rights until you are blue in the face, but that will do nothing to land you a job. If you still go off to law school notwithstanding this baleful warning, do not come crying later to Old Guy. 

U of North Dakota contemplates deadly drop in standards

The law school at the University of North Dakota anticipates a shortfall of $2.1 million by 2028. In response, it proposes to raise fees and expand the entering class from 85 to 100 students.

The dean admits that greater expansion might well push his über-toilet into "accepting students that may struggle to pass the bar exam". Indeed, already the LSAT score at the 25th percentile is a horrible 146, and the admission of 15 more students, to say nothing of a greater number, would likely send that score tumbling. It is difficult to imagine where the U of North Dakota could find even 15 more students per year without dipping at least a few points on the LSAT, and probably quite a few.

The dean's statement amounts to a shameful admission that the law school as it stands hovers just above the threshold for students of truly horrible calibre—those who would struggle to pass any bar exam. It is a predatory institution that puts its existence, and the advancement of its faculty, ahead of the needs and interests of its students. 

There simply is no need for a law school in North Dakota, especially one that draws its so-called students principally from the marginal group that will struggle with any bar exam if it does manage to graduate. Rather than coming up with a few million dollars and thinking of admitting even worse trash, the dean should have the honesty to concede that his über-toilet should be wound up as soon as possible. 

Law school in El Paso "feasible"

Another "feasibility study" has alleged the need for a new law school, this time in El Paso, Texas. And the U of Texas at El Paso calls itself the perfect home for this would-be über-toilet. 

The state's legislative body commissioned the so-called study from Kennedy & Company Education Strategies, a firm in Virginia that offers various consulting services to universities. On its Web site, we read that its "feasibility studies can help serve as an advocacy document to Boards of Trustees or funding authorities to provide accurate forecasts for the investment needed to support high-quality programming in new fields". Or to legislatures that want "advocacy"—propaganda—rather than sound, independent analysis. 

According to the "study", this law school would need ten years to become financially self-sustaining. It would require an infusion of $20 million in capital. That does not include the cost of constructing a building needed on account of "limited campus space and accreditation requirements"—supposedly $60–110 million more. And we are expected to believe that an über-toilet in desolate Hell Paso with a maximum of 100 students per class would generate enough profit to pay back a nine-figure outlay, or that it would serve the public well enough to justify an unrecovered expenditure of that size. 

Let's hope that sane voices will prevail in the Lone Star State. Old Guy, however, isn't betting on it. 

Golden Gate remains closed

After Golden Gate announced its closure, disgruntled students and alumni sued for an injunction requiring the über-toilet to continue its operations. Unsurprisingly, they lost. Golden Gate is part of law-school-scam history.

As for the various claims arising from alleged breach of contract, "plaintiffs are unlikely to prevail on any of them" (at 3). Not exactly a ringing endorsement from the bench.

With this decision, Golden Gate is the sixteenth ABA-accredited law school to close since 2016:

Cooley (one campus)

Hamline (merged with Mitchell)

Indiana Tech

Whittier

Charlotte

Savannah

Valpo

Arizona Summit

Cooley (a second campus)

Thomas Jefferson (relinquished ABA accreditation in favor of state accreditation)

La Verne (relinquished ABA accreditation in favor of state accreditation)

Concordia

Cooley (a third campus)

Florida Coastal

Penn State Law (probably) 

Golden Gate

Which law school will be the next to close?