Saturday, December 26, 2015

Open Letter to First Year Lemmings: Drop Out Now, If You Are Not Near the Top of Your Class After First Semester

It’s Okay to Quit: Back on May 4, 2011, former Biglaw associate Will Meyerhofer wrote a brilliant piece that was entitled “Someone likes a quitter.” Look at his excellent opening:

“No one likes a quitter,” she quipped, exhaling a cloud of toxins.

Uh…huh. Except there’s a proviso in that statement – a “carve-out” in the contract language – covering the quitting of something self-destructive. Like smoking.

Or a pointless march through law school. 

I’d like to speak in defense of quitting, and quitters. 

Quitting can be about more than stopping whatever you’re doing. It can be about waking up and asking yourself if what you’re doing makes sense and is worth continuing.

If you’re plugging away dutifully through the legal education process with no real idea why – it might be time to quit. 

Does this mean I’m seriously advising young law students all over the country to give up and drop out – simply abandon their legal education mid-way through? 


I am prescribing a mass exodus from law schools. A semi-mass exodus might do the trick. 

Tune in. Turn on. Drop out. 

If you don’t know why you’re there – and you’re not sure what you’re getting yourself into – if you’re not at a top school, or even if you are, and your grades are a little iffy, and likely to stay that way – then please, get out. Today. Before you spend another cent." [Emphasis mine]

Mr. Meyerhofer then refers to this filth as the legal education scam. He earned his Bachelor’s degree from Harvard and his JD from NYU.

U.S. Department of Labor Data: If you are considering a potential legal career, then surely you are familiar with the Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook, correct?!?! Take a peak at the entry for Lawyers. According to this source, there were 778,800 attorneys in this country, in 2014. BLS predicts that there will be 43,800 more lawyers in 2024 than there were ten years earlier. Still want to take the plunge, Dumbass?! From the handbook:

Job Outlook

Employment of lawyers is projected to grow 6 percent from 2014 to 2024, 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]

By the way, “growth” in this GLUTTED field tends to be from retirement and deaths, as this “profession” has been decimated by automation and outsourcing. Vendors such as LegalZoom have also reduced the need for attorneys.

Too Many Damn Graduates: Review the Class of 2014 National Summary Report, furnished by NALP. You will notice that there were a total of 43,832 law grads competing for 27,928 jobs where bar passage was required. In fact, the outlook is even weaker for those who want to work in private law offices. After all, only 18,587 members of this cohort ended up employed as private lawyers. This figure includes desperate-ass sole practitioners.

Class of 2014 Bimodal Salary Distribution Curve: This organization also provided an important graph for this cohort. Look at the text below, which is under the chart:

“Note: Graph is based on 22,095 salaries reported for full-time jobs lasting a year or more. A few salaries above $205,000 are excluded from the graph for clarity, but not from the percentage calculations. The left-hand peaks of the graph reflect salaries of $40,000 to $65,000, which collectively accounted for about half of reported salaries. The right-hand peak shows that salaries of $160,000 accounted for about 17% of reported salaries. However, more complete salary coverage for jobs at large law firms heightens this peak and diminishes the left-hand peaks — and shows that the unadjusted mean overstates the average starting salary by just over 6%. Nonetheless, as both the arithmetic mean and the adjusted mean show, relatively few salaries are close to either mean. For purposes of this graph, all reported salaries were rounded to the nearest $5,000.”

By the way, this graph does not accurately reflect reality. It is based on salaries reported, which is a little over half of the collective 2014 JD class. Specifically, that figure represents 50.4% of the group, i.e. 22,095/43,832. Furthermore, it only includes full-time positions that lasted for one year or longer. Going back to the NALP National Summary Report, you will see that 1,090 grads ended up in firms of 101-250 attorneys, another 1,091 members of this class were employed in offices of 251-500 lawyers, and that 3,952 JDs reported working in law firms with more than 500 attorneys.

You can bet your ass that nearly everyone from these three groups furnished their salaries to their schools, which was consequently supplied to NALP. Tons of graduates chose not to provide their income data to their commodes, out of a sense of shame or failure. This skews the data further, in favor of those earning more. This makes the law school swine happy, since lemmings will see these numbers as proof that if they work hard they can be successful as well.

Conclusion: You are MUCH better off trying to explain a 6 month gap in employment – and taking out an additional $20K in student loans – rather than pissing away three years of your life, owing $190K in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, and scrambling for low-paid dreck. This is your life and the law school pigs are not looking out for YOUR interests. They merely want to get as many asses in seats as possible. The cockroaches will do and say anything to get you to sign on the dotted line.

Sunday, December 20, 2015

Western Michigan University Thomas M. Cooley Law Sewer’s Median LSAT Score for First Year Students is Now 141

ABA 509 Required Disclosures: Head to this link and select Thoma$ M. Cooley Law $chool, year 2015, and then hit the Generate Reports button. You will then be able to review the Western Michigan University 2015 Standard 509 Information Report in PDF format. Please do not eat or drink anything while looking over the following figures:

“GPA and LSAT Scores

Total # of apps: 1,222
Full-Time: 919
Part-Time: 303
Total # of offers: 1,072
Full-Time: 807
Part-Time: 265
Total # of matriculants: 448
Full-Time: 41
Part-Time: 407
75th Percentile GPA, Total: 3.19
75th Percentile GPA, Full-Time: 3.23
75th Percentile GPA, Part-Time: 3.19
50th Percentile GPA, Total: 2.85
50th Percentile GPA, Full-Time: 2.93
50th Percentile GPA, Part-Time: 2.84
25th Percentile GPA, Total: 2.51
25th Percentile GPA, Full-Time: 2.57
25th Percentile GPA, Part-Time: 2.50
Total # not incl. in GPA percentile calc.: 10.00
Full-Time # not incl. in GPA percentile calc.: 0.00
Part-Time Total # not incl. in GPA percentile calc. 10.00
75th Percentile LSAT, Total: 147
75th Percentile LSAT, Full-Time: 155
75th Percentile LSAT, Part-Time: 146
50th Percentile LSAT, Total: 141
50th Percentile LSAT, Full-Time: 149
50th Percentile LSAT, Part-Time: 141
25th Percentile LSAT, Total: 138
25th Percentile LSAT, Full-Time: 145
25th Percentile LSAT, Part-Time: 137” [Emphasis mine]

The numbers speak for themselves. The toilet had an 87.7 percent acceptance rate, i.e. 1,072/1,222. One wonders about the profile of the 150 applicants who were denied admission. There seems to be an error under the Matriculants section, regarding full-time and part-time students. Perhaps the numbers were mixed up, since “only” 303 students applied for part-time enrollment.

LSAT Scores by Percentile: Let’s review the LSAT Percentiles Table furnished by Cambridge LSAT. Unfortunately, the most recent data is for the 2011-2014 cycle. However, this provides a clear picture of competence as the numbers have been consistent recently. According to this source and chart, an LSAT score of 141 – Cooley’s TOTAL MEDIAN for 2015 – would have placed one in the 16th percentile. A 138 on the exam, which was the garbage heap’s 25th percentile score for this year, would place you firmly in the 10th percentile of test-takers in 2014. That is BEYOND PATHETIC!!

Bachelor’s Degree Not Required: This notorious trash pit has posted the following info on a page labeled “Applying Without a Bachelor’s Degree”:

“Please note: Some state bars require a bachelor's degree; however, the State Bar of Michigan does not. Please check the educational requirements of the bar in the state in which you plan to practice law. 

Most WMU-Cooley students have a bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university. Yet, under court rules adopted by the Michigan Supreme Court, an applicant may also attend if the student has completed at least 60 semester hours or 90 quarter hours either toward an undergraduate degree from an accredited school or from an accredited junior or community college.

WMU-Cooley Law School welcomes inquiries from individuals with associate's degrees or 60 to 90 credits at a four-year institution. 

Students who have completed from one-half to three-quarters of the work necessary for a bachelor's degree must meet the admission requirements outlined in the next two sections to qualify for admission. Please call the Admissions Office at (517) 371-5140, ext. 2244 if you have any questions about your particular circumstance.” [Emphasis mine]

Yes, what a TTTTruly pre$TTTTigiou$ in$TTTTiTTTTuTTTTion of higher educaTTTTion, huh?!?! Hell, this school is approaching the admi$$ion$ “standards” of most community colleges, i.e. open enrollment. I wouldn't be surprised if the pigs offered remedial reading and writing courses.

Conclusion: In the final analysis, in the game of law school admissions, TTTThoma$ M. Cooley Law $chool is the equivalent of a $5 prostitute who is twitching and jerking due to extensive meth use. This sweltering pile of excrement will admit damn near ANYONE WITH A PULSE! Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature believe that U.S. taxpayers should be financing these morons’ “legal education”?! With the information above, and given the toilet’s reputation, those who failed to gain admission to this toilet must have had serious criminal backgrounds or other huge red flags.

Tuesday, December 15, 2015

Further Breaking Down the Drop in Pass Rates on the July 2015 New York Bar Exam

Leaking Toilets: Back on November 20, 2015, the New York Law Journal published an Andrew Denney piece, under the headline “Most New York Law Schools See Decline in Bar Pass Rates.” Look at this opening:

“Ten of New York’s 15 law schools had their pass rates decline from last year on the July 2015 bar examination, according to figures that the law schools provided to the Law Journal.

Three institutions—Touro Law School, New York Law School and Albany Law School—had a double-digit or near double-digit slide.

The exam was administered on July 28-29. There were 3,291 candidates who sat for the test for the first time, down from 3,740 first-time test takers a year earlier. 

The statewide pass rate was 79 percent, down from 83 percent last year and the lowest since 2004, when the New York State Board of Law Examiners began breaking out the pass rate for first-time test takers who graduated from American Bar Association-accredited schools. 

Touro Law Center recorded a 15-point slide, from 67.5 percent to 52.5 percent, the largest of any of the state’s law schools.” [Emphasis mine]

Yes, what an eliTTTTe in$TTTTiTTTTuTTTTion of “higher learning,” huh?!?! According to US “News” & World Report, TTTTouro College Jacob B. Fuch$berg Law CenTTTTer is a FOURTH TIER TRASH PIT! By the way, the name fits perfectly. Several paragraphs later, the article continued:

“New York Law School's pass rate for its 245 first-time test takers was 60.4 percent, down from 71 percent last year. In 2013, the school's pass rate was 83 percent. 

The [dung heap] declined to comment. 

Albany Law School, which had 151 graduates sitting for the test, had the third-largest decline, dropping almost 10 points to 68.2 percent. 

Alicia Ouellette, dean of Albany Law, said that this year's pass rate is "deeply disappointing." 

"We can and we will do better," Ouellette said. "We are analyzing exam results, meeting with our students, and developing a short-term response for the current 3Ls, and a long-term response for future graduates." [Emphasis mine]

How exactly are you going to improve your bar exam pass rates, when you continue to enroll waterheads, douchebag?  Are you going to sprinkle fairy dust on these dolts?  These swine have no plan and no real answers.

Other Coverage: On November 20, 2015, ATL featured an entry that was labeled “Stats Of The Week: New York State Bar Exam Results By School.” Read the text below:

“The recent precipitous drop in the New York State bar exam passage rates (70% for first-time takers) has been earliernoted and discussed here on ATL. The state’s overall passage rate (61%) was the lowest in “at least” 35 years. There’s plenty of blame to assign for this sad state of affairs: the schools’ increasingly laxadmission policies, the latest crop of students’ general endumbening, and, of course, foreigners. 

Recently, the New York Law Journal broke out bar passage rates by law school and found that 10 of the 15 New York state law schools saw their pass rates decline from last year. Three schools had declines of (roughly) 10% or more: Touro (-15%), NYLS(-10.6%), and Albany (-9.8%).” [Emphasis mine]

USN&WR Ratings for New York Diploma Mills: Here are the 2016 law school rankings, for Empire State commodes, as furnished by US “News”:

First tier: Columbia 4; NYU 6; Columbia 13; and Fordham 34. Second tier sewage pits: Cardozo 75; Crooklyn 78; St. John’s 82; SUNY Buffalo 87; and Syracuse 87. Third tier toilets: CUNY 113; Hofstra 122; NYLS 127; Albany Law School 138; and Pace University 138. Touro is the only TTTT in New York State.

Now, look at the chart on this entry. You will notice that bar pass rates essentially reflect the tiers. Law grads from Cornell, NYU, Columbia, and Fordham had the highest success. Syracuse, St. John’s, CUNY, and Brooklyn Law Sewer are in the next group. Cardozo, Pace, and SUNY Buffalo JDs collectively came in at 9th, 10th, and 11th “best” on the July 2015 New York bar exam. Albany, Hofstra, NYL$, and TTTTouro featured the lowest pass rates, which the single fourth tier pile of excrement at the very bottom. It seems that the only diploma factories that fell outside their ranking were CUNY, SUNY Buffalo, and Pace, with CUNY and Pace JDs exceeding expecTTTaTTTions.

Conclusion: If you plan on attending law school in this state, and your are not admitted to Columbia or New York Univer$ity, and perhaps Cornell, then you are a moron of monumental proportions. Do you think – for one damn second – that YOU are going to be able to survive on $37K per year, after living in the most expensive area of the country for three years and paying insane amounts of tuition for a TTT law degree?!?! This is your life, cretin. The law school pigs are not looking out for your interests. They simply need your ass in a seat, so that they can get their filthy hooves on more federal student loan money. The cockroaches do not give one goddamn about YOU, the student or recent graduate. They don’t care what happens to your or your family, after you receive your garbage diploma. You are a mere means to an end, chump.

Friday, December 11, 2015

Increase in Minority Enrollment in Law School Resulted in Less Than One Percent Gain in the Number of Minority Lawyers, from 2000-2010

Still Want to Sign on the Dotted Line?: On December 4, 2015, ATL posted an entry from second year law student Renwei Chung. His contribution was labeled “Minorities In The Legal Profession Have Increased By Less Than One Percent Since 2000.” From his opening:

“In 2010, 88.1 percent of lawyers were white. In 2000, 88.8 percent of lawyers were white. These percentages were taken from the U.S. Census Bureau reports for 2010 and 2000, respectively. In other words, minorities in the legal profession have increased by less than 1 percent since 2000. 

Over this same time period, minority enrollment in the J.D. programs of ABA-approved law schools increased by 6,752 students, or 1.8 percent (from 20.6 percent in 2000-2001 to 22.4 percent in 2009-2010). What do you predict the percentages of white and minority lawyers will be in 2020?

As I have previously noted, according to the National Jurist, overall law school enrollment dropped 15 percent from 2011 to 2013, but it has not been consistent among races. Asian students had the largest drop in law school enrollment – 16 percent. White enrollment dropped 14.8 percent, black law students fell 1.6 percent, and Hispanic enrollment held steady. It would be interesting to discover why there is such a large variance in the change in enrollment.

For a better diagnosis of future diversity in legal areas such as Biglaw, it may be practical to track the shifting demographics among the top 14 law schools and other traditional Biglaw feeder schools. The specific change in demographics among these top-tier schools is likely to be the biggest indicator of potential diversity in Biglaw. 

How will the change in the law school population affect the legal industry? I have already noted how diversity among Biglaw partners doesn’t reflect law school diversity. Since the late 1980s, the percentage of minority law school graduates has more than doubled (going from 10 percent to 23 percent), yet 92 to 94 percent of current Biglaw partners are white.” [Emphasis mine]

Attending ABA-accredited dung heaps such as Villanova, the University of Mississippi, CreighTTTon, New Mexico, or Seattle certainly is not going to help you land Biglaw. Yet, you will still be charged ridiculous sums of tuition – in your pursuit of joining the GLUTTED “legal profession.” Why take the plunge?

Other Coverage: On December 8, 2015, JD Journal published an Amanda Griffin article that was entitled “How Minorities Can Select the Best Law School for Their Future.” Check out the following portion:

"The reports and studies are not new. Even though the legal market is improving, finding jobs can still be challenging. This rings especially true for minorities. The National Association for Law Placement reported in November that the number of African-American associates at major law firms has declined every year since 2009. 

African Americans now make up only 3.95 percent of the number of associates at major U.S. law firms. Minority women are especially rare, making up only 2.6 percent of associates in 2015. Hispanic associates have increased slightly to comprise 4.3 percent and Asians make up 11 percent. 

With numbers as small as these, minorities considering law school need to make sure they are selecting a school that gives them the best chances of success after law school. Minority students should look for a law school with an infrastructure that supports students such as with mentoring. Law schools that offer more practical courses in the areas of compliance, intellectual property, transactional, and litigation have the students’ best interests at heart." [Emphasis mine]

The author is correct in noting that minority law students should focus on practical courses. However, the suggestion regarding mentoring is a sad joke. Do you think these money pits will invest any meaningful time, energy or money into helping out their also-ran pupils?!?! As those who have gone through this waste of three years can attest, the pigs devote their energy to helping those in the top ten percent of the class find employment. At best, the commodes will offer a TTT program to assist students with legal writing and how to answer exam essay questions.

Conclusion: In the final analysis, Biglaw wants associates who reflect their wealthy clients’ backgrounds and views. They are not going to start actively recruiting minority law grads from weak-ass schools – with the exception of Howard University Sewer of Law. If you are attending a stink pit, with the hope of landing a good paying legal job after law school, then you are sadly mistaken.

With regard to the “profession” overall, if you are a minority or someone of modest means – and you did not graduate from a top 10 law school – then you are realistically looking at the following options: selling insurance premiums; working in toiletlaw, where you will make peanuts while working long hours representing scum; or going back to your previous employment or industry. Hell, you may even have the “opportunity” of returning to your childhood bedroom – as a broke-ass, debt-riddled 31 year old attorney. Who wouldn’t want to take this terrible bet?

Sunday, December 6, 2015

Law School Admissions Council Cockroaches Take Offense to LST Publishing Studies and Statistics Showing That Law Schools Are Admitting Dunces

LST’s Report: Recently, Law School Transparency published an excellent study – backed up with charts, graphs, figures, and rock solid analysis – that was entitled “2015 State of Legal Education.” Here is the general overview of that report:

“A problem for our profession and society

Law school enrollment is the lowest it's been since the 1960's. To remain financially viable, many law schools are admitting many people who face real risk of not completing school or of failing the bar. The bargain is clear: take larger, riskier classes now to survive and deal with the accreditation challenges, angry alumni, and bad press that follow later. 

But at what cost, and to whom? And should we collectively enable this bargain? 

We need lawyers. Yet too many schools hoping to produce the next generation of lawyers are failing the profession and society today—not to mention the students they're setting up to fail. To reinvigorate the law school pipeline, we must address the substantive issues that drive prospective law students away from the legal profession. We must ensure that law schools make responsible enrollment choices and become more affordable.” [Emphasis in original]

Since a profession is supposed to care about its practitioners, future members, potential clients or patients, and society – as well as maintaining and enhancing its reputation – who could be upset with an organization that, at its own expense, has furnished such data and provided pragmatic solutions? Then again, we are talking about the law school swine.

The Pigs Respond: LSAC “president” David Bernstine provided this reply, in his letter “Why LSAT Scores Should Not Be Used to Label Law Schools and Their Students” – On December 1, 2015. From his opening:

“A report recently released by Law School Transparency (LST) has gained headlines by claiming that some ABA-approved law schools have been intentionally admitting “high risk” students who, based on their LSAT scores, do not have a reasonable chance of passing the bar. As explained below, this claim and others made by the LST study are based on misunderstandings of the LSAT. 

The LSAT is a valid measure of certain cognitive skills that are important for success in law school. However, proper use of the test does not include using score ranges to label law schools and their students as to their potential for successful bar passage.

In addition to the fact that the recommendations in the LST report run counter to LSAC’s testuse guidelines, we are concerned about the methodological errors upon which the report is based, and the misleading media coverage that this flawed report has generated.” [Emphasis mine]

By his “logic,” college quarterbacks being assessed for their ability to play and succeed in the NFL should not be judged on whether they can complete difficult passes in tight coverage or whether they can remain calm and perform at a high level in critical situations. After all, there are so many other factors and intangibles. Apparently, David Bernstine has difficulty with reading and statistics.

McEntee Replies: The Faculty Lounge posted his well-written retort, “Law School Transparency (LST) Responds to Law School Admission Council (LSAC) Press Release” – on December 2, 2015. Check out the meaty portion below:

“In recent weeks, several deans at high-risk schools have made comments in the media suggesting that there is no correlation between LSAT scores and bar passage at their law school, but none have provided data to support their assertions. The most clearly false claim came from Dean Penelope Bryan at Whittier Law School. She told the Los Angeles Times that “[t]he LSAT score has no predictive value for the success of Whittier Law School students on the bar exam.” Incidentally, Whittier’s first time bar pass rate in California dropped from 64.7% in July 2013, , to 42.7% in July 2014 to 30% in February 2015. (Note - Whittier had only 10 first time test-takers for that administration; California's July 2015 results by school are not yet available, but the statewide results were lower.) 

At the same time, Whittier’s entering class profile progressively weakened. In 2014, over half of the entering class at Whittier was at 146 or below on the LSAT. To Whittier’s credit, the school dramatically shrank their first year entering class in 2015, substantially raising the LSAT profile of the bottom half of the class, with the 50th percentile increasing from 146 to 148 and the 25th percentile increasing from 143 to 146. Clearly, Whittier has recognized that LSAT scores do matter, even if Dean Bryan won’t publicly admit it.” [Emphasis mine]

According to the Orange County Register, the American Bar Association placed Whittier Law Sewer on academic probation in 2005 due to pathetically low bar passage rates. The fact that the ABA continues to accredit such dung heaps shows that they don’t give a damn about students or recent graduates. It also speaks volumes about the organization.

Conclusion: In the final analysis, the LSAC rats are in the same boat as “law professors” and deans. They need more asses in seats, in order to keep their plush, easy jobs. They know that the media coverage of the drop in numbers of test-takers, decline in the quality of applicants, and the resultant plunge in bar passage rates has cast the ABA-accredited toilets in a bad light. The bitches and hags will do and say anything, to stanch the bleeding. Simply put, the schools want to be able to admit morons who can barely read at an 11th grade level – and they don’t want anyone to point that out to others. The Law $chool Admi$$ion Council is in leagie with the pigs. However, this is still “the noble profession,” right?

Wednesday, December 2, 2015

Wall Street Journal Documents the Further Drop in Bar Passage Rates Across the Nation

Further Documentation: On November 24, 2015, the Wall Street Journal Law Blog published a Sara Randazzo piece that was entitled “Bar Exam Passage Rates Nationwide Keep Dropping.” Check out the following portion:

“The last time we checked in on bar passage rates, the results weren’t looking too rosy for law school graduates who took the July 2015 exam. 

The numbers still seem to be in a downward spiral, most recently demonstrated in California. While the Golden State didn’t see quite as large a drop as some other states, the percentage of first-time test takers who passed the exam fell to 60% from 61.4% a year earlier on the July exam. Among first-timers who attended American Bar Association-accredited schools, the rate dropped about a percentage point to 68%. 

The National Law Journal took a look this week at some of the states that have seen declining rates on the July exam. Some of the most notable numbers, according to the story:

In Pennsylvania, the passage rate for first-time test takers fell below 80% for the first time since 2003, to 78.3% 
• In Georgia, the first timers rate dropped almost 7 percentage points, to 73.5% 
• In Texas, 76.6% of first-time test takers passed, down about 4 percentage points from a year ago 
• In Florida, first-timers passed at a rate of 68.9%, compared to 71.8% last year 

Douglas Sylvester, dean of Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, told Law Blog that the national numbers indicate “the credentials of these students are lower” than they’ve been in the past—a sentiment that’s taking hold in the legal community. Schools are “either admitting someone who can never pass the bar, or failing to educate them,” he said.” [Emphasis mine]

The law school pigs KNOWINGLY and WILLINGLY admitted a higher percentage of applicants, even though the credentials of the lemmings have dropped. Yes, that is a recipe for success, right?!?! Then again, the swine don’t care about their students. However, since bar passage rates reflect the strength of a program, the cockroaches have been forced to feign concern for their graduates.

Nicholas Allard of Crooklyn Law School has made several moronic attempts to place the blame at the feet of the bar examiners for making the test too difficult for his lower quality JDs. Don’t expect the jackals to accept responsibility for lower pass rates.

Other Coverage: The National Law Journal posted a Sheri Qualters entry labeled “Bar Exam Pass Rates Drop Across the Country” - on November 23, 2015.  Check out this killer opening:

“Bar exam passage rates sank in several big states, indicating a drop in the qualifications of students amid fewer law school applications. 

Pass rates in California, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania all came in lower for the July 2015 exam.

As demand for law schools has dropped over the last few years, law schools, as a result, have been admitting and graduating less-qualified students,” said Derek Muller, an associate professor at Pepperdine University School of Law in Malibu, California, who has studied and blogged about the issue. 

The number of law school applicants plunged from 87,900 in 2010 to 54,130 in 2015, according to the Law School Admission Council. 

Law schools have been admitting students with lower LSAT scores and lower grade-point averages in recent few years and “that manifests itself in the bar exam a few years later,” Muller said. 

The bar pass rate in California dropped to the lowest point since the fall of 1986. For the state’s July exam, just 46.6 percent of applicants and 60 percent of first-time takers passed, compared with July 2014 rates of 48.6 percent overall and 61.4 percent for first-time takers. The overall pass rate in the fall of 1986 was 44.4 percent. 

New York’s overall pass rate for July first-time test takers from American Bar Association-accredited schools hit its lowest point since 2004. This summer, 79 percent of those examinees passed, compared with 83 percent in July 2014. The state’s 70 percent overall pass rate in July 2015 dropped from 74 percent in July 2014.” [Emphasis mine]

You’re welcome, bitches! However, you rodents chose to lower your admi$$ion$ "standards" further.

Conclusion: In the final analysis, the law school pigs DO NOT GIVE ONE GODDAMN about their students or recent graduates. For years, they have pumped out FAR TOO MANY JDs, for the available number of attorney openings. They did so with full knowledge that the U.S. lawyer job market was GLUTTED – and they did not miss a wink of sleep over this fact or their role in consigning legions of law students to a lifetime of financial ruin. 

Only now when it becomes apparent that the selfish whores accepted too many waterheads – in order to get their hooves on more federal student loan dollars – are they interested in the outcomes for their grads. When JDs were working as “sandwich artists” or selling insurance policies, they did not blink an eye. If a significant portion of their recent classes had to return to their prior non-legal work, or serve pizzas in sit down restaurants, the swine did not have the slightest concern. After all, the cockroaches could simply claim that those students were “lazy bastards who didn’t apply themselves.” If a commode produces low bar passage rates, those applicants who fail have no chance to practice law – at least not for another 6-12 months. And the rats recognize that they will have one hell of a time justifying their gross tuition rates for a garbage “legal education.” Of course, mental midgets will continue to enroll – but perhaps at a lower clip.
Web Analytics