LOWERING THE BAR

via ABA Journal:

Law Schools Could Be Admitting 80 Percent of Their Applicants This Fall, Statistics Suggest

If you are an aspiring law student with low grades and scores on the Law School Admission Test [LSAT], this could be your year. 

Seventy-five of the 197 law schools ranked by U.S. News & World Report, or about 38 percent, suffered from triple declines in 2011--in enrollment, and test scores and grades of entering students[.] 

The Law School Admission Council is estimating the number of law school applicants will drop by 14.4 percent this fall. The decline in interest has been greatest among those with higher scores on the Law School Admission Test. As a result, law schools should expect further declines in enrollment and further erosion of test scores and grade point averages[.] 

It will also become easier to get into law school. "The admit rate will be the highest it has been this millenium, probably exceeding 75 percent and possible exceeding 80 percent (after increasing from 55 percent to 71 percent between 2004 and 2011)," [University of St. Thomas law professor Jerry] Organ says.

The Instapundit has been talking about the Higher Education Bubble for quite some time now. It seems like things are proceeding as predicted, starting with law schools. A professor from my alma mater, Brian Tamanaha, has a great book on the subject.

So what? Admissions standards are dropping as applications decrease. Big whoop. Well, OK, but stories like this are becoming increasingly common. Applications are down because potential students know that a law degree no longer guarantees a job in the legal industry, much less one that pays the exorbitant salaries that have been so shamelessly plugged by admissions departments for the last few decades. Instead of recognizing the tidal shift that has occurred/is occurring in the industry, schools who lower their standards are acting like the proverbial ostrich, heads buried in the sand. The value of a law degree is being diluted. While some schools are going against the grain, the majority will continue to struggle to preserve the status quo and hope that everything will be OK if they can just wait out this rough patch. With more and more bad news for new grads, those ostriches might get their eggs cooked. Stay tuned.

ABA Considering Doing Something to Benefit Young, Unemployed Lawyers It Wishes Didn't Exist

OK, that's probably not really fair. I mean ... there might be some (unpaid) interns working at the ABA that really do care. Anyway, hundreds of news stories about the undeniable shit storm facing law school grads for the last few years appear to have been taken into consideration.

via ABA Journal:

ABA House to Consider Ethics Rule Changes to Help Young and Mobile Lawyers

The measure would amend the ABA Model Rule on Admission by Motion to say that lawyers seeking to practice in a new jurisdiction through this procedure need to have actively practiced law for only three of the past five years. The previous version of the rule required active practice for five of the last seven years. 

Another new model ethics rule would allow lawyers moving to a new jurisdiction to practice there for up to a year, subject to some restrictions, while seeking admission to the bar.

As a recent grad, I welcome this change in the ethical rules. The limitations imposed by the outdated model of parochial bar associations in every state make very little sense in our increasingly global economy. In the current job market (read: desolate wasteland) for new law grads, being forced to choose one jurisdiction before you even begin practicing law leads to a severe limitation of potential jobs. Even when I do see a job that looks perfect for me, I won't be able to apply if it's out of state.

This makes no sense.

But wait! Don't individual states have an interest in making sure that lawyers practicing in that state know the laws of that state?!?!? Well, sure. But I can tell you this: most of the law that you learn for the bar is forgotten by the time you get your results. The only way to be competent in a particular area of practice is to practice in that particular area. Studying a BARBRI outline might get you through the MBE or an essay, but it's not enough to prevent you from committing malpractice.

Now, with jobs, particularly in certain markets (San Francisco comes immediately to mind), being hard to find, this change to the ABA Model Rules on Admission by Motion is a step in the right direction. This will increase mobility and help grease the gears of the legal industry, leading to fewer attorneys languishing in tight job markets when their skills could be put to use in other regions.

UPDATE: The revision has passed!

Broke California Finds $250M+ in "Lost" Funds

via Channel 6 News:

California Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration on Friday announced that $119 million more in untapped money was found in a sweeping audit of state accounts, bringing to more than $286.5 million the sum lawmakers were unaware of as they repeatedly cut government services.

The state of California is an absolute disaster. It imposes one of the highest levels of taxes (both corporate and sales taxes) in the nation, has been in constant danger of failing to meet its financial obligations, and, Oh!, just happens to have a slew of tax increases on the November ballot. Our illustrious Governor said:

“I am going directly to the voters because I don’t want to get bogged down in partisan gridlock as happened this year,” said Brown in a statement. “The stakes are too high.”
He suggested that the state can’t make any more cuts responsibly. “Spending is now at levels not seen since the ’70s,” he said. “Schools have been hurt, and state funding for our universities has been reduced by 25 percent. Support for the elderly and the disabled has fallen to where it was in 1983.”
“The stark truth is that without new tax revenues, we will have no other choice but to make deeper and more damaging cuts to schools, universities, public safety, and our courts,” he added.

Is this anything less than insanity? Why should we vote to give more money to a government that has shown itself to be completely incompetent, specifically in the area of handling money? If it is even remotely possible that a quarter of a billion dollars could be unaccounted for in a state that is desperately trying to make up for a billion dollar deficit, then I refuse to allocate any more funding to the state.

The most frustrating thing to think about is that whatever outcry that comes from this won't last until November. Instead, we'll hear the same hostage negotiations political speeches demanding higher taxes in order to "save" our "schools, universities, public safety, and our courts."

And the California bullet train to fiscal calamity rolls on ....