Monday, January 5, 2015

Profiles in Academic Tripe: Stephen Diamond, Associate “Law Professor” at Third Tier Toilet Santa Clara University School of Law


http://stephen-diamond.com/2014/12/28/washington-post-joins-the-myth-making-about-law-schools-and-legal-employment/

Vile Swine Droppings: On December 28, 2014, Cockroach Stephen Diamond wrote a blog entry labeled “Washington Post joins the myth making about law schools and legal employment – New Year’s Update.” He was butt-hurt that the Washington Post merely pointed out that first year enrollment has plummeted at DC-area toilets. From Diamond’s whiny rant:

“Now, of course, law schools face both a reputational effect of that oversupply problem and the fact that with a wider economic recovery underway law school is no longer necessary as a hiding place for unemployed college grads. Many college graduates can get jobs right away with just a BA, even if these gigs don’t pay as well as lawyering. 

Ironically, and as has happened in several prior business cycles, the decline in the attractiveness of a JD is occurring as the legal employment market is steadily recovering. New BLS data analyzed by Ted Soto at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles suggests there will be a shortage of lawyers beginning as early as 2016. One legal industry consultant, Peter Zeughauser, told the Wall Street Journal that “the legal industry across the country was faring better than in the years following the financial meltdown of 2008. ‘For the first time in six years, the legal economy is back on track,’ he said.”

These basic facts about economic cycles and the BLS data on legal employment do not bother the Washington Post, however. Their legal reporter Catherine Ho reports today that there is a “shrinking job market for young lawyers” and a “major retrenchment” underway since 2008 in the legal sector.

This would certainly come as a surprise to the many large law firms handing out bonuses that are larger than any they have awarded associates since 2007. The conclusion also flies in the face of the data the BLS carefully assembles on legal employment and wages. The number of lawyers employed in the US has risen steadily every year over the last decade (except for a one time drop in 2008 to 553,690) to a high in 2013 of 592,670. Average annualized earnings have grown every year as well from $107,800 in May of 2003 to the May 2013 total of $131,990.” [Emphasis mine] 

Theodore Soto is a liar and a pig, which has previously been pointed out on Third Tier Reality. For $ome rea$on, Cockroach Diamond fails to point to this BLS data from its Occupational Outlook Handbook:

“Job Outlook Employment of lawyers is projected to grow 10 percent from 2012 to 2022, about as fast as the average for all occupations. Competition for jobs should continue to be strong because more students graduate from law school each year than there are jobs available. [Emphasis mine]

Apparently, some “law professors” have the reading comprehension level of an infant. By the way, moron: just because THREE New York Biglaw firms gave associates larger bonuses does not mean that the job market for attorneys is improving overall. When the hell did three large firms equal MANY? Plus, Biglaw accounts for a small fraction of available lawyer openings each year. Furthermore, how many graduates of 107th ranked $anTTTa Clara Univer$iTTTy Sewer of Law receive such employment offers, Bitch?!?!

http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2015/01/ideology-belief

Paul Campos Bitch Slaps Stephen Diamond Across the Face: On January 1, 2015, Paul Campos put a cueball in a sock and smashed Cockroach Diamond over the damn head with it in his LGM piece entitled “Ideology and belief.” After pointing out that Stephen Diamond has the mathematics acumen of a gerbil, he drops this knowledge:

As I’ve noted elsewhere, the fact that demand for law school admission actually declined during the worst economic contraction since the 1930s should have been a warning sign to legal academia. It wasn’t, because instead law schools slashed admission standards, and managed to slightly increase total enrollment — although, again, enrollment fell per school — in the face of declining demand, leading innumerate observers like Diamond, who has a Ph.D. in political science as well as J.D., to conclude that demand was increasing. (Diamond claims that big year-end bonuses for lawyers at a handful of hyper-elite law firms means prosperity is just around the corner for the average law graduate, which is akin to arguing that Robert Axelrod’s salary is a good reason to enroll in a graduate program in political science). 

Since then things have gotten much, much worse. Over at the Legal Whiteboard, Jerry Organ has afascinating post detailing the practical collapse of admission standards since 2010 (recall that standards had already slipped a good deal between 2004 and 2010, as the percentage of law school applicants who were admitted to at least one school increased by 23.6% between those years). It’s difficult to pick out the single most hair-raising stat that Organ has assembled, but here’s a good candidate: between 2010 and 2013, the percentage of law school matriculants with sub-145 LSAT scores increased by 56.8%. And that percentage almost certainly grew again this fall, as ABA law schools collectively admitted an astounding 80% of all applicants. [Emphasis mine]

Now to this insightful conclusion from Campos:

“The question that interests me, in a somewhat morbid way, regarding Diamond, Conison, and their ilk throughout American legal academia in this the year 2015 of the Christian Era, is the extent to which they actually believe what they say. 

The lawyer and sociologist David Riesman described ideology as the kind of sincere mental state that allows a man to habitually believe his own propaganda. American legal academia apparently remains a very sincere place.”

And people sometimes wonder why I refer to law school swine as mentally ill. First, legal academics have shown that they are not the slightest bit concerned with anyone but themselves. Secondly, they are seemingly incapable of grasping basic facts, i.e. employment “placement” figures, that don’t support their baseless assertions. Third, many of these leeches – such as Brian Leiter – lash out at their opponents, especially when those people dare to point out the obvious. In light of these MAJOR personality and character defects, can you honestly picture these entrenched “educators” as successful legal practitioners?!?!

Conclusion: In the final analysis, Stephen Diamond is a gluttonous pig who has fattened himself on the carcasses of an untold number of law students, over the years. He does not want to stop gorging himself on their flesh, and will do and say anything in order to keep the law school scam in operation. The parasite “teaches” at a third tier commode located in the historically-glutted California legal market. He simply doesn’t give a damn about the truth, potential legal clients, the “profession,” or his students.

27 comments:

  1. I wonder if what really has Diamond so riled up is Santa Clara's bar passage rates...

    Santa Clara 2014 bar pass rate is 60.4%!

    Santa Clara is fabulous number 16 out of 21 ABA-accredited car wrecks in the Golden State!

    And, oh my, several spots behind...La Verne...9 percentage points below the statewide average.

    Santa Clara's bar passage rate slid 12.6 percentage points from 2013 to 2014.

    Hide yo kids, hide yo wife! They enrollin' e'rybody up in here!

    Happy New Year, Nando. Should be a good one!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's an obvious reason for those dumb-and dumber bar passage rates. Diamond has his gullible students convinced that they're policy experts and political activists. The last thing they care about is learning legal principles, analyzing cases, or practicing law. Considering the pitiful array of legal jobs open to Santa Clara graduates, I don't blame them for living the academic fantasy life as long as they can. I just wish they weren't incurring life-destroying debt in the process.

      If the law schools were decartelized and opened up to competition, someone could do what Diamond's doing and charge $3,000 a year instead of $50,000 a year. Which is why Diamond will say or do anything to try to justify the ABA cartel.

      Delete
    2. Ah yes, the ABA. It has rules, I am told, about accreditation and bar passage rates.

      Thomas Jefferson School of Law's bar passage rates 2009-2014 against the statewide average:

      2009: statewide ABA average 79.3%
      46.5% T. Jefferson

      2010: statewide ABA average 75.2%
      58.10% T. Jefferson

      2011: statewide ABA average 76.2%
      33.3% T. Jefferson

      2012: statewide ABA average 76.9%
      52.33% Thomas Jefferson

      2013: statewide ABA average 75.9%
      50.3% Thomas Jefferson

      2014: statewide ABA average 69.4%
      44.7% Thomas Jefferson

      Those are not 75% bar passage rates for 3 out of 5 most recent years. Those rates are all more than 15 percentage points below the statewide average for six years running.

      How is this school still ABA-accredited when it appears rather flagrantly out of compliance with the bar passage rate rule for accreditation?

      The 'school' that also has the worst average debt loads and just defaulted on $133 million in bond debt.

      What inference should I draw about the ABA?

      Delete
  2. I find it ironic that to the left of this egghead's noggin, there is a book titled "The Making of New World Slavery." I am sure this academic charlatan is fully aware that his livelihood depends on enslaving countless rubes into investing in a degree that has been exposed as worthless and futile. I am glad Paul Campos decimated this asshat's arguments, which defy logic and reading comprehension.

    So please Mr. Diamond, pray tell how many of your students obtained jobs as associates with these "many" firms which paid these robust bonuses?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Man! Talk about an egghead!

      Delete
  3. If you support minimum enrollment standards for law schools, you want to return to the bad old days of Professor Kingsfield, where law school teaching was dominated by old white men - like, er, Professor Diamond.

    "Santa Clara 2014 bar pass rate is 60.4%! "

    Santa Clara Law used to have a decent regional reputation - the place you went to if you wanted to be an assistant DA or the like. Like a lot of these formerly decent regional schools, their graduates have been squeezed out of the market - a DA in the Bay Area can hire all the T14 graduates he wants, so why on Earth would you hire someone from Santa Clara?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, before a D.A.'s office hired a Santa Clara graduate, that graduate would need to have passed the bar.

      If the trend plunging bar passage rates continues, which it will given that the enrollment standards have also plunged, soon and very soon there will be no Santa Clara University School of Law.

      Delete
  4. You have to feel for the guy - after all, what is he going to do if he loses his job, assuming that the partnership offer from Wilson Sonsini falls through?

    There is another struggling Jesuit law school up the road in San Francisco, and there are probably already quiet conversations about what to do if the market for law schools doesn't turn around.

    No wonder that it is important to keep the suc - I mean, scholars - coming to Santa Clara Law.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My favorite scenario: UOP gives away the money-losing McGeorge school to Santa Clara, which uses it to promote state internships in Sacramento. USF gives away its own money-losing law school to Hastings, whose first-year students now get to avoid the Tenderloin completely.

      Delete
  5. This asshole has a book on the Pol Pot regime. See it next to his shiny dome? At least Pol Pot didn't act like he was doing his victims a favor.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He also has a book on the French Communist Party. This obviously makes him a world traveler, intellectual, and bon vivant. Why anyone should borrow $47,000 a year to support his decadent lifestyle has yet to be explained.

      Delete
  6. Well, at least you can apply to Santa Clara for free-that's before they siphon off all your student loan money.

    http://law.scu.edu/

    For 2013, of 322 graduates 142 were employed in bar passage required jobs-and a whopping 58 were listed as "unemployed" and one of those had already given up.

    http://law.scu.edu/careers/employment-statistics/

    Quite the investment, this law school.

    ReplyDelete
  7. He also has the writings of Jonathan Swift. I wonder what modest proposal Diamond will come up with to reduce the surplus population of unprepared law graduates...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Diamond seems to believe everything he writes with absolute sincerity, including -

    * the vast majority of law graduates were doing very well prior to 2008, and the vast majority will be doing very well by 2016 too!

    * Santa Clara is good value for money - hey its (a little) cheaper than Stanford - and an excellent school to go to if you want to want to practice public law!

    Many law school deans and professors have tempered their relentless optimism about the value of law school, but Diamond keeps holding the line like its 2008.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You forgot Diamond's funniest claim: that Stanford was an alienating place run by the Professor Kingsfield's of the world, so Santa Clara set itself up as the anti-Stanford, devoting itself to a democratic, humane, education, with a focus on public service.

      Hey - Santa Clara's not inferior to Stanford - it's an explicitly different (and perhaps superior) model!

      That being said, Diamond has never identified a single faculty member who has turned down an offer from Stanford to teach at "more humane" Santa Clara, and he has never identified a single student who has turned down an offer from Stanford to study at "more humane" Santa Clara.

      I mean, there has **got** to have been someone out there who has turned down Stanford for Santa Clara, right?

      Delete
  9. I love this blog. More needs to be said though about the sleazy life that awaits even Biglaw practitioners. It is the nastiest group of self absorbes, scumbag fools you can imagine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Personally, I think that shitlaw practitioners are worse than biglaw practitioners. And law professors are worst of all, by a wide margin.

      Delete
  10. In re: 7:10.

    "Therefore let no man talk to me of other expedients: Of reducing the number of schools and students to match the number of jobs. Of reducing tuition to match expected first year salaries. Of being honest and forthright with the number and percent of graduates with employment requiring bar passage 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years' hence. Of reducing the vigorous and the profit paid to our overseers, our universities. Of ending student loans for graduate programs.

    "No, but rather, we shall continue to dine on our student loan conduits."

    ReplyDelete
  11. Santa Clara is a shithole. I heard of the university when it's men's basketball team beat Arizona in the first round of the NCAA tournament years ago. I didn't realize they had a law school.

    ReplyDelete
  12. http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2008/7/11/1955/80313

    Back on July 11, 2008, someone using the handle “Steven D” posted an entry on Diamond, under the header “Professor Stephen Diamond, Moron.” Look at this lengthy excerpt:

    “And I might add, you're a horse's ass, as well. Just my considered opinion:

    Corrente has been operating for the last month under something of a threat, something in the nature of an implied possibility of legal action that could be taken against us, at least Lambert and myself, as the “owners and managers” of the website, for not exercising “due care,” in that we allowed one of our commentators, “Bringiton,” to publish a post, “Lies, Damnable Lies And Political Commentary,” to which one of its several subjects, Stephen Diamond, took strong exception.

    Mr. Diamond is a professor of law and political science and teaches both at Santa Clara University Law School. [...]

    In view of its previous public circulation, we assume that Mr. Diamond will not object to our posting his original email as it arrived in Lambert’s Inbox.

    From: Stephen Diamond
    Subject: Post on Lies, Damnable Lies
    To: lambert_strether.corrente@yahoo.com
    Date: Thursday, June 12, 2008, 7:57 PM
    Dear Mr. Strether and Ms. Appet,

    I am writing to you to request that you remove the post by an individual known as “Bringiton” entitled “Lies, Damnable Lies and Political Commentary” on the Correntewire.com website, together with the associated comment sections and the follow up posts by each of you. In addition, in conformance with California Civil Code Section 48a, I ask that you publish a correction and retraction.

    I do not believe that you have exercised the due care that is expected of the owners and managers of a website.

    I believe these posts to be defamatory of me and my professional work and of my reputation as a lawyer and a professor of law, which depends heavily on my widely established and long held reputation for veracity and accuracy…

    Sincerely,

    Stephen Diamond, J.D.
    Associate Professor of Law
    Santa Clara University School of Law

    Admitted to practice in New York and California[.]”

    Posting “Admitted to practice” is a hallmark of douchebag behavior. It’s about as stupid as writing the letters J.D. behind one’s name. If you notice, Cue-Ball committed that sin as well. People see that and immediately think, “What a dumbass.” Actual practicing attorneys don’t need to bolster their weak self-esteem with such nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When I was admitted to practice back in the early '80s, the judge I clerked for and I would make bets on whether attorneys who used "Esq." after their names were douchebags in the courtroom. Based on that one year clerkship, I could tell you that about 80% of the lawyers who used used "Esq." after their names were in fact assholes.

      Whenever I get a business card from a lawyer who uses "John E. Doe, Esq,. J.D., M.B.A., C.P.A., M.Phil.," I laugh. And believe me I have gotten these types of business cards. At the same time I feel sorry for these assholes who feel they need to compensate for their lack of self-worth. Stevie Diamond, on the other hand, I don't feel sorry for this modern day academic hustler. Has anyone here seen a law "professor" litigate? It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

      Delete
  13. If law degrees are so versatile and valued in the employment market like law schools say, why do law professors need tenure?

    ReplyDelete
  14. In his defense, the fact that there are still three law firms giving bonuses is pretty news worthy.

    ReplyDelete
  15. http://law.scu.edu/admissions/financial-aid/

    Outrageous Tuition: Apparently, the pigs feel that they offer an “education” on par with Harvard or Stanford. Check out the following filth:

    “Tuition and Fees

    Tuition for the 2014-15 academic year is $1,568 per unit. The tuition for full-time is based on 30 units per year (15 units per semester). Tuition for part-time is based on 21 units per year (11 units for the fall semester and 10 units for the spring semester). Fee and tuition charges for the 2014-15 academic year are:

    Full-time: $47,040 ($23,520 per semester)
    Part-time: $32,968 ($16,464 per semester)

    The student budget also known as the “cost of attendance” is comprised of required tuition and estimated expenses for the academic year (August – May).”

    http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/law-rankings/page+5

    Ranking: As you can see, $anTTTa Clara Univer$iTTTy Sewer of Law is rated as the 107th greatest, most amazing and wonderful law school in the entire damn country – by US “News” 7 World Report! Hell, it “only” shares this distinctive honor with the following FIVE toilets: Catholic University of America; Gonzaga; St. John’s University; Syracuse; and TTTexa$ TTTech Univer$iTTTy.

    Who the hell wouldn’t want to attend a third tier commode at such prices?!?! Good luck trying to compete with grads from Stanford, Berkeley, USC Gould and UCLA for good legal jobs, chump. Who are we kidding? You don’t have a shot in hell against those young men and women, because they went to REAL law schools.

    http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/27/the-lawyer-surplus-state-by-state/?_r=0

    By the way, California has THE SECOND LARGEST ATTORNEY GLUT in the nation. Can you wrap your tiny brain around that fact, Lemming?!?! These figures were compiled by Economic Modeling Specialists Inc., a consulting company that does not make any money from the law school scam.

    If Stephen Diamond knew how to read, then he would recognize that his students and graduates are royally screwed. Then, if he developed some integrity, he would punch himself in the face and toss himself into freeway traffic – as penance for his deliberate lies and piggish behavior.

    ReplyDelete
  16. http://lawschooltuitionbubble.wordpress.com/2014/03/11/record-14-law-schools-didnt-report-2013-graduate-debt-to-u-s-news/

    Average Law Student Indebtedness: On March 11, 2013, Matt Leichter wrote a solid LSTB entry entitled “Record 14 Law Schools Didn’t Report 2013 Graduate Debt to US News.” Look at his analysis and accompanying chart:

    “Each year, accompanying the U.S. News rankings is the online magazine’s list of law schools by graduate debt. The law schools are required to report this information to the ABA, but the ABA inexplicably doesn’t release it to the public, even though it’s one of the most useful things people studying law schools would like to know about. Instead, the ABA takes an unweighted average of the numbers and posts it in this pdf. Thus, for some reason, we must rely on U.S. News, and of course, law schools can decline to transmit their graduates’ average debt numbers.

    On average, about four law schools (excluding Widener University’s Harrisburg campus, the three Puerto Rico law schools, and Belmont because I don’t think it’s had any graduates yet) don’t report average graduate debt levels. The previous record was six in 2010. This year, as many as fourteen chose not to. Here’s the list and their last reported average graduate debt levels:

    Arizona Summit (formerly Phoenix) – $162,627 [UPDATE: Per the comments below, Arizona Summit Law School's Web site posts its 2012-13 graduates' average amount borrowed as $184,825.]
    Southwestern – $147,976
    Atlanta’s John Marshall – $142,515
    Cornell – $140,000
    Touro – $137,781
    Campbell – $130,428
    Santa Clara – $129,621
    Loyola (La.) – $124,335
    Thomas M. Cooley – $122,395
    Appalachian – $114,740
    La Verne – $112,628
    Texas Southern – $99,992
    Florida A&M (two years in a row) – $96,934
    Rutgers-Camden – $93,990”

    Have fun paying off $145K-$185K in NON-DISCHARGEABLE student loans, while raking in $45K per year, Dumbass. Now, try convincing someone you marry you, with such finances, you broke bastard. Plus, when a woman’s biological clock is ticking, she feels the urge to start having children. Yes, this includes the loose sluts - “attached” to weak-ass boyfriends - who used to blow you and the local AAA baseball team, in college.

    Women tend to seek security. Do you think these creatures will even consider having kids with you, loser?!?! Hell, as a TTT grad, you will likely be living with and mooching off your parents – well into your 30s. Get used to relatives and friends viewing you as a waste of space, you cretin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's worse for the women. Might as well killself. No purpose is left to life.

      Delete
  17. Stephen Diamond = POS

    ReplyDelete

 
Web Analytics