Tuesday, March 10, 2015

News Flash: ABA-Accredited Diploma Mills Are Getting Desperate for Asses in Seats


ABA Commodes Lowering the Bar Further: On March 7, 2015, JD Journal published a Daniel June article entitled “Why are some Law Schools Accepting Students Without LSAT Scores.” Look at this opening:

“With the pull and strain of law schools nowadays, which are down the lowest in enrollment since we’ve seen in the 1970s, we expect them to bend, quaver, and maybe for some of the weaker ones, to fall out. After all, if the legal market is so lousy, if the law school debts are so high, if fewer students are signing up, something’s gotta give somewhere, right? 

Perhaps we are seeing a little of this “giving” now that two schools have announced they will consider accepting law students who have not taken the LSAT. 

The LSAT is the stopgap that weeds out the desperate English majors from those who have a mind for law. It was a test all took, and the passing rates a school is willing to accept go a ways in determining metrics such as its national ranking. 

But Bloomberg Business claimed last week that “the State University of New York-Buffalo Law School and the University of Iowa College of Law said they would admit students from their respective undergraduate colleges,” based on GPA and standardized tests such as the SAT and the GRE. 

Have they capitulated? Certainly they are taking advantage of a change in rules the American Bar Association lays down. They now state that 10 percent of their classes need not take the LSAT so long as they meet other criterion.” [Emphasis mine]

In comparison to medical and dental school, it is a breeze to gain admission to law school. Yet, the bitches and hags want to make it even easier to get into an ABA-accredited diploma mill. The pigs seek to do this, so that they can get their filthy hooves on more federal student loan dollars. They are CLEARLY not looking out for YOU, lemming.


Ridiculously High Acceptance Rates at U.S. Law Schools: Dybbuk posted an epic OTLSS entry labeled “Tracking the dramatic increase in law school acceptance rates, 2011-2014” – on March 5, 2015. He provides a vivid illustration as to why the pigs have lowered their admi$$ion$ “standards.” Check out this meaty excerpt:

“In my opinion, percentage of applicants accepted is the most important metric in tracking the decline in selectivity at ABA-accredited law schools, and the consequent devaluation of a JD degree. When a law school refuses to accept an applicant with substandard credentials, it is choosing its own reputation over the lucrative opportunity to monetize a dupe. But law schools are turning away far fewer applicants than they used to. 

The decline in LSAT scores for incoming law students is important too, and we have discussed that. (See here and here) But law schools can "game" their LSAT numbers somewhat by enrolling likely applicants in LSAT prep courses, or by admitting a certain percentage of the class without an LSAT, which the ABA now allows. 

The decline in GPAs for incoming law students is less important, though it may be worth a post at some point. Law schools do not have to game this stat, college students do that for themselves by taking easy courses or easy majors. (College flashback: An "American Studies" class where we piled into a vast lecture hall, standing room only, to watch reruns of "Green Acres" and then pretend to be intellectual by discussing the semiotics of it all. A reasonably coherent essay got you an "A." An unreasonably incoherent one got you a "B.") 

In the tables below, I look at how many schools had particular acceptance rates for the incoming class of 2011 as compared with the incoming class of 2014. I then look at the the number of schools that have increased their acceptance rates and by how much during that three year period. I then list the law schools with the highest acceptance rates, the quasi-open enrollment ones that accept 70% or more. Finally, I list the schools that have experienced the greatest percentage point increase in their acceptance rate between 2011 and 2014-- i.e. those schools that are most rapidly abandoning selectivity in the interest of keeping their gravy trains chugging a little longer. [Emphasis mine]

The author then lists the acceptance rates at various dung heaps. Take a look at the following stoll sample, for the 2014 first year class:

Suffolk, 87%;
TTTThoma$ M. Cooley Law Sewer, 85%;
Thomas Jefferson SOL, 84%;
Western New England “University,” 82%;
Capital Univer$ity, 81%

Yes, those are super impressive numbers, huh?!?! Hell, cracked-out, busted up prostitutes are more selective than these supposed “institutions of higher learning.”

Conclusion: ABA-approved toilets are becoming less selective, because fewer people are applying to law school. The greedy academic swine do not want to give up on those federal dollars, so they have WILLINGLY decided to admit a higher percentage of boys and girls – even though LSAT figures continue to decline. In the final analysis, these “educators” do not care about maintaining $tandard$. It is ALL about the money, and they don’t want to leave any on the table. If they could enroll dead people into their programs, then the law school cockroaches would do so – with a smile on their vile faces.


  1. Well, I just got an explanatory "Dear JD" email from my scama mater. Apparently the school's rank has dropped again. Fortunately, "the only significant downward component of our rankings was the employment numbers for members of the graduating class of 2013." I mean, that's just a trifling concern compared to the school's mission to create a top-ranked part-time program.

    1. Please consider forwarding the email to OTLSS. We will redact your name and publish.

    2. Seconded. This would be.. highly amusing to read. So much for student employment, right? Like, I dunno, that being the thing that actually MATTERS.. These assholes are pathetic.. Truly pathetic and absolutely indefensible in their attitudes and behavior.

    3. Ok, I just forwarded it to OTLSS. If Nando wants it I'll email it to him too.

    4. Yes, please publish it somewhere.

  2. Medals For EveryoneMarch 10, 2015 at 8:12 AM

    Maybe in the near future there will be a "Special Moot Court Competition" at these law schools, similar to the Special Olympics.

    1. Please delete this comment and try thinking before posting about those who are in the special Olympics would feel reading this.

    2. Get over yourself message discipline troll. People that compete at the special Olympics have more important concerns than reading scam blog comments and being offended at funny jokes.

    3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    4. So 3:29, you crawled out of your sewer to leave a filthy message. Why not look for a job instead? You must get tired of eating excrement. In your case, it's actually a form of cannibalism.

    5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    6. So are you repeating your libelous comments about Painter not working? You've got to understand that in a civilized society, libel can get you sued or make you even more of a social leper than you already are.

    7. Special Olympics comment really was tasteless.

      But I'm all for a TTTT Olympics.

      What would these schools compete in?

    8. ^ Painter works? Since when? That guy's been on vacation for about 25 years now. And counting.

    9. He doesn't just accuse Painter. I'm not Painter and he has accused me as well. That commenter is just a psychopath, and apparently does nothing but sit at home trolling scam blogs, because he doesn't work for a living clearly. A debt collector or law school (probably former) pig that is now unemployed, and has been for at least a couple of years.

      Nando had and does erase his comments, but he still sticks around here to harass people whenever he can. I guess he has absolutely nothing going on in his life and has no pride or dignity.

      Regardless, in the new normal, many attorneys are underemployed and face bouts of unemployment. It is rare to have a full time permanent position in law that will last an entire career.

      Even before the scam got to critical levels in the past decade, it was something like 5 years for the average length of a career as a lawyer. Now it's dropped even lower, because for the past 6 years or so there have been very few new entrants into the field. When you start averaging in the "0"s for length of legal career, it really brings it down.

      When I started going to court 7 years ago, I was the youngest attorney everywhere I went. Now 7 years later, I am still almost always the youngest attorney. This is because nobody else came in after me, outside of a few token prosecutors here and there usually.

      When I leave, the average age of attorneys in those parts practicing will probably shoot up, and it's not like I'm young anymore either. There is a survivor bias too, since as the youngest attorney I do get approached a lot by potential clients----that don't have any money to pay me and don't seem to think that is a barrier to retaining my services. I do not understand how anybody can go through life assuming they can get free access to services, but the general public seems to think so of lawyers.

    10. > What would these schools compete in?

      1. The 150,000 Dollar Dive Into Debt Slavery

      2. Verbal Gymnastics

      3. Cross-country (Trucking After Law School)

    11. @102,

      Haha, you aren't fooling ANYONE, you practicing attorney Message Discipline Troll, you. Potential clients my ass.

      You aren't Painter - you're just a troll whose sole purpose on this site seems to be an absolutist, unconditional defense of the laziest motherfucker who ever lived. That guy loves spending other people's money - and he fucking HATES to work. There's no debating that point.

      I still say that Painter hired the Message Discipline Troll from Reputation Defender to monitor this site 24/7 and immediately pounce on any and all legit criticism of the smelly shiftless turd Painter. You think anyone would provide a round-the-clock service like that for free?

      Whatever the Paint-turd is using to pay him with, you can be sure of one thing - it isn't honest money.

  3. Law schools are run by faculty for the benefit of faculty. They do not give a shit about anything else besides maintaining tenure, sabbaticals, teaching 2-4 hours a week, summers off, and the other perks derived from student loans.

    1. The students are just the warm, flaky biscuits used to sop up all that rich and savory student loan gravy.

      So, to the extent that people care about having fresh biscuits, then yes - the law schools "care."

    2. Omigod, I've got some great news for everyone. Princess Nancy is teaching three classes this semester. I'm thinking the scam must be falling apart! Omigod!

  4. Are you sure about this?

    1. Oh, I'm sure they care, a little bit...until the paycheck rolls in, of course. Then memories grow faint.

      Plus, Dean James Huffman admitted as much:

      "But the core factor in the escalating cost of legal education is that the guild of law school professors long ago captured the combined regulatory apparatus of the American Bar Association (ABA) and the AALS. We law professors have constructed a legal education model that, first and foremost, serves faculty interests—higher salaries, more faculty protected by tenure, smaller and fewer classes, shorter semesters, generous sabbatical and leave policies and supplemental grants for research and writing. We could not have done better for ourselves, except that the system is now collapsing."


      But trolls gotta troll; we all get it.

  5. The LSAT doesn't weed out anyone, including those who may, or may not, have "a mind for law".

    The dismal employment market for JD's, especially non-elite JD's, does that just fine. And it is very efficient.

    1. I agree 100% with the first sentence. I had a LAS assoc dean tell me that he felt that the best indicator of law school success was high grades in math.

      The second sentence assumes that folks have already wasted 3 years and a fortune, to get a worthless degree. No one should have to do that to prove the last sentence.

  6. TTTTouro only let in 70% of their applicants even though their median LSAT is now at 145? Now them's some mighty pre┼┐tigious numbers.

    1. Yep. Touro Law School is a piece of fucking shit.

    2. An interesting thread on JD Underground contains the claim that Hofstra is even worse, since its students are less realistic about what their employment outcomes will be. Aren't deluded students the most important feature of a scam school?

  7. News article from Business Insider:

    'In 3 years, a top law school will close'

  8. Nando, you should do an update on UC-Irvine and Dean Chemerinsky. Remember how he predicted UC-Irvine would be instantly fixed in the T20 upon the inaugural rankings? Well his prediction fell flat.

    That, however, is not the real story. Apparently Chemerinksy had to juke the stats by reducing the Class of 2017 to 89 students to make it seem more selective and thus manipulating USNWR criteria. How does Chemerinsky believe he will sustain a T30 ranking with 300 students? Last I heard, UC-Irvine has 45 faculty members who are overpaid. Remember, Chemerinsky and his wife cleared $650K in 2011.

    1. It's been noted elsewhere that Dean Chem's business model would have worked if UC Irvine had a chance of becoming an elite school. They could actually afford all those inflated salaries if they achieved a ranking in the Top 10 or so law schools. But Top 30 is nowhere near a good enough ranking for what they're trying to do.

  9. I am a cracked out, busted up prostitute and I take exception to that.

  10. Yet with real legal work LSAT's don't matter at all. No one cares or ask about them. Completely discretionary test, and now that I have gone through the process now decades ago, I recall what a waste of $$ and time it was to deal with. Good riddance to the LSAT test, hope more law schools catch on.

  11. Hey Nardo, what's your email? I have a copy of the letter to send to you.

  12. A former student from RWUMarch 11, 2015 at 3:25 PM

    Hello again, Nando; you said this: "If they could enroll dead people into their programs, then the law school cockroaches would do so – with a smile on their vile faces."

    I've seen you and other scambloggers say in years past about how, if they could, the scammers themselves would enroll insane people, dead people, animals, boxes of cereal, etc.; and now I want to ask what I've wanted to ask for a while...
    What's stopping the law school cartel and scamdeans from doing just that, or enrolling totally fictitious and non-existent students altogether? Obviously, there's going to be something stopping them from doing that, or they definitely would have done it by now.

    Don't get me wrong, I enjoy watching them burn and I want to see them crash and burn just as much as everyone else, and I don't want to see them pull such a stunt or do anything else which could help them survive this... but I'm just curious.

    1. This post can't be serious. You really want to know why a law school has not enrolled a box of cereal? Could you honestly imagine sitting in class between a box of corn flakes and a box of cocoa puffs (even though the cocoa puffs would be an URM).

  13. http://www.jdjournal.com/2015/01/07/95-percent-of-law-schools-have-lowered-their-admission-standards/?hvid=3DWsNp

    On January 7, 2015, Daniel June wrote a JD Journal entry labeled “Why it is Easier than ever to Get into Law School.” Check out this portion:

    “We’ve heard enough about how the legal market makes for pain for recent JD’s. There are plenty of lawyers knocking, but firms arent’ answering. No wonder, then, that 1L enrollment has dropped 28 percent these last few years. And when you have a dynamic like that, something’s gotta give.

    We’ve seen exactly that with a new report released recently by the National Conference of Bar Examiners, which looked at what sorts of LSAT scores law schools find acceptable nowadays.

    It seems most schools are a little less choosy. Since 2010, 95 percent of the 196 accredited U.S. law schools lowered their LSAT standards. Even top 20 schools have succumbed, with 20 out of 22 of the top 20 schools slipping. Emory University topped the list with a 9 point slip on their 25TH-pecentile LSAT score drop, and the runners up for lowering standards include Charlotte School of Law, Elone University, Suffolk University, and Arizona Summit Law School, each with a 7 point drop.”


    Back on January 9, 2015, BloombergBusiness published a piece from reporter Natalie Kitroeff, which was entitled “Getting Into Law School Is Easier Than It Used To Be, and That’s Not Good.” Look at this brilliant opening:

    “Getting into law school with low test scores is easier than it used to be.

    Low scores on the Law School Admission Test have dipped at most schools in recent years, a new report shows. A paper released last month by the National Conference of Bar Examiners, the nonprofit that creates part of the bar exam, shows that since 2010, 95 percent of the 196 U.S. law schools at least partially accredited by the American Bar Association for which the NCBE had data lowered their standards for students near the bottom of the pack. The NCBE compiled data from the American Bar Association and the Law School Admission Council, the group that administers the LSAT, to illustrate the decline in LSAT scores for students at the 25th percentile—meaning, the students who were at the very top of the bottom quartile of students.

    Standards aren't just falling at lower-tier schools—Emory University, ranked among the top 20 U.S. law schools by U.S. News and World Report, had the single largest drop in LSAT scores for this group, enrolling bottom-tier students who'd scored nine points worse than three years earlier (on a test where 120 is the lowest score and 180 is the highest score.) In fact, 20 of the 22 U.S. News top-20 schools—there was a three-way tie for 20th place—were enrolling students with lower test scores. Across all schools, LSAT scores for the 25th percentile dropped an average of three points.”

    Yes, even the cockroaches at the top law schools/diploma mills are lowering their $tandard$ - in order to cram more asses in first year seats. Isn’t it nice to see these “educators” putting their students’ interests first?!?! In the end, YOU are simply a number to these academic thieves.

  14. Here's another professor who's "seen the light," except not. He swipes every talking point of the scambloggers since 2009, except the devastation that is inflicted on the victims' lives. He even admits that schools have to close.... not trash pit 49% employment as lawyers George Mason though, that's his school. He even fights with the commenters.


  15. US News came out with its latest bullshit rankings. Cover that.

    1. Lewis and Clark fell 22 spots!!

  16. http://law-schools.startclass.com/saved_search/Easiest-Law-Schools-to-get-Into

    Now there is a whole cottage industry revolving around getting into easy-ass law schools. Take a look at the pathetic acceptance rates and median LSAT scores for the commodes on this filthy list.


    When you’re done laughing at this info, read this garbage article entitled “How to Get Into Law School.” Here is the first method:

    “Pick the right major. Unlike medical school, there are no prerequisites for law school so choosing a major can be particularly tough. In fact, The American Bar Association itself does not recommend any undergraduate majors or group of courses to prepare for a legal education and says so on its web site.
    Choose a major with a higher degree of law school acceptance. Consider majoring in philosophy, economics or journalism--in a recent review of data from the Law School Admissions Council (LSAC) those majors have a high rate of acceptance.
    Think twice about prelaw. While the name seems to suggest that it would be a good path to follow on your way to law school, not everyone agrees. Check to see how much of the coursework in the prelaw program at the school you're considering seems related to the work you'll do in law school.
    Undergraduate majors that involve lots of reading and stress critical thinking offer good foundations for law school.” [Internal citation removed]

    [Read: major in something softer than a moist stool sample, and earn a high undergraduate GPA. Medical schools require people with a working knowledge of science, where law schools don’t give a damn about your educational background – as long as you qualify for student loans.]

    The 4th method is hilarious, i.e. take an internship. Actually, it’s disgusting, especially when LEGIONS of recent law grads – each damn year – end up working for free, in order to gain experience. Yeah, who the hell wouldn’t want to incur an additional $143,516.82 in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt – so they can donate their labor?!?!

  17. those with a lsat below 145...... the time it right to apply to law school...don't miss this window of opportunity!!!!!!!!
    maybe they will abolish the lsat all together....

  18. well... i wonder..... is the lawyer with a 160 lsat more effective / better than the lawyer with the 145 lsat ????

    1. Trick question. Neither will be employed.

  19. 5:30

    The sad thing is that people are actually following that advice, there was a significant increase in LSAT takers this February (when compared to last February).

    Hopefully we don't get some sort of minibubble of people taking advantage of the lower acceptance standards.

  20. The small increase in the Feb. 2015 LSAT takers may simple be people re-taking, rather than new LSAT takers. News about the importance of a high LSAT score is more than readily available to law school hopefuls.

  21. http://www.lawschooltransparency.com/reform/projects/Admissions-Tracker/?show=NatlApps

    Look at this page labeled Admissions Tracker, from the LST website. Scroll down for some pertinent info:

    “Law School Now Easier to Get Into

    The number of people admitted to at least one law school remained relatively flat between the 2002-2003 academic year and the 2010-2011 academic year, so getting into law school became easier over time. With demand dropping so sharply in recent years, schools relaxed their admissions standards. It is now almost 40% easier to get into law school than it was 10 years ago.”

    This figure seems to follow earlier tracking data from Paul Campos, in his December 14, 2012 entry entitled “Endgame”:


    “What are the economic implications for law schools of an admissions cycle that ends up attracting only 53,000 applicants? To answer this question, we have to estimate how many matriculants such a cycle is likely to yield. This is a function of two factors: how many applicants end up getting admitted to at least one school to which they apply, and how many admitted applicants actually end up enrolling.

    As to the first factor, the percentage of applicants being admitted to at least one school has been rising for several years now:

    2004: 55.6%
    2005: 58.6%
    2006: 63.1%
    2007: 66.1%
    2008: 66.5%
    2009: 67.4%
    2010: 68.7%
    2011: 71.1%

    In other words, law school applicants were 27.9% more likely to be admitted to at least one school in 2011 than they had been seven years earlier. We don’t have numbers yet for how many 2012 applicants were admitted to at least one school, but since the number of applicants fell by 13.7%, while the number of new 1Ls fell by only 8.6%, it seems certain that the upward trend in percentage of applicants admitted continued.”

    Now, you can see why the bitches and hags want to waive the LSAT for up to 10% of their incoming classes. Plus, the higher-ranked toilets already get a nice infusion of federal cash each year, from transfer students – without incurring those LSAT scores and less than stellar UGPAs. But the pigs are looking out for their students, right?!?!

    1. :) Nando, a prophet is never acceptable in his own time.

  22. Great article. The scam deans will move to open enrollment policies to keep the cash flowing. They must be getting really nervous, there just aren't enough idiot lemmings to fund their 300k salaries and grueling 5 hour workweeks.


Web Analytics