Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Putrid Desperation: Rutgers School of Law - Camden Actively Recruits Those Who Took the GMAT!

Dean Rayman Solomon Bitching About a Drop in Applications to His Commode:

On March 13, 2012, John Ostapkovich presented a CBS Philly piece labeled “Rutgers Dean Sees Sharp Drop In Law School Applicants, Blames Takeover Talk.” Here is a morsel of the dean’s nonsense:

“Dean Rayman Solomon says law school applications have been down nationally due to what he considers overblown worries about the value of a law degree, but that’s not all.

“That was for starters. And then when the news of the potential merger, it was right around when many applications come in, and our volume dropped precipitously,” he tells KYW Newsradio.”

This fool apparently believes that his school is entitled to a large surplus of applicants each year – even in the midst of a fundamental restructuring of the U.S. economy! Listen, bitch: people sometimes make rational financial decisions. Law school should be approached PRIMARILY as an economic choice, i.e. “Will a law degree increase my future potential earnings?” Another question that prospective law students must ask themselves: “Will the possible benefits exceed the certain drawbacks, such as additional student debt and three years out of the full-time workforce?!”

Rutgers SOL-Camden Turd Further Sinks in the Rankings:

I profiled this commode on March 11, 2012. At the time, it was rated as the 84th greatest, most magnificent law school in the entire nation. After the dweebs at US “News” & World Report released their newest rankings on March 13, 2012, this trash pit was listed as the 99th best law school in the land.

Prior to this, RuTTger$-Newark and RuTTger$ Sewer of Law-Camden were both ranked the 84th greatest law school, in the United States. Now, Rutgers-Newark is ranked 82nd best, while Rutgers-Camden is now rated as the 99th most magnificent law school in the nation.

RuTTger$-Camden Solicits GMAT Test Takers to Apply to the Toilet:

On May 20, 2012, LSAT Blog reported on this development in an entry entitled “Rutgers Law School Takes GMAT Scores.” Check out this biting commentary:

"Last week, Rutgers School of Law at Camden sent out an email blast suggesting that the school would accept GMAT scores as an alternative to LSAT scores. (HT: Above the Law; Campos)

Why would they do such a thing? Well, amid declining applicant numbers, lower-tier law schools must work harder than ever to maintain their class sizes in order to keep tuition money coming in.

They apparently sent out this email to people who hadn't even expressed interest in law school. Given how intimidating the LSAT may seem at first, Rutgers Camden is looking to make it easier than ever to apply:

The traditional law school program is a three-year program, which is extremely attractive to most graduate students given the difficult economy. The program is open to all students who have completed their undergraduate education with a 3.3 GPA or higher and scored in the 70th percentile or higher on any one core section of the GMAT. [Emphasis in original]

At some point, I half expect to see a festering ABA-accredited stink pit accept applicants who can color within the lines, or place the correct shapes in their respective pegs. But this is a prestigious “profession,” right?!?!

Pig Boy Defends His Sewer's Pathetic-Ass Sales Pitch:

On May 22, 2012, Debra Cassens Weiss posted a story on ABA Journal, under the headline “Rutgers at Camden Law Dean Defends Marketing Pitch Touting Salaries of $130K for ‘Many Top Students.’” Here is an excerpt:

“A marketing pitch sent to prospective students by Rutgers University School of Law at Camden touted a 90 percent employment rate in the legal field for its employed graduates and top private-practice salaries in excess of $130,000 for “many top students.”

Now law dean Rayman Solomon is defending those claims after critics charged that the statistics are misleading, Inside Higher Ed reports.

According an analysis by Law School Transparency, no more than five recent graduates reported a salary of $130,000. And the 90 percent employment statistics include jobs where having a J.D. is an advantage, the group says. Solomon said he didn't dispute the group's figures, but disagreed with its analysis.” [Emphasis mine]

Conclusion: In the final analysis, this school is a trash pit that does not care about its students’ outcomes. This crass sales pitch is further proof that the ABA-approved diploma mills simply want more asses in seats. The school is not concerned if these marks are even interested in becoming lawyers. Keep in mind that this toilet is ranked 99th, out of 200 ABA-accredited law schools. We know that with declining LSAT takers and applicants, several garbage pits are becoming desperate. It is all about the money – and “legal education” is designed to support tenured “professors,” staff and bloated university administrations. In contrast, could you imagine U.S. medical or dental schools lowering their admissions standards, soliciting to potential applicants or extending their deadlines by several months?!?!


  1. Why am I not surprised by this shit? I mean for fuck's sake Seton Hall places better in this area. Maybe they'll accept ACT scores next year.

    1. I think that all you naysayers are positively CRAZY.

      No career prospects at Rutgers? LOL! What about Elizabeth Warren? She graduated from Rutgers Law, and she was hired by Harvard University as a law school professor. And oh, by the way, she is the odds-on favorite to be the next U.S. senator from Massachusetts. And this is someone who graduated from Rutgers WITHOUT honors.

      Sounds like some pretty good prospects to me!

    2. 11:37 am ate paint chips as a kidJune 2, 2012 at 2:39 PM

      Fuck yourself. How many other Rutgers grads are doing that well? Oh and she went to Rutgers-Newark.

    3. 11:37 a.m.

      Elizabeth Warren got her JD in 1976. I will stipulate that a JD from a second tier law school like Rutgers, even without honors, is a good investment IF it includes a time machine that transports its graduates back to 1976.

    4. Hilarious exchange! The person who posted in support of Rutgers/Warren made me LOL. Great responses to his or her drivel.

  2. I suspect Rutgers-Camden is getting desperate since many people who submitted their deposits are rapidly withdrawing their committment to attend in the Fall. The drop in the rankings didn't help and the merger talks with Rowan pretty much makes a JD from this dump radioactive.

    This school was never good to begin with. Its location in Camden doesn't help. By the way, if you are White and decide to attend Rutgers-Camden, you will be subject to a 6PM curfew. Don't believe me? Ok, if you are White, go out after 6PM. I guarantee you will be arrested for being in a drug zone looking to buy narcotics. This has happened to quite a few people I know. Also, if you attend Rutgers-Camden, do NOT, I REPEAT DO NOT wear any Black or Red clothing. You may catch a bullet for being a suspected Blood or a Crip. Put it another way, if you attend school in Camden, you either hate yourself or have a death wish.

  3. The GMAT standard RU-Camden set is low. Any moron sleepwalk through college and "earn" a 3.3 GPA. The beauty of this admissions gaming scheme is that someone who would score a 145LSAT can get into this place and not have that score bring down the school (which is already sinking faster than a 5000 ton anchor).

  4. It's true that most medical schools will accept DAT scores as dental schools will accept MCAT scores. I took both the GMAT and the LSAT. The GMAt was extremely similar to the SAT. The LSAT; we were all there. In my opinion, neither the GMAT nor the LSAT bore any correlation to what there respective graduate programs. At least the MCAT takes college level subjects and tests them in a way they are used.

    * * *

    Does anyone know: From my information the law schools are still filling there classes, right? It is just the number of LSat takers that is down, right?

  5. I don't understand. Isn't the the LSAT required for applying for an ABA accredited Law School?

  6. This school is shit if it is in fact 'reaching out' to GMAT students. I mean those kids are trying to get into Master's degree and Phd programs, not law school. Just like a drug pusher checking out the local middle school for business.

  7. "Solomon said he didn't dispute the group's figures, but disagreed with its analysis."

    Wow, this guy's analytical skills must suck donkey balls. Motion for summary judgment granted. I sure hope no one has ever paid this goon to give them such analysis.

    "Inside Higher Ed asked Solomon if the numbers were misleading. "I don’t know how to respond," he replied. "If you have a hundred people, would four of them be misled? Would one be misled? Would 98 be misled? [It was] a piece that was designed to get people to think about something they hadn't thought about. This wasn’t the only information they could get about it.""

    Judas Iscariot, that's some poor fraud defense. Who trained this flaming idiot? Someone at the ABA head office needs to make a phone call and get him the Official Bill Robinson Guide to Pissing on the Downtrodden.

    "Dean Solomon graduated with a B.A. from Wesleyan University (1968) and has a J.D. (1976) and a Ph.D. (1986) in American Legal History from the University of Chicago."

    Yikes. Looks like he's a professor/expert of legal history a/k/a uselessness. This guy would be making like 40k a year selling vacuum parts if it weren't for the scam.

  8. Let's see why Cockroach Rayman Solomon would make such a tepid defense of his school's TTTT sales pitch.

    For this info, we head to the salary database provided by Collegiate Times. While this source provides income for employees at some public universities, the figures may not be comprehensive, i.e. they may not include bonuses, nontaxable benefits, other compensation, etc. The salary data is from 2009:

    Rayman Solomon raked in $266,895, as dean of this garbage can. As you can see, this ass-clown/selfish pig has at least 266,895 rea$on$ to defend the indefensible.

    By the way, at that income, this mental midget isn't smart enough to come up with a cogent response? Then again, a big-ass salary does not necessarily equate to high intelligence. Hell, a family cat that brings a dead bird or rodent into the house can make a better case for itself.

    Head to Solomon's faculty bio, so that you can take a look at this beady-eyed bastard. Nice combover, useless rat! Has anyone else noticed that many of these well-off "professors" and administrators often wear cheap suits, have decrepit teeth or are in terrible shape?! Can't these clowns afford a gym membership or a trip to the dentist? Hell, I know some 50 year old laborers who look better than these ass-wipes.

    Check out this incisive comment from ABA Journal reader "Pushkin," which was posted on May 22, 2012 at 1:26 pm:

    Question: “Are the numbers misleading?”

    Answer: “I don’t know how to respond. If you have a hundred people, would four of them be misled? Would one be misled? Would 98 be misled? It was a piece that was designed to get people to think about something they hadn’t thought about. This wasn’t the only information they could get about it.”

    Translation of Answer: “Yes, the numbers are misleading.”

    Yes, that was the response from head idiot/dean Rayman Solomon – when asked if the sewage pit’s sales pitch was misleading. A homeless person with a fraction of his education could have contrived a better reply, for the mere cost of a blanket, an Egg McMuffin and a cup of hot coffee.

  9. You keep beating a dead horse...but you do it in convincing (and sometimes funny) fashion. I give you credit for that. The scambloggers have made 'law school' synonymous with 'shit'. And that is an accomplishment. Last month, my friend and I were having lunch. She mentioned that her aunt talked her own daughter out of going to law school. Well, she sowed some seeds of doubt and they took hold is what I should say. She focused on the cost. And she also knew a little about rankings. Nice job. I never thought I'd see the day where average American parents would express doubt about their kids going to law school.

    1. The horse will only be dead when 80-90 percent of the lawl skoolz are closed and the student loan debts are cancelled.

      Right now the law schools are more like Germany in 1942; losing, but not on the run yet.

  10. Couple things about this. First, there is some poetic justice to seeing a law school scam artist complaining in public about a shortage of applicants to fill 1L seats. When those of us who have been affected by the law school scam voice our complaints, we hear responses from people like Solomon telling us to not be so entitled, and to take personal responsibility for our failings. When things go wrong for law school deans, apparently it is A-OK to complain in public. The hypocrisy is amazing.

    Other thing - I mentioned in a previous post that it wouldn't be too long before a law sewer closes down. I think we have a winner here. Its a law school that is desperate for 1Ls in a region that is seriously glutted with law schools. Its rakings are spinning around the bowl and going down the drain trap. Its in a shithole of a city. The school's shills are apparently going out looking for anyone who might be willing to enroll.

    I will put the prediction out here now that Rutgers-Camden will be the first ABA accredited law school to go under in the coming wave of law school failures.

    We are finally reaching the point where 0Ls are no longer willing to take out student loans for three years of Socratic head games and effective employment rates of 30%. The scambloggers can take the majority of credit for this change in opinion. I look forward to watching these toilets go under. It can't happen soon enough.

  11. T Money, I don't think Rutgers-Camden will be the first toilet to be decommissioned; although, I think Governor Christie is a crafty and brilliant fellow. You see, many Rutgers-Camden alumni are against the merger with Rowan. Ultimately, the taxpayer will support the Governor's initiative if Rutgers-Camden law school proves to be a drain for the Board of Trustees. It looks like Rutgers-Camden law will have a difficult time putting asses in seats. The taxpayers will grow tired of subsidizing the albatross known as Rutgers-Camden law school and the public support will ok the merger. I feel sorry for the poor souls who think the merger won't happen and enroll despite the ominous future of this school.

  12. Obvious post entry missed...

    Second Tier Toilet Hits the Downward Spiral

  13. PBS Show about Student Loan Debt. Paul Krugman is featured too:

  14. It's about fucking time we start seeing SL debt on primetime TV.

  15. Here is a link to a relevant story on the student loan debt trap:

    Law professors, law schools, and their associated colleges are scum bags. They cause so much damage in so many people's lives by making them debt slaves. Every time they sit down to a meal, that meal is partially paid for by putting someone into serious debt. How many horror stories have they created like the aforementioned story?

    Yet, they keep touting statistics of 99% employment to lure in fresh victims. They are scum. Instead of admitting the legal employment situation is fucked up and there are too many damn law schools with little quality control, they blame it on the economy.

    Law schools will do and say anything to keep the 30K, 40K, 50K, a year tuition rolling in. Sacred cow law professors work six hours a week, and teach little practical skills because most of them have practiced little or no law. Could you imagine going to dental school and not learning how to do a filling?

    The ABA and law schools have no problem teaching little practical skills. It makes it easy to pack large numbers of students in classes at 40K a head and the professor can be the sage on the stage recycling the same material for the next ten or twenty years. A graduate from a typical ABA accredited law school is qualified to commit malpractice upon passing the Bar exam, that's it.

    Most law professors shun the actual practice of law. They go almost straight into academics, build a little cocoon, and stay in there gorging on student loan money for the next twenty or thirty years. Legal education is outdated and has not changed much in the last 130 years. The only thing that has really changed in the last 100 years or so, is that it has become much more expensive to go to law school and the huge numbers of law graduates.

    1. This almost makes me want to take my Rutgers UG degree off my resume. (I went to Rutgers College, in New Brunswick.)

  16. You are too polite. Law professors are fucking shitbags. They hardly work and they make a ton of money. All they have to do is bankrupt thousands of students each year. These fuckers really should be taken out back and beaten senseless with brickbats.

    1. You are too polite! You forgot to add that most law professors wouldn't know a courtoom from a faculty lounge, and are no more able to train capable lawyers than a talking chimp.

  17. @7:47AM

    OMG Wow and well said.

    Thank You!

  18. What about doing Atlanta's John Marshall Law School? I see you have done Chicago's John Marshall Law. Here are the admission stats for John Marshall Atlanta:

    A. The LSAT and undergraduate GPA percentiles for the Fall 2011 entering class were as follows:


    148 25%

    150 50%

    152 75%


    2.52 25%

    2.82 50%

    3.16 75%

    I think it is safe to say they will not have to worry about, or be given the chance to represent corporations. Instead, these below ordinary law students prove that admission standards at ABA law schools can be very low.

  19. 'Right now the law schools are more like Germany in 1942; losing, but not on the run yet.'

    Great analogy.

  20. lustlarrystoiletservicesJune 1, 2012 at 11:03 AM

    Bwahahahaha! Rutgers camden is so pathetic it makes the seton hall law toilet look like the yale law toilet!


    Elie Mystal posted a piece on this filth pile’s conduct, on May 18, 2012. The story was titled “Law School Sales Pitch Doubles Down On The ‘Getting Rich’ Rationale For Law School.” Here is one juicy segment:

    “A tipster forwarded this recruitment pitch from Camille Andrews, Associate Dean of Enrollment at Rutgers Law – Camden. We understand that it was sent to “high-achieving” individuals. The first part of the email seems to just remind students that the job market is challenging — and offers up graduate school as a way to avoid the drama.

    “But it’s the second part of the pitch that really exposes just how law schools try to sell legal education:

    The School is proud to carry on the tradition of excellence at Rutgers University, which is one of the oldest and largest public institutions of higher learning in the nation. As a direct result of the quality of legal education at Rutgers, of those employed nine months after graduation, 90% were employed in the legal field and 90% were in full time positions. Our average starting salary for a 2011 graduate who enters private practice is in excess of $74,000, with many top students accepting positions with firms paying in excess of $130,000. In a recent Forbes publication, Rutgers School of Law-Camden was ranked 18th nationally as one of the “Best Law Schools for Getting Rich”. Rutgers is also ranked high in the nation at placing its students in prestigious federal and state clerkships.

    I hope that you will consider this opportunity and join this class. Please apply on-line at our web site at We are a direct student loan institution so financial aid is easily processed. We also have newly constructed on-campus law school apartments available, adjacent to the Law School and the Federal Courthouse, and guaranteed for our law students.”

    This conduct is beyond pathetic! Hopefully, the recipients of this disgusting email are smart enough to see through this garbage. In his closing remarks, Mystal expresses his doubts as to whether “sophisticated consumers” can filter this disinformation.

    “I’m sure the Rutgers Camden joint degree program is great for some people, but you see the problem here with how the school emphasizes the economic upside of a legal education. You can see how a person — especially a 22-year-old who hasn’t been trained like a lawyer about how to read a document carefully — can miss important words in this pitch. Let me replay the key lines with some emphasis added: “As a direct result of the quality of legal education at Rutgers, OF THOSE EMPLOYED NINE MONTHS AFTER GRADUATION, 90% were employed in the legal field and 90% were in full time positions. Our average starting salary for a 2011 graduate WHO ENTERS PRIVATE PRACTICE is in excess of $74,000, WITH MANY TOP STUDENTS accepting positions with firms paying in excess of $130,000.”

    Do you trust your average college graduate to notice all of that? Does Rutgers expect them to be able to parse through all of that? But hey, don’t worry kids, because financial aid is easy to get.” [Emphasis in original]

  22. Hey kids, want an opportunity to put "ESQ." after your name and boast to your friends and family that you are a member of a noble and prestigious profession? Sign up for law school. For a $200K payment for a JD, $4K for barbri and after passing the bar exam, you too can earn the princely sum of $10,000 a year working as an associate for a firm.

  23. Nando - thank you.

    Recent college grad here and one who was convinced he was going to law school through the whole of his undergrad career. Law was, in fact, the subject that interested me the most in school. I loved civics in high school and enjoyed taking many law oriented political science classes in college. I had heard the standard stories about job difficulty and debt. I didn’t care. It was my interest so it’s what I had to pursue. I was delusional, though not as badly as some. My goal was a Top 30 or I wouldn’t go. A good GPA in a fluff major and a top 30 worthy LSAT score later, I was all set to attend, er— re-attend Wisconsin, where I did undergrad (It is, unlike its law school, a fine university in a great town). “Tier 1!” Comparatively modest tuition for in-state! Alright!

    Then I read your blog, which I came across somehow in a corner of the internet unrelated to these topics. Oh, sweet serendipity. I wasn’t going to go anymore. Even if I got into a school better than Wisconsin, I would not and will not give them a dime. Not while these swine potentates are allowed sit on their halcyon islands amidst the swarming seas of piss and fermented bile known as law schools.

    While I was fortunate enough not to succumb to delusion after it was too late, I did still feel a slight sting from the industry’s peripheral profiteers, the test prep companies. I spent about $300 on LSAT prep books and practice tests, and finally coming to the hard-truth realizations made that $300 hard to swallow. I can only imagine $120,000. This is why people like you are so desperately needed.

    There is without a doubt a higher education crisis in this country and the Law School machine is the most egregious manifestation of same. But in general school is too expensive and a stilted culture that forces any and all students into higher education is ruining a generation. I do not regret my university education despite my degree being pseudo-worthless. I’ve always been a scholastically minded person who loves to learn and I have a manageable $12,000 in undergrad debt from work, scholarships and going in-state. But some people are not in so decent a place. The ones who go out of state. The ones who didn't work enough and got their Art History piece-of-paper. Then of course, the law students.

    As for me, instead of shooting myself in the face, I’m starting a job overseas that should cut my debt in half by the end of the year. Then, hopefully trade school.

    Thanks again, Nando, and keep fighting the good fight, buddy. Someday, these fuckers will fry.

    1. Id go to wisconsin law on in state tuition if i was truly into law like u say

  24. Law is depicted as honorable in tv and films. Put down the Grisham novels, kiddies. You're not gonna represent the weak and downtrodden, win million dollar cases, drive a Jaguar or suck on Sophia Vergara's toes.

    Not.Gonna. Happen. Heck, you'll be lucky to pull down $45K per year starting out. And that's before taxes and SSI. After taxes, you're looking at about 38 grand. Then you need to figure out private insurance. If you work for a small company or firm know that the premiums will not be cheap. Try raising kids or buying a house on that salary. With a bunch of student loans in the mix, you're done.

    It's a crap shoot at best. And even with gambling (er, gaming) you have the option to write the losses off. Law school is too expensive. And they're aren't enough jobs.

  25. To the Anon who responded to my comment.. With all respect, that would just not be a wise decision. Wisconsin's in-state tuition has ballooned to almost 20,000 cheese curds. Paltry compared to most, but still exorbitant. The only way Wisconsin is a viable choice is if you are an in-state student who is also receiving significant financial aid (full or half scholarship) and you plan on being tied to Wisconsin forever. There is no doubt in my mind that top class Wisconsin grads can find decent legal work in Wisconsin--Wisconsinites think highly of their University, and Wisconsin isn't exactly jam packed with law schools-- but besides that, good luck. I am not sure if you are a prospective law student who is considering Wisconsin or what, but it is not a great law school. "Tier 1" is a myth.

    My first year at Wisconsin (undergrad), tuition was a "modest" $6,000 for a year. I had it paid in full with scholarships, but by my senior year? $9,000 out of my own pocket. Where is the ceiling? Is there one? Will this madness never end?

  26. Schools can charge whatever they want because of nonstop student loans. It's a broken, inefficient system. And only a dumbshit would argue to the contrary about that.

  27. The law school machine is so dangerously perpetual because it feeds on the liberal arts crowd--people like me. Kids without skills who become frantic about their future and decide to plunge into this field that has a standardized entrance test that doesn't require math (hooray!) and a popular perception of glamour and high earning. It's the humanities kid's dream: six figure salary in today's world and it doesn't require science or math? Sign me up!

    LSAC likes to pretend that the LSAT doesn't favor one field over another. Complete and utter BS. The kind of mechanical, deductive reasoning present throughout, especially on the dreaded "logic games" section favor the math-y/science-y brain. And indeed, those kinds of majors score the highest on the test.

  28. What about the free market assholes. If their theory is correct, shouldn't there be a bunch of law schools charging $5,000 a year in tuition? That would provide competition for students and provide an incentive for the $40K toilets to provide results, lower prices, or get the fuck outta business.

  29. The "free market" types would simply go to the free money the government provides them.

    Nando, I have a request:

    You've thus done a great job with detailing the scandalous nature of law school tuition to students, in contrast to their future lack of earnings, and the current earnings of professors and administrators.

    However, the Law Schools are only perhaps the ugliest manifestation of the entire Higher Education Industry. My request is that you spend some time also focusing on colleges in general, beyond just their law schools.

    Your researching skills are phenomenal, and I think you can put it to good use detailing the filthy salaries of college administrators, and the nexus between big business, government, and universities.

    Something you may want to consider as you run out of law schools to expose.

  30. The law schools are worse than most graduate programs. Because even the average American can understand that getting a PhD in Anthropology is a waste of time and money. They also understand that a Master's in German literature is useless. But a law degree? Well, you at least have a small chance of making good money.

    On top of this, the law schools falsify their employment numbers and make false promises to attract students. They are the worst offenders. Even in prison, there is a hierarchy with the child molesters at the bottom. It's important I think to keep focusing on the law schools. Even when you run out of schools to flush, you can keep the spotlight on the bastards.

  31. Nando, it's time you cover Boston College Law School. That school's defense of posting a $10K a year job on Simplicity is truly abominable conduct, especially since they charge close to $50K a year in tuition.

  32. The schools have no shame. I'm glad you post these overpaid cocksuckers' salaries. I'm sure it makes them squirm. But who cares. How many people have they fucked over?

  33. Here's a little nugget from JD Blunderground. It's yet another one of those "I Got A Job" threads. But note the Something-Something Special about it:


    recordingangel (Jun 1, 2012 - 11:39 am)

    I spent the last year and a half eating Cheetoes on the couch, doing doc review, and cursing my alma mater's worthless career services office. I spent months chasing white rabbits through multiple interviews. Finally, something came through. It's not my preferred area of practice and I'll have to relocate a significant distance in a short amount of time,but the benefits are unreal. Taking questions.


    recordingangel (Jun 1, 2012 - 12:34 pm)

    '04-'07, T6, no ranking (average, surely), 4+ years solid litigation


    recordingangel (Jun 1, 2012 - 2:28 pm)

    The four years is from 2 different public interest agencies. I also had about a year of specialized policy type experience that matched well with the job description. Other than that, I have NO CLUE how I got past HR. As far as succeeding over the other candidates, I have amassed a considerable amount of interviewing experience over the last 1.5 years.

    Also, it was a minor miracle that the job actually existed in the first place. Most gov't job announcements are for positions that never get funded.


    Top 6 school for a measely $75k per year Gubment job. Whooopppeeee!!

    This is how bad its gotten, kids.

    Proceed At Your Own Risk

  34. recordingangel (Jun 1, 2012 - 12:36 pm)

    Salary around 75k plus health, dental, pension & 401k. Sent a paper application in response to an announcement on Starting in a few weeks.


    State. Not Federal. $75k. 500-mile move. 4 yrs. exp. T6 school.

    This is the competition now.

    So where do kids from TT and TTT and TTTT think the bottom is for them??

    Welcome to Fuck-Ville.

  35. AtheistATLLawyerJune 3, 2012 at 9:42 AM

    The kids from TT and TTT and TTTT can apply to that 10k a year position. If they are lucky, they will land it.

    Anyone here think that the law school deans and professors shouldn't be put in jail for fraud?

    They are just as bad as the wall street scum.

    Funny how none of them went to jail. Of course, if a lowly simpleton peon committed fraud, you bet they'd go to jail.

    It's time to completely revolt. STOP paying your student loans, STOP paying your unsecured credit cards.

    YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PAY THEM. The lenders have no recourse if you are judgment proof.

    Even if you have assets, you can easily hide them/shield them, just like the "elites" in this country do.

  36. To all the victims of the Law School scam:

    Start life over and try your best to get into an entirely different field or industry outside of law. You have to do this and have no choice but to try.

    If necessary leave the JD off the resume and make up some story about what you were doing for those 3 wasted years of life and income.

    It is your only hope, and you might have to even emigrate to another country.

    There will never be anything other than token and patchwork watered down changes to the student lending system that will ever be of help to you.

  37. @ June 2 9:44am - Law schools are much worse than purely academic graduate programs because the purely academic graduate programs make no claims about the value of their degree for getting a job. Just look at the department website for any social sciences or humanities masters or PhD program, and you will not find % employed or mean salaries or anything like that. Also, you can talk to grad students and professors who will generally be pretty forthright about the chances of gaining employment with a specific degree.

    @ AtheistATLLawyer - Your idea about going off the grid is a good one. The powers that be only have power if everyone agrees to play within their system. They need everyone to go along with the program and pay just enough back every month not to go into default. The recent foreclosure "crisis" was a thing of beauty. Lots of people, instead of feeling bad about being in underwater mortgages and not being able to pay every month, did the smart thing and told the banks to go fuck themselves. I hope more people take this attitude and learn to live outside the control of creditors.

    We're seeing the same thing transpire right now with law schools. More people are getting smart and are realizing that going to law school is a waste of time and money that too often only serves to make you a debt slave. The schools can only exist if they can find enough victims to fill seats. As people get smart and decide not to enroll, the schools will eventually have no choice but to close down.

    They cannot win if you refuse to play.

  38. On May 18, 2012, Inside the Law School Scam featured an entry labeled “Rutgers-Camden Goes Old School.” Here is the conclusion:

    “A careful search of the internet reveals that Rutgers-Camden is being remarkably discreet about the fact that it's trying to convince people who have never even thought about going to law school to enroll as 1Ls 12 weeks from now, on the basis of egregiously misleading employment stats. That's so . . . 2010. (The reference to this farcical Forbes "study" is also a nice touch).

    Really Dean Andrews? This is May 2012. Did you actually think this kind of thing is going to fly under the radar at this point?”

    On May 21, 2012, the same website posted an article entitled “Update on Rutgers-Camden.” Here is an excerpt:

    “Law School Transparency has just called for Camille Andrews, R-C's associate dean for enrollment, to resign from her post. LST also asks the ABA to investigate the school's actions and bring appropriate sanctions for violating accreditation standard 509.

    LST's post includes an excellent analysis of the misleading statements in Dean Andrews' email to prospective students. The Andrews email is a breathtaking example of how schools continue to disclose statistics in a selective, highly deceptive manner. Sort of like failing to give a job applicant all of the relevant facts about the job. This email came to light because of its brazenness. But how many other law school representatives, at schools across the country, made similarly glib statements about salaries and percentages to 0Ls this spring?”

    Of course, the piece of trash named Melvin Schweitzer will argue that the sewage pits are not taking advantage of these “sophisticated consumers.” However, those with an IQ above 65 recognize that recent college graduates are easy marks for the advanced degree scam. Hell, they fell for the scam once - at the undergrad level. By the way, expecting Andrews to resign over this conduct is akin to demanding that a contract killer apologize for his crimes.

    Here is the faculty profile of the pig who sent this solicitation to GMAT test takers:

    “Camille Andrews is an Associate Dean at Rutgers School of Law-Camden. In addition to teaching Antitrust, Evidence, Complex Litigation, Professional Responsibility, Sports Law and Entertainment Law Drafting, she is in charge of enrollment and special legal programs. She serves as a faculty advisor to the Rutgers Law Review and is a Member of the Admissions Committee. Since 2010, her Department has assumed responsibility for scholarships and residency.”


  39. I am considering the idea of not paying my student loans anymore. With no job, no social security for my generation, why would I pay this insidious and immoral debt? Really, what can they do?

    How does one live off the grid when you have a wife and a kid? Any ideas?

  40. Not legal adviceJune 3, 2012 at 8:36 PM


    Off-the-grid may not be necessary. Research your state's exemption laws. Play it as close to the line as possible. They know how to use garnishments and other post-j tools, but most collection firms are run as high-speed machines, so nit-picky creditor-debtor law is your friend. Research FDCPA. Us the bankruptcy code to your advantage, even if you can't discharge the SL debt. If they call, ask if you can record it. Someone who knows how to game it on defense can stall collections activity for years.

  41. Somebody mentioned Liz Warren. She graduated in a different era. The typical RuTTgers grad today is fucked.

  42. Nice job highlighting deliberate attempts by greedy administrators to mislead and financially rape students. It is so obvious what is going on here. I guess people see what they want to see for as long as they can.

  43. It's like you read my mind! You seem to know a lot about this, like you wrote the book in it or something. I think that you can do with some pics to drive the message home a little bit, but instead of that, this is fantastic blog. A great read. I will definitely be back.
    GMAT Coaching institutes in Chennai


Web Analytics