Spring 2000
Notes from the Editor
President's Message
Contrasting Justice, Law School, and Catholic Christian Faith
Ave Maria School of Law
If Only I had Known Then
Happenings in the Profession
National
Recruitment Calendar Meeting
White, Wealthy Males and Accommodations for
the Disabled
The activities of several current Georgetown Law Center students have recently caught the attention of the media. Two students, perhaps driven by the "student debt crisis," engaged in activities, while law students, on which the Securities and Exchange Commission has cast a very disapproving eye. Another student was accepted despite the fact that he had gained considerable notoriety a few years back for investigative reporting that was based on facts he oftentimes created out of whole cloth. In the articles recounting these incidents, although there were quotes from experts on legal ethics, there was no mention that Georgetown is a Jesuit Catholic institution and how these characteristics related or did not relate to the behavior of the students.
Perhaps, this omission stems from simple carelessness on the part of its reporter and, possibly, the newspaper's editors who in the same week anointed Dick Gephardt, in a headline no less, as Speaker of the United States House of Representatives. Perhaps too, it is simply a confirmation of George Bernard Shaw's remark that the very appellation, Catholic university, is a contradiction in terms and, accordingly, the Times's conclusion that the fact that Georgetown is Catholic is irrelevant.
The two major articles in this issue would obviously take issue with the Shavian putdown of Catholic higher education. They revisit an issue that NAPLA explored at an annual conference many years ago with a panel chaired by my first successor as pre-law advisor at Saint Joseph's, Joe Gower. I remember Joe telling me, as he strove to put the panel together, that, although he had no problem rounding up representatives from Jewish- and Protestant-affiliated schools, he had no takers from the Roman Catholic variety of law schools. Possibly, it was the location of our conference that year or the fact that Joes being in a Theology Department deterred return calls! Professors Richard S. Myers (Ave Maria Law School) and Paul J. Goda, S.J. (Santa Clara University School of Law), happily, were much more forthcoming and their contributions, I believe, will shed some light on the subject, providing insights that will prove valuable for pre-law advisors in advising their students concerning law school selection.
Dickinson School of Law of Pennsylvania State University's Elaine Bourne's piece perfectly complements the Myers and Goda articles. Too many of our advisees make their decisions as to where to go on too little data and no true research about the law school at which they matriculate. Bourne's article comes from the excellent panel, "News from Outside Lake Wobegon," organized by Carol Wright of Lafayette College. for the 1999 Conference.
Getting more information about law schools is what recruitment should be all about. NAPLA Secretary Heather Struck attended the recent LSAC meeting on recruitment held in Cleveland in early April and provides a report that raises the possibility of instituting major changes to the recruiting schedule. Finally, for something totally different, an article on accommodating the handicapped for standardized tests is reprinted from The Chronicle of Higher Education. Although it does not deal with the LSAT, members probably realize that LSAC is currently being sued by the United States Department of Justice for failure to make what DOJ considers to be necessary accommodations for the handicapped to take the LSAT. We will have more on that issue in a subsequent number of the Notes.
Finally, my once-a-year plea for tributes honoring any of our colleagues, admissions officers or pre-law advisors or "significant others" engaged in activities related to law school admissions who will be retiring from or leaving their positions. The deadline for inclusion in the summer issue is July 15th.
Graham Lee
Saint Joseph's University
Philadelphia, PA 19131-1395
phone: 610-660-1753
fax: 610-660-1284
glee@sju.edu
Now that our law school applicants are settled in and hopefully preparing to attend a school which really excites them, the new wave of students has started to appear. Last minute questions about the LSAT and school selection seem to be at the top of their list. It is also time to reflect on whether we can improve our services to them so that this time of life will be less frantic.
Maybe by working together there are some things that can be done. One suggestion has been put forth by LSAT regarding APLA's coordinating law school caravans and fairs so that they can be of the maximum advantage to the most students. If we believe, as I think we all do, that the best pre-law advising can be done by an applicant's university or college pre-law advisor, we need to get our names and services out there more prominently and frequently. Our friendly commercial competitors are certainly working in this area, combining LSAT prep and law school application prep. Please carefully read Heather Struck's article on the possibilities of our being able to work cooperatively to foster more contact between our students and law school admissions officers and thus get more information to our students in our own environment.
I trust that your summer will be a relaxing and enjoyable one, from which we all come back in the Fall full of energy and new ideas for our next batch of students. Hopefully, we will have some time to catch up at the national conference in San Diego and at Williamsburg in June 2001.
Pauline M. Harrington, JD
Political Science Department
Bridgewater College
180 Summer Street
Bridgewater, MA 02325
508-531-2418
fax: 508-531-6186
Contrasting
Justice, Law School, and Catholic Christian Faith
Paul J. Goda, SJ., Professor,
Santa Clara University School of Law
Reprinted with permission from Explore, vol .3. number 1, Fall 1999, published by the Bannan Institute for Jesuit Education and Christian Values, Santa Clara University.
The tensions of time and transition have affected every institution throughout history. The Roman Catholic Church is the only institution to pass through the Dark Ages and into a dominant position of power in European culture for centuries to follow. The transition into, and out of, cultural power is not what the Church is ultimately about, however, because it is not what Jesus was about.
Jesus came to teach us that life was a gift of His Fatherłgrace living in nature, in good times and in bad, in all of the contrasts of life. But in the midst of those contrasts, taut with tension, believers are meant to assert that "the God" -one God-lives. The absolute lives in the midst of change. The tension exists in many different forms: in the problems of faith, in the problems of justice, in the issues of philosophy and justice.
Can Law Schools Be Catholic?
The starkest tension is the contradiction that appears when oneĘs faith does not drive one to justice; that is sin. St. James put it better: "to show faith by works."
In the academic setting of a Catholic university, law schools are meant to concretize the intellectual aspects of justice for our culture. But such a setting for a law school involves an intellectual tension between faith and justice. For example, as a priest and a lawyer, I have never thought of the Santa Clara University School of Law as a place that can be formally, practically, and institutionally Catholic. (Please, do note how many and which adverbs I have used in that sentence.)
Catholic law schools cannot be formally Catholic, just as biology or mathematics cannot be formally Catholic. The formal subject matter of law is simply not faith. When one of our Presidents here at Santa Clara asked me to help draft a mission statement from the SCU School of Law as a preparation for fundraising, I included some of this tension of which I speak in the draft statement. I said that one of the first universities in Western culture was Bologna, founded in the 12th century. It was at Bologna that law was first separated from the other subjects taught in the University, from the "arts". I wrote that even then Catholic authorities had problems with law schools because of their independent, secular status. So did our President.
Nor can law schools be practically Catholic. There is no core curriculum, tying the law school into the liberal arts or into theology. I do on occasion raise the issue of justice, and sometimes, of faith, in my core courses in law school. But Contracts, Wills and Trusts, and Community Property are not formally or practically "Catholic" They are pragmatic, technical courses. In my course in Jurisprudence, which is not a technical, legal course, I can emphasize issues of faith and justice in a context in which the students can engage both themselves and me in a confrontation with foundational issues in depth.
On the other hand, our SCU School of Law can and should be institutionally Catholic. The institutional principle of Catholic law schools is that they are in a Catholic context, within a Catholic university. But this raises issues of the ambiguities of institutionalization, of the everyday relationships that are worked out in the uneasy relationship of a semi-autonomous law school with the larger University. None of the courses in the law school are specifically Catholic. Certainly, the works of justice, of bringing law to groups that do not have the full benefits of American justice, must be a prominent part of what law schools do. And I would say that almost every law school in the country does those works of justice in some way. But such activities are not specifically Catholic.
Philosophy and Justice
On the day after I was asked to write this essay, one of my SCU students asked me, "How can the Catholic Church accept Greek definitions of justice?" That question posed the foundational issues of law and justice that transcend positive law. "Positive" here simply means human law, explicitly enacted by human authority. The tension here is that law should also be a profession, an acknowledgment of some underlying faith.
The Catholic Church does accept the definitions of justice that came originally through Greek philosophers, especially through Plato and Aristotle. Those definitions were obviously secular definitions of justice. But just as obviously, those definitions connected justice with morality.
So I gave the student the simple answer that the Church accepted such definitions because the Catholic Christian Church did not have a philosophy of its own. It took its philosophy from the culture in which it lived.
But that Church also molded that philosophy in accord with the teachings of Jesus and the early theology of the Church. Aristotle held that justice was a virtue that was both general and specific. The general notion of justice covered all virtue. A specific limited part of that justice was the legal justice by which human beings gave to each other what was their due within the community by public action. St. Thomas Aquinas accepted the definitions of justice implied in the broad and limited notions of justice, setting them in the context of his faith.
In many ways, this early distinction between justice as a general virtue, encompassing all others, and justice as a specific virtue, limited to the "legal," to public activity, presaged the later attempts to find connections and boundary lines between the sacred and the secular, between faith and works, and between faith and justice. These contrasts go beyond the local antinomies of law schools set within the context of Catholic Universities. The contrasts lead into the broader contradictions of an intellectual culture at war with itself: an ethic that says there are some absolutes that we can know and by which we can guide our lives versus an ethic that says either there are no absolutes or we cannot know them, so the only moral norms are purely relativistic.
Historical Development
The modern historical development is easy to follow. John Austin, in determining the province of jurisprudence in the mid-1800s, postulated a rather mild positivism. Positivism as a philosophy is concerned with empirical facts, without concern for ultimate absolute values. Austin was a pious Christian who did not radically condemn the older natural law and its metaphysics.
However, Hans Kelsen suggested earlier in this century that a legal system had to be without a priori content. This simply means that a historical legal system could not have laws until they had been enacted. But he also postulated a radical skepticism to deny the possibility of the certainty of any knowledge. And this, of course, would radically separate law and morality. Such a denial and such a separation create a vacuum of principles. He still needed a starting point, a foundation. So he established the hypothesis of a Grundnorm, a basic principle, which was a legalistic substitute for God.
Hans Kelsen did not come to this hypothesis easily. In a series of brilliant essays, Prof. Pierre Schlag has plumbed the depths of the despair that flows from the relativism occasioned by God-substitutes in legal theory. Prof. Schlag is no follower of traditional philosophy, but at least he knows that philosophy. In Law as the Continuation of God by Other Means,1 he dismisses St. Thomas AquinasĘ proofs for the existence of God. But having done so, he goes on to say, in what I can only construe as an epistemological despair that goes far beyond skepticism:
For those who remain interested in ōdoing law, the popular alternative is to try to continue the legal conversation, minus the underlying metaphysic. This invitation issues from various anti-formalist quarters: postmodernists, neopragmatists, and so on. But short of dissonance or bad faith (both of which are certainly possible) there is no intellectually respectable way to do so. It is no more possible to continue doing law in an intellectually respectable way once the metaphysic is gone, than to continue worship once God is dead. Law is like God-here. And once you say that God is just a bunch of conventions, he loses a great deal of his appeal. Correspondingly, worship comes to lack a certain seriousness. The same goes for law.
I venture a guess that such an attitude is not uncommon. It is the "treason of the intellectual. " It is no wonder that Pope John Paul II spoke for traditional Catholic, Christian faith and for reason when he issued the encyclicals: Veritatis Splendor in 1993, dealing with morality and natural law, and Fides et Ratio in 1998, dealing with faith and reason. He quoted St. Thomas Aquinas:
Among all others, the rational creature is subject to divine providence in the most excellent way, insofar as it partakes of a share of providence, being provident both for itself and others. Thus it has a share of the Eternal Reason, whereby it has a natural inclination to its proper act and end. This participation of the eternal law in the rational creature is called natural law.
The notions of participation and Eternal Law go back to Plato. The notion of nature goes back to Aristotle. The early Christian theologians eclectically took these ideas and used them to try to explain the morality of Christians. St. Thomas used Aristotle's ideas in his intellectual struggles with medieval nominalism, a descendant of the skeptical Sophists against whom Plato and Aristotle had argued. Nominalism is a theory of knowledge that asserts that human knowledge is essentially uncertain, that we can only put "names" (from nomen, hence nominalism) on things. Nominalism is really an older form of skepticism.
It is fascinating and disturbing that this ancient battle between different visions of reason has returned to the inner life of the Catholic Church. Traditional philosophical values had supported the vision of theology, including its moral theology, by the assertion that some absolute truth was knowable by human reason. St. Thomas Aquinas summed up this vision by the foundation of his thought, "grace builds on nature".
A Modern Example
If there is any arena in which all of these tensions become intertwined within our culture, it is in the arena of the politics and morality of abortion. Traditional Catholic theology has condemned the act of abortion as an absolute moral evil because it is the direct and intentional killing of an innocent human being. Modern, liberal political thought has emphasized the right of the woman to have an abortion based on various theories of empowerment, simply subordinating the life of the child to the power of the woman.
But the tensions are not so simple. Conservative political groups have clearly positioned themselves politically and morally against abortion, while denying, as I understand it, any obligation to aid poor women who would be forced to carry their children to term. Indeed some extreme religious groups have resorted to killing doctors in order to stop the killing of babies, truly an antinomian way of destroying dialog. On the other hand, liberal political groups have demanded strong asceticism with regard to the needs of the environment while denying the need for such asceticism in the areas of sexual activity and abortion.
An Ancient Resolution
I cannot give my own resolution to all of these tensions here, although I hope that I have more than hinted at my own positions. So let me end with Luke's example of resolution and tension in which he describes Jesus in one of his arguments with those who were in power in Israel while he was preaching to his people:
." . . is it lawful for us to pay tribute to Caesar, or not? He perceived their trickery at once and said to them, Suppose you show me a silver coin. Whose image and inscription does it bear? Caesar's, they answered. So he said to them, Well, then, pay to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's."
There is no exegete who can plumb the mind of Jesus or the mind of the writer fully to explicate Jesus' last words in this discussion at the time they were said or at the time they were written. We have to struggle with them in order to try to understand how they bear on our current problems, consonant with some fundamental meaning of Jesus' life.
Jesus was comparing in some way what is marked with Caesar's image and who is marked with God's image. Apparently, Jesus acknowledged Caesar's kingship as a valid, secular kingship. But Jesus emphasizes that the most important aspect of human life is our possession by God. That possession is not the ownership of a thing by the Deity. It is the participation of a free creature in the life of God. It is our challenge and our peril to forge that life in accord with the absolute will of God. It is living out our faith to do justice.
1 85 California Law Review 427 (1997), p. 440.
Ave
Maria School of Law
Richard S. Myers, Professor
of Law, Ave Maria School of Law
Introduction
The announcement that a new Catholic law school-Ave Maria School of Law-will open in Ann Arbor, Michigan in August 2000 has generated an enormous amount of media attention. Ave Maria has been featured in a cover story in the Chronicle of Higher Education (Ave Maria: A "Seriously Catholic" Law School; February 18, 2000) and in an extensive article in Lingua Franca (Domino's Delivers; November 1999), to name just two recent articles.
This interest in Ave Maria is relatively easy to understand. Many are intrigued by the involvement of Tom Monaghan. Tom Monaghan is the former owner of DominoĘs Pizza who sold his business for nearly one billion dollars and is now devoting his life to philanthropic causes through the Ave Maria Foundation. One of the principal areas of interest of the Foundation is Catholic education, including the founding of Ave Maria School of Law. Although not many think that the United States has too few lawyers, most people seem to agree that we do not have enough good lawyers-lawyers of character and integrity. And that is the type of lawyer that Ave Maria will strive to educate.
Ave Maria School of Law seeks to accomplish this goal through two major emphases. First, Ave Maria seeks to recapture the sense of law as a vocation. This ideal has largely been lost in the profession over the last generation, and we seek to foster this conception of the lawyer and of the lawyer's role. Law is one of the traditional learned professions, and it is critical that this noble heritage be retrieved.
Second, Ave Maria self-consciously seeks to draw from the Catholic intellectual tradition. In particular, much of the inspiration for the law school has come from the writings of Pope John Paul II-primarily the encyclicals Veritatis Splendor ("The Splendor of Truth"), Evangelium Vitae ("The Gospel of Life"), and Fides et Ratio ("Faith and Reason"). In fact, Ave Maria School of Law draws its motto-Fides et Ratio-from the Pope's encyclical by that name. Moreover, Ave Maria School of Law has affirmed its whole-hearted commitment to Ex Corde Ecclesiae ("From the Heart of the Church"), Pope John Paul II's 1990 Apostolic Constitution on Catholic Universities.
Ave Maria's emphasis on its Catholic identity is another major explanation for the attention the School of Law has drawn. Some wonder whether the ideal of a Catholic law school is coherent, and even if it is, wonder whether it is an ideal that is possible to achieve. To answer these two questions, I thought I would describe in more detail the mission of Ave Maria School of Law.
The Mission
Ave Maria School of Law is a Catholic law school dedicated to educating lawyers with the finest professional skills. Our mission is to offer an outstanding legal education in fidelity to the Catholic Faith, as expressed through Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the teaching authority of the Church. We affirm Catholic legal education's traditional emphasis on the only secure foundation for human freedom-the natural law written on the heart of every human being. We affirm the need for society to rediscover those human and moral truths that flow from the nature of the human person and that safeguard human freedom.
This substantive vision underlies all of our activities. We seek to educate lawyers with the finest professional skills. To accomplish this, we are devoted to excellence in teaching. This commitment to excellence in teaching goes beyond training students in the necessary technical skills. Our students will be trained to reflect critically on the law and their role within the legal system. We are dedicated to research and scholarship, to serving the common good, and to building a community. In recognition of the dignity of every human being, we welcome people of all faiths who wish to receive the education we provide and to join with us in our dedication to the truth.
We will seek to accomplish this mission by offering an intellectual culture that is different from that which characterizes most American law schools. In a famous article entitled "The Ordinary Religion of the Law School Classroom," Roger Cramton, then the Dean of the Cornell Law School, concluded that certain [m]odern dogmas entangle legal education-a moral relativism tending toward nihilism, a pragmatism tending toward an amoral instrumentalism, a realism tending toward cynicism, an individualism tending toward atomism, and a faith in reason and democratic processes tending toward mere credulity and idolatry. A Catholic law school can and should differ in every respect. The intellectual culture of the Catholic law school will promote the integration of faith and reason, it will understand the social nature of man, it will affirm the necessity of examining the moral aspects of the study of law, it will affirm the ideal of law as a vocation (as a calling), and it will affirm the existence of truth, and in particular moral truth. A Catholic legal education will aspire to that education described by Newman in The Idea of University, in which "A habit of mind is formed which lasts through life, of which the attributes are freedom, equitableness, calmness, moderation, and wisdom.....".
It is important to note that law has a certain autonomy. Ex Corde Ecclesiae notes that each academic discipline retains its own integrity and has its own methods. And this rightful autonomy of the law will, of course, be honored at Ave Maria School of Law. But, Catholic moral and social teaching offers truths (about the nature of human beings, about the nature of freedom, about morality, etc.) that provide a framework through which to evaluate critically the law, and this will be an important part of the study of law at Ave Maria.
The Curriculum and the Spiritual and Intellectual Life of the School of Law
This effort to integrate law and morality will be accomplished through four required courses-a first year course entitled Moral Foundations of the Law, and advanced courses on Jurisprudence and Professional Responsibility, and a third year course entitled Law, Ethics, and Public Policy. Moreover, where appropriate, Catholic moral and social thought will be discussed in other courses too.
The spiritual and intellectual life of Ave Maria School of Law will be very different from the typical law school. The law school will have a chapel and a full-time chaplain. As Ex Corde Ecclesiae states, a Catholic university (and of course this would include a Catholic law school) ought "to promote the pastoral care of all members of the ... community, and to be especially attentive to the spiritual development of those who are Catholics". This ministry will help to facilitate the integration of human and professional education with religious values in the light of Catholic doctrine, in order to unite intellectual learning with the religious dimensions of life."
The intellectual life of the law school will consist of much more than what goes on in the classroom. Ave Maria will sponsor the annual Ave Maria lecture. The first speaker in this series was Justice Clarence Thomas, who delivered the inaugural Ave Maria lecture in November 1999. We will sponsor academic conferences such as the conference the law school is co-sponsoring with Sacred Heart Major Seminary in June of 2000. This conference, St. Thomas Aquinas and the Natural Law Tradition, features the leading, natural law scholars in North America. We will also sponsor conferences for lawyers and their families, such as our recent Law & Family conference, that will foster the professional and spiritual development of those in the profession. Moreover, we will sponsor study groups for faculty and students, such as the John Paul II Study Group, that will foster the intellectual and spiritual development of those in the law school community.
An Emphasis on Quality
All of this is driven by an emphasis on quality. Ave Maria School of Law expects to be recognized as a leading law school in a very short period of time. To this end, we have emphasized quality in every aspect of the program. Our dean, Bernard Dobranski, was most recently the Dean of the law school at Catholic University of America. Dean Dobranski will be team-teaching Moral Foundations of the Law with Judge Robert Bork. The law school building is technologically advanced, offering power and Internet access at every seat in every classroom and in the library. The library, which is under the direction of Professor Mitch Counts (who was most recently the director of the law library at Baylor University School of Law), will have over 200,000 volumes when the law school opens in August. The law school has the strong financial backing of the Ave Maria Foundation, and that financial support has made possible a $5.1 million scholarship program for the law schoolĘs students.
The mission of Ave Maria School of Law is resonating with students around the country. At this writing, we have admitted 100 students from 29 states. Over half of these students have submitted deposits and the median LSAT of this group is 158.
In sum, Ave Maria School of Law is a tremendously exciting new venture that offers a distinctive vision of law and legal education. Ave MariaĘs website www.avemarialaw.edu contains detailed information about the School of LawĘs programs and progress.
If Only I had Known Then . . .
Author's Note I appreciated the opportunity to present the information below at the June NAPLA meeting. I hope it is helpful to your students as they consider their future plans.
1. Explore your motivations for attending law school before you arrive for the first semester of classes.
Students decide to attend law school for a myriad of reasons. Yet each year many students resign from school during the first semester for "personal" reasons. Many more endure three years of an academic program for which they are not well suited. I believe that this is a result of students not fully comprehending their own motivations. I would encourage you, in consultation with your pre-law advisor to develop an understanding of why you are making the decision to attend law school. Verbalize or write down your stated reasons and your unstated reasons for thinking about law school. For example, do you say it is for the educational experience, but really mean that it is your default choice because you do not know what else to do at this point? Have you always wanted to be a lawyer, but when you get beneath the surface it is because being a lawyer is "what one does" in your family? Explore your assumptions regarding lawyers and how you see yourself being a lawyer-Are you seeking intellectual challenge? Looking to make a difference in the world? Are you uncertain whether to pursue an MBA, other graduate program or law school? Are you looking for prestige? status? or a way to satisfy parental/family pressures and/or traditions? Do you believe that going to law school is what an individual with high academics should do? Think about your answers to these questions. Do not be surprised or scared that some reasons may be incongruent with each other. Learn about yourself from your answers. This analysis can help you determine whether law school really is appropriate for you. You may decide the answer is no, and that is okay. Or, you may decide yes, and that is okay too. Your goal is to make the decision that is best for you and not for anyone else.
2. Learn what lawyers do
Each year I am amazed at the number of prospective (and even matriculated) students who have never met and/or observed an attorney in practice yet know that they want to practice law. It is important that students gain some understanding of what lawyers do including the skills used and expectations involved in the legal profession. Consider making arrangements to shadow a lawyer for a period of time, conduct informational interviews with practitioners from several different practice settings, and/or review publications that discuss the work of attorneys. The Guide to Legal Specialties published by the National Association for Law Placement is an excellent resource as are many of the career guides published by the American Bar Association. Attend criminal and civil trials, attend law school classes, or work as a messenger or paralegal at a law firm.
3. Understand that law is a profession and not just "a job."
Law is a noble profession (contrary to its portrayal in the popular media). Law school trains one in legal analysis, advocacy, ethical responsibility and the underlying values of the law. But, graduating from law school is just the first step in the process of becoming a lawyer. You must recognize that being a lawyer is a privilege. As with any privilege, though, the individual granted the privilege bears certain responsibilities. For lawyers, this includes taking the bar examination of the jurisdiction(s) in which they will be practicing law, completing a certain number of continuing legal credits each year, fiscal responsibilities, and become an integral part of the community in which they live.
Be aware that your actions, now and in the future, may have consequences on whether you will be able to practice law or not. What do I mean by this? As I already mentioned, graduating from law school is just the first step in becoming an attorney. One must also be admitted to the Bar of the jurisdiction in which they wish to practice. Gaining bar admission usually entails a "character and fitnessö
" test in addition to a written bar examination. Character and fitness boards look closely at incidents of underage drinking, arrests and/or citations one may have been issued, charges of plagiarism in college and/or law school, and a host of other matters -even the status of debts an individual may have. Think before you act - you may be surprised what behaviors are scrutinized.
4. Don't be seduced by the headlines that read "entry-level lawyer salaries top $100,000." Your future salary as a lawyer is primarily dependent on the clients that you serve.
According to the National Association for Law Placement, Jobs and J.D.'s Employment and Salaries of New Law Graduates, Class of 1998 (hereafter Class of 1998 Report), the median starting salary for members of the Class of 1998 was $45,000 with salaries of $70,000 or more being the exception versus the rule. It may surprise many students to learn that $40,000 and $30,000 were the most frequently reported salaries in the Class of 1998 Report. Individuals who serve corporate clients earned more than individuals serving indigent persons (median salary of $60,000 versus median salary of $31,000); and the median salary for government positions was $36,000.
5. If you are interested in pursuing a position in the private sector, you will most likely work for a law firm of 50 attorneys or less.
More than 50% of the private sector entry level positions for the Class of 1998 were in firms of 50 attorneys or less. Small law firms of 2-10 attorneys accounted for the largest percentage of the positions with more than 30% of all private sector positions. The median starting salaries for firms of this size is $37,000. For firms of 11-25 attorneys the median salary is $ 43,500, and for firms of 26-50 attorneys, $52,000.
Hiring at law firms of 100+ attorneys has increased over the past few years with approximately one-third of the Class of 1998 obtaining positions with these firms. The starting salaries have increased as well with the median salary for firms of 101-250 attorneys at $62,000; 251-500 attorneys at $85,000 and firms of more than 500 attorneys at $90,000. One should not count on obtaining one of these positions. Hiring criteria for these firms are very strict and usually confined to the students in the top 10% - 20% of their class and to those who hold law review membership. In addition, we do not know how long the current hiring trend for the larger firms will continue. In the late 1980's/early 1990's the economy changed-many lawyers were laid off,-.it could always happen again.
6. From a financial standpoint, plan to be in the middle of the class versus the top 10%.
Be aware that the average law student graduates with more than $50,000 in debt. A recent article in the American Bar Association Journal reported that the Nellie Mae Corporation found "lawyers who have been out of school between one and three years made an average of $37,200 in 1996 but had average educational related debt of $52,600". (June 1999) The monthly repayment amount on this debt would be more than $650.00 per month (at a 9% interest rate). This means that more than one-third of an individual's monthly income is going to this one item alone! Another way to look at this, -if you purchase a pizza every week at an average cost of $15.00 with loan money, that pizza will actually cost you $27.00 at the end of ten years. Do you really need that pizza every week?
Often law students expect a large payoff in terms of salary when they graduate and feel entitled to treat themselves well during school. DO NOT DO THIS. The payoff is not immediate upon graduation and you may experience a lifestyle that is very different from what you imagined once you have graduated. Therefore, my advice is to "live like a law student while a student." This means borrowing as little money as you can to finance your legal education, limiting credit card and other debt, learning what it means to borrow $30,000, and being careful how you spend your money.
Visit http://www.accessgroup.org for a wealth of information about borrowing money for school and managing debt.
7. Take a tough academic curriculum and develop excellent writing skills while an undergraduate.
While there is no one major that prepares students for law school, taking on an academic program that is challenging can help prepare a student for the rigors of law school. If one is thinking about the field of intellectual property law, a science or engineering degree is important to have.
Good writing is an important skill for lawyers. They must be able to convince others that their position is the "correct" position both verbally and in written formats. Lawyers write all the time and how well one writes can make the difference between whether the client wins or not. If you have any doubts about your writing ability, I encourage you to seek assistance to improve it now. It will enhance your abilities and marketability in the long run.
8. Be knowledgeable about what is happening in the world.
Becoming focused on one's immediate surroundings is easy while a student. I think that getting in the habit of reading a national newspaper such as the New York Times, Washington Post, L.A. Times, Wall Street Journal, etc. is important while an undergraduate . Most of these newspapers are available via the Internet. Being aware of current events can make the classroom experience more meaningful. Oftentimes, in job interviews, current events become a topic of conversation.
9. Be willing to think outside the box.Law school teaches one to be a problem solver. But you can start this process before you get to law school by recognizing that there is more than one way to approach a problem. Whether you are looking at prospective law schools or prospective employers, look at your strengths and figure out how to market your uniqueness. Similarly, know how to recognize opportunities that may present themselves and take advantage of them. Remain focused on your goals, but recognize that there is more than one path to get there.
10. When all is said and done, law schools ask themselves three questions when deciding whether to admit an applicant or not.
A. Does this person have the ability to succeed here?
B. Does he or she appear to be motivated to succeed here? Recognize that motivation is defined differently by different people. This means that you should do things because you have an interest in doing them and not doing them for ōresumΘ purposesö only.
C. Is this individual the" typical" kind of person who has done well here in the past?
The answers to these questions will vary at each institution. A rejection from an institution should never be looked at as a referendum about you as a person. It should be taken as, this institution has determined that it is not the best place for me to undertake my law school studies.
11. Give yourself permission to be happy.
Whether you are looking at potential law schools or at future employment opportunities, it is important that you take the time to get to know yourself. Figure out what you like and do not like. What are your strengths and weaknesses? Your most important values? Your short-term and long-term goals? Remember you are a multidimensional person and not just one or two different things. In other words, you are more than your grades and credentials. If you are in doubt about the questions to ask or are having difficulty sorting through what your responses mean, visit your pre-law advisor and your career services office. They are wonderful resources for you.
Law is a life-long learning process and can be a wonderful journey if you are open to the possibilities. The journey begins, though, with making decisions that are most appropriate for you.
References
"And DebtĘs All Folks," American Bar Association Journal, June 1999, p. 24.
Access Group-http://www.accessgroup.org
Jobs & J.D.'s: Employment and Salaries of New Law Graduates Class of 1998, National Association for Law Placement (1999). [Note: This report is published each year and provides information on positions, salaries, geographic areas, and on how graduates found their jobs. It may be ordered from NALP at (202) 667-1666 or visit their website for further information at http://www.nalp.org.]
Happenings
in the Profession
National Recruitment Calendar Meeting in Cleveland, April 9, 2000
I recently represented NAPLA at LSAC's meeting on the National Recruitment Calendar for 2001. LSAC's Anne Brandt convened the meeting, which also was attended by:
Eileen Crane (WAPLA and PLANC), Brigham Young
Susan Meyer (PCAPLA), U. of California at Davis
Joyce Hicks (SAPLA), Central Carolina Technical College
Karen Severn (SWAPLA), Texas A & M
Heather Struck (NAPLA) Binghamton University
Melanie Nutt Wake Forest U. School of Law
Trey DeLoach, Southern Methodist U. School of Law
Joel Goodman Western State U. College of Law
Pamela Jorgensen New England School of Law
Reyes Aguilar U. of Utah College of Law
(MAPLA was not represented at this meeting)
The meeting was held because the national recruitment calendar has become more complex, expensive, and scattered in recent years. Events are being planned around the country, sometimes with little coordination with the LSAC Forums or with major events in other parts of the country. Some parts of the country host very few events, while others schedule many independent events over many weeks in the season. Law schools are facing significant conflicts as to where to send limited staff to important feeder schools/regions on the same days and weeks. For the pre-law student or law applicant, this means that an event at his or her campus or region may or may not draw substantial representation by law schools. For law schools, the recruitment season has lengthened and costs more (over $50,000 at many schools), with uneven turnouts at events around the country. Some APLAs have taken a leadership role in planning major caravans for the law fairs; others have not played a major role in this process. Law fairs and recruiting events are planned by different offices and staff at different institutions, sometimes without the involvement of pre-law advisors, and scheduling issues are also different from institution to institution. We all recognized that our efforts to achieve national coordination may encounter obstacles of various kinds around the country.
After a general discussion of the problems and particularities of each region. the group came to consensus on some general principles:
The APLAs should take on a coordinating role in each region
Recruiting events should be planned with a minimum of three events in each cluster, so as to maximize the number of students and campuses visited
Major events of the national recruitment calendar (LSAC forums, major caravans or recruiting weeks) should be planned on a national basis two years in advance, where possible, to facilitate better regional planning for smaller events and maximum participation by law schools (see proposed 2001 calendar, below)
A training manual should be developed to help pre-law advisors and career development staff plan law recruiting events (LSAC has a planning document for law school events)
Issues for NAPLA to consider:
NAPLA's Role in Coordinating Regional Recruitment Events:-This proposal would add new responsibilities for NAPLA: the coordination of regional recruiting events. The NAPLA Board must consider whether this new role is one we are ready to assume. Given all of the different campuses, pre-law advisors, career offices, law schools and others involved in recruitment activities in our densely populated academic region, this will be a challenge in the first few years. On some campuses, there is no pre-law advisor, or the pre-law advisor is not involved with event scheduling, or the pre-law advisor is not a member of NAPLA. Some campuses do not permit scheduling events more than one year in advance.
For Fall 2001, the proposed calendar designates three recruiting weeks in the NAPLA region (October 8 - 12, October 15 - 18, and October 22 - 26). The first two weeks would include the Pennsylvania/New Jersey region and Upstate NY Law Days. The third week, which follows the Boston LSAC Law Forum, would cover schools in the New England Region. The proposed 2001 calendar reflects recent recruiting schedules in the region.
My recommendation is that NAPLA continue to participate in the LSAC recruitment planning process, and that we help to coordinate events in our region. We cannot require our members or their undergraduate institutions to follow a certain schedule, but we can inform them and make suggestions about productive scheduling. If all undergraduate campuses around the country were to follow the proposed schedule, there would be no conflicting recruiting events. The result will better opportunities for law applicants to meet with law school representatives.
PLANC's Role in Coordinating the National Calendar: Another issue is whether PLANC should assume the national coordination of the two year advance planning process and Recruitment Calendar. This first meeting was convened by LSAC, with pre-law advisor and law school representation. For now, LSAC will continue to lead the process and maintain the calendar. LSAC probably will convene another meeting to set the 2002 Recruiting Calendar, but may not wish to continue indefinitely in this role. If PLANC were to assume a major national coordination role for the calendar in the future, this would be a new role for PLANC.
I have recommended that this issue be placed on our June Board meeting agenda, and that it also be presented at the Business Meeting in June. Please call or write with your thoughts about the proposal: 607-777-6875 or hstruck@binghamton.edu
Proposed 2001 Calendar
(these dates are subject to change)
July 7: Washington, DC Forum
September 8: Atlanta Forum (to be confirmed)
September 10-14: SAPLA recruiting events (south Floridałtentative)
September 13: NYU &/or Columbia-tentative
September 14-15: NYC Forum
September 17-22: WAPLA events (September
18-19 are Rosh Hashanah holidays)
September 24-25: GW, Johns Hopkins and William & Mary (tentative)
September 24-26: MAPLA events (Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas)
September 27: Yom Kippur
September 28-29: Chicago Forum
October 15: MAPLA events
October 6: LSAT test date
October 8-12 and October 15-18: (NAPLA) These two weeks are designated for Upstate NY Law Days AND Pennsylvania and New Jersey events
October 20: Boston Forum
October 22-25: New England events (NAPLA)
October 29-November 2: Texas Swing (SWAPLA)
November 3: Houston Forum
November 4-5: PLANC Meeting in Houston
November 6: Wake Forest & Davidson
November 7: UNC
November 8: U. Calif. at San Diego/Southern Calif. events (PCAPLA)
November 9-10: LA Forum
November 12: Oakland Forum (PCAPLA)
November 13-15: Berkeley, Stanford, UC Davis events (PCAPLA)
November 15-17: Oregon & Washington State events (PCAPLA)
November 22: Thanksgiving
White, Wealthy Males and Accommodations for the Disabled
The number of students who receive extra time to complete the SAT because of a claimed learning disability has soared in recent years, and most of the growth has occurred among white, male students whose parents are wealthy. The analysis was conducted by the Los Angeles Times, using data supplied by the College Board.
The finding worries officials at the College Board, which oversees the test. They fear that the accommodations are being used by privileged families to seize an advantage on the high-stakes exam, rather than helping students with real disabilities.
We're always concerned anytime the statistics indicate there has been any unfairness to anybody, Gaston Caperton, the College BoardĘs president, told The Chronicle on Sunday. The strength of the test is its fairness.
Mr. Caperton noted, however, that the vast majority of students who received special accommodations had real disabilities and deserved the help.
Roughly 47,000, or 1.9 per cent, of the students who took an SAT last year received accommodations. But at private high schools and public schools in wealthy suburbs, the proportion was typically much higher. At 20 prominent New England preparatory schools, 1 in 10 students received special treatment, the Times reported.
The Times found that male students accounted for 61 percent of the test-takers who received accommodations, but just 45 percent of those who received no special treatment.
Eighty-four percent of the accommodated test-takers were white, compared with only 68 percent of those with no special treatment. And 27 percent of those who received accommodations had parents who earned more than $100,000 per year. Only 13 percent of students who received no special treatment came from such wealthy families.
In affluent areas, parents of students with good grades but mediocre test scores often shop around for psychologists who will write up a desired diagnosis, high-school officials say. A student diagnosed with dyslexia, for example, may receive four and a half hours to complete the three-hour test.
Five years ago, the College Board set up a national panel of psychologists and other experts to review requests for extra time from students who had no history of disability accommodations in high school or elementary school. Last year, the panel rejected 82 per cent of the 670 requests, the Times reported.
top