PJ Media encourages you to read our updated PRIVACY POLICY and COOKIE POLICY.

Search Results

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: John O. McGinnis: Liberal Bias Makes Law Schools Bad For Democracy.

The assumption that law schools should have a left-wing orientation is deeply problematic. Universities should have as their objective the production of knowledge, not activism. … [D]emocratic stability is bolstered from having an engine that tries to discover truths even amidst its divisions of interest. And activism interferes with the university’s production of knowledge, because it leads directly to ideological discrimination and the erection of roadblocks of orthodoxy that impede truth seeking. To be sure, the law has a normative dimension, but norms also are a form of knowledge to which people can add and which they can refine. Thorstein Veblen thought that law schools had no more business in the university than schools of fencing, in part because they did not aim at producing knowledge. Moyn is proving him right.

The idea that law schools should steer students away from legal practice is an equally bad idea, particularly because it is bound up with another strand in Moyn’s essay—that law schools should imbue their students with a skepticism about the rule of law. This trope—drearily familiar from the critical legal studies movement—is obviously an ideological one as well. And in my view an indefensible one. To be sure, good societies have an imperfect commitment to the rule of law. But societies that lack that regulative ideal are truly dreadful ones.

And yet they’re what all the best people seem to want to create.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: ‘Trump bump’ offering little help to law schools.


HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Beset by Problems, Thomas Jefferson Law School Tries To Avoid A Death Blow.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: AAUP Investigates Vermont Law School’s Tenure Revocation From 14 Of 19 Faculty.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Chicago Expelled a Male Student 4 Days Before Graduation Because His Ex Made a Dubious Sexual Violence Claim. He’s suing the school, and the accuser, and good.

A former student who was expelled for sexual misconduct just four days before graduating is suing the University of Chicago for allegedly violating his due process rights.

He has also sued his accuser—his ex-girlfriend—which is a rare step for those seeking justice in such cases. Most lawsuits born of shoddy campus sexual misconduct adjudication solely target the institution.

That the accused student, “John Doe,” has chosen to sue his accuser, “Jane Roe,” is indicative of the serious, malicious actions he ascribes to her. According to Doe’s lawsuit, their relationship was entirely consensual, and Roe did not dispute that. After they broke up, they continued to have sex, and those encounters were all consensual as well. Roe did not allege wrongdoing until her friends—to whom she had trash-talked Doe, and promised to stop seeing her ex—discovered she was still sleeping with him. She then claimed Doe had engaged in nonconsensual sex with her after she had passed out.

“UC expelled [John Doe] despite overwhelming evidence that Jane Roe fabricated her story because she was too embarrassed to admit to her friends at UC that she was engaged in a secret sexual relationship with her ex-boyfriend,” wrote Doe’s lawyers in his lawsuit.

Cost of attending the University of Chicago: $75,735 per year. A lot to spend only to be kicked out just before graduation based on unfounded charges.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Non-Elite Universities Launch Medical, Not Law, Schools In Search Of Future Financial Stability.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Northwestern Law Dean Cites School’s ‘Difficult Time’ As Reason For Faculty Cuts.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LAW-SCHOOL SHUTDOWN EDITION: Valpo law school closing; teach-out plan in the works.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, INSTITUTIONALLY-PERPETRATED RACISM EDITION: Harvard’s Student Body: Hitting the Targets, Spinning the Story. “High schoolers who try to get into Harvard are unique individuals; the applicant pool they make up is unique each year as well. Truly considering applicants on an individual basis ought therefore to produce variability in the racial percentages across the years. Because there isn’t much variability, these numbers prove by themselves that Harvard has a policy of predetermined percentages, regardless of the number or quality of applicants. Such a statistical uniformity is so unlikely that it cannot be explained in any other way. As the Asian American plaintiffs have enunciated in their complaint, Harvard ‘racially balances its entering freshman class to ensure proportional representation of the various racial and ethnic groups in Harvard’s student body.'”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Moritz Family Fights Ohio State Over Undisclosed 1% Annual Development Fee Charged Against Naming Gift To Law School, As Endowment Has Shrunk From $30m To $22m In 17 Years. Money drained to pay for administrators and their travel/dining? Go figure.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: ABA: Florida Coastal Remains Out of Compliance With Law School Accreditation Standards.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Vermont Law School Is the Tip Of The Spear. “The legal Academy must “do more with less.” Vermont Law School—and others—must face the reality that their model of ever-escalating tuition, fancy new buildings, arcane new courses that fascinate their instructors but don’t add much value to students, and a faculty wholly unfamiliar with the marketplace are over. The sad story of Vermont Law School is not new and no doubt will be reprised by others. It’s time to face the numbers and take some painful steps to reduce the cost of tuition and to provide students with the tools required to succeed in today’s marketplace. That’s the lens that matters.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Tenured Faculty Purge Is A Good Move By Vermont Law School.


In the uproar over Sarah Jeong’s hiring by the New York Times, the focus on her history of hateful rhetoric against white people overlooked her many other expressions of hatred — toward males, Christians and police officers, among others. While her new employers have apparently accepted Ms. Jeong’s disingenuous excuse that she was “engaged in what I thought of at the time as counter-trolling… intended as satire,” this cannot explain away her demonstrable habit of deliberately insulting entire groups of people. It is not true, as she claimed, that she merely “mimicked the language of my harassers.”

Consider, for example, Ms. Jeong’s oft-expressed contempt for Christians, including her own parents. She “grew up in a conservative evangelical Christian bubble,” but “became an annoying atheist” as a teenager, when she was “trapped in a fundamentalist Christian school.” After attending the University of California-Berkeley and graduating from Harvard Law, Ms. Jeong pronounced herself a member of the “educated left wing elite.” She says she has now “mostly cut myself off from the conservative evangelical community,” and condemns Christians who “indoctrinate children” with “reality-denying belief systems.” Ms. Jeong’s spiteful denunciation of her parents’ faith was not “counter-trolling,” nor was it “intended as satire.” These anti-Christian remarks appear to express her sincere beliefs, no different from her many similar expressions of contempt for other groups.

Police? “Cops f—king suck” and “they’re f—king horrible,” according to this Harvard Law alumna, who hates the men and women whose job is to enforce the law. She responded to the 2014 race riot in Ferguson, Missouri, by aiming obscenities at the police and declaring “America is f—king racist.” This rhetoric was not a response to harassment, nor was Ms. Jeong “mimicking” anyone as “satire.” Her anti-police sentiments, like her anti-Christian sentiments, are evidently sincere. These opinions are endorsed by her new employers, who share the same “educated left wing elite” worldview. It’s doubtful the New York Times would hire anyone who wasn’t a cop-hating atheist.

Ms. Jeong has routinely expressed her total contempt for males. In August 2014, she tweeted, “Men are too f–king emotional to be let out in public. Jesus Christ,” and followed that with, “Yo. Men. Just get off Twitter. Every man. All of you. You can’t handle this sh—.” She has repeatedly said “all men are garbage.”

By keeping her on and defending her, the New York Times — and the blue-check tribe on Twitter that’s been taking her side — is playing into Trump’s hands. See, Trump can say, this is what they really think of you. Because, you know, it is.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Vermont Law School’s Tenured Faculty Purge And What It Portends For Legal Education.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Thoughts on Mass Tenure Revocation at Vermont Law School in the Shadow of the Market and Beyond Shared Governance. Though legal education is a “market” that is supervised by a cartel.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: LSAT Adopts 12 Different Gender Identity Options; GRE Only Has Two. So does that mean that law schools that have started accepting the GRE in lieu of the LSAT are bigoted?

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Vermont, Minnesota show that law schools are still grappling with budget challenges.


HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Federal Judge Denies Florida Coastal Law School’s TRO Bid Against The ABA. “A federal judge has declined to issue a temporary restraining order—at least for now—that would have stopped the American Bar Association from requiring Florida Coastal School of Law to make several public disclosures about its accreditation status and bar pass rates.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Georgetown called out for urging donations to left-wing groups. “Georgetown University’s Law School Library appears to have taken down a web page encouraging students to donate ‘time and money’ to a list of left-wing activist groups after more than 13,000 people signed a petition against it.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Vermont Law School Plans Faculty Cuts. “McHenry said that, in a process that began last October, all faculty positions are being reviewed for efficiency gains to help the law school recover from the effects of a national downturn in enrollment that hit its nadir a few years ago. McHenry declined to discuss details of the restructuring process, which is expected to be completed in late June, but gave examples of expected outcomes that include shifting some professors to professor emeritus status, reducing the teaching and programmatic load for others, and asking others to take on more responsibilities. Several members of the faculty, including some senior professors with tenure, declined comment.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: NC Central Law School Replaces Dean, Shrinks 1L Class (By 33%), And Imposes Minimum LSAT (142) And UGPA (2.96) Admissions Requirements To Address ABA’s Accreditation Concerns. (Broken link fixed, and bumped.)

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: 2018 Grad Decries Political Correctness At Stanford Law School.

At Stanford Law School, no more than three of approximately 110 full-time faculty publicly identify as conservative or libertarian. (By way of contrast, Stanford Law School touts on its webpage 23 full-time faculty under the inartful rubric of “minority.”) As a consequence, many of my classmates will graduate having never engaged with a law professor whose worldview and convictions track those of nearly half the voting public.

It would require nothing less than willful blindness to presume this state of play does not affect the education that students receive. Probably for obvious reasons, my classmates demonstrate little willingness to identify publicly with anything associated with conservatism or, God forbid, President Trump, no matter how trivial. By way of extraordinary example, the Law School Republicans will soon cease to exist as a student organization because — after a campaign of intimidation and opprobrium — not one underclassman would volunteer to serve on its board next academic year.

An almost unspoken agreement seems to exist among many students that all of us will soon be fabulously successful, so long as everyone remains a “team player” and nobody rocks the boat too earnestly. Political, moral, and religious convictions are, for the most part, accessories best deployed for instrumental purposes, rather than values to be espoused or explored for their own sake. In much the same manner that all respectable people may speak or dress or eat a certain way, students at Stanford Law School have come to believe — and not entirely without reason, given their surroundings — that all respectable people should think the same way. …

For the past two years, I have repeatedly beseeched the dean of Stanford Law School to follow the example set by the leaders of my undergraduate alma mater — the University of Chicago — and publicly affirm the centrality of viewpoint diversity to the aims of education. Each time, she has refused, citing squeamishness at the prospect of overstepping her portfolio. Yet during that same period, she has nonetheless offered schoolwide commentary on public topics as diverse as the violence in Charlottesville, the rescission of DACA, and the Trump administration’s efforts to ban transgender individuals from military service.

Beyond the Office of the Dean, Stanford Law School has staged programs aimed at helping students to #resist more effectively, celebrating International Workers’ Day and offering advice on “progressive lawyering” in the Trump era. Professors have sent schoolwide emails condemning anyone who supported President Trump as either an outright racist or an enabler who is #complicit. One professor even saw fit to join a student/alumni Facebook group for the purposes of criticizing the Law School Republicans.

When the taxpayers get tired of supporting this narrowmindedness, they’ll be accused of “anti-intellectualism.”


Allard’s abrupt departure is unusual in legal education, where law deans typically announce their intention to step down months or even a year in advance. Even when law school leaders clash with university officials or faculty, they are typically allowed to plan graceful exits out of the dean’s office. …

Allard’s deanship coincided with the national downturn in law school applications, and the school struggled with financial issues during that time. It has sold a number of its residential properties in the highly sought-after Brooklyn Heights neighborhood, and in 2016 sold off an office building across the street from its downtown Brooklyn campus for $76.5 million.

But those sales don’t appear to have been enough to keep the school in a strong financial position.

Last month, Moody’s Investors Service lowered the law school’s outlook from stable to negative, citing, “ongoing tuition pricing challenges and operating deficits that are deeper than previously projected and will continue for a period longer than anticipated, leading to a likely deterioration of spendable cash and investments.” But Moody’s also noted that the school’s unrestricted reserves give it time to “move to operating equilibrium.” Moody’s reported that the school generates $43 million annually.

More at the link.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Colleges Bend the Rules for More Students, Give Them Extra Help: With an influx of students classified as disabled, schools move to accommodate their needs.

As many as one in four students at some elite U.S. colleges are now classified as disabled, largely because of mental-health issues such as depression or anxiety, entitling them to a widening array of special accommodations like longer time to take exams.

Under federal law, students can be considered disabled if they have a note from a doctor. That label requires schools to offer accommodations depending on the student’s needs. A blind student, for example, would have access to specialized software or a reader for an exam.

The rise in disability notes for mental-health issues has led to a surge in the number of students who take their exams in low-distraction testing centers, are allowed to get up and walk around during class or bring a comfort animal to school, among other measures. . . .

At Pomona, 22% of students were considered disabled this year, up from 5% in 2014. Other elite schools have also seen a startling jump in disabilities, according to data from the federal government and from the schools. At Hampshire, Amherst and Smith colleges in Massachusetts and Yeshiva University in New York, one in five students are classified as disabled. At Oberlin College in Ohio, it is one in four. At Marlboro College in Vermont, it is one in three.

Small, private schools have the greatest concentration of students with disabilities. Among the 100 four-year, not-for-profit colleges with the highest percentage of disabled students, 93 are private, according to a WSJ analysis of federal data.

Public schools have also seen a significant uptick in test accommodations. From 2011 to 2016, the number of students with special accommodations increased by an average of 71% among 22 flagship state schools, according to data obtained by The Wall Street Journal.

The most common accommodations come during testing. Students who receive extended time may get twice as long as their classmates to take an exam.

Some professors question how this affects the fairness of exams.

With reason.


HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Students blast ‘intimidating’ endorsement of Nobel for Trump.

When a committee chair issued an unauthorized statement on behalf of the Student Bar Association at Rutgers Law School and refused to rescind it, SBA President John DeLuca decided to give him a taste of his own medicine.

DeLuca issued a statement endorsing President Trump’s nomination for a Nobel Peace Prize, which was quickly denounced as “harmful,” “dangerous,” and “intimidating.”

As always, it’s different when we do it.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Law School Applicants Are Up 8.8%. People are saying this is because of Trump, so I guess lawprof jobs are just another domestic industry he’s saved!

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Proposed Student Loan Cap Could Cause 20-30 Law Schools To Close Within Five Years.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Justice Department Probes Colleges’ Early-Decision Admission Practices: Multiple schools received letters inquiring about possible antitrust violations. “The U.S. Department of Justice is looking into whether colleges’ early-decision admission programs violate antitrust laws, the latest in a series of investigations the federal government has launched into higher education practices in recent months. The Justice Department sent letters to a number of colleges and universities this week asking that they preserve emails and other messages detailing agreements with other schools regarding their early-decision policies, and how they communicate with one another about admitted students.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: 25% Of Harvard Law Students Suffer From Depression, 20% Are At Heightened Risk Of Suicide.

Cost of attending Harvard Law School: $95,800 per year.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Law School Applicants From Top Colleges Decreased 7% In 2017, Down 45% Since 2008.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION: Savannah Law School Sells Building, To Close After Spring 2018 Semester. This is a good place, with good faculty, in a good location, and if it can’t make it it bodes poorly for some other schools.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: McGeorge Law School To Reduce Faculty By 25% Through Voluntary Buyouts. “According to Law School Transparency, McGeorge’s 1L enrollment has fallen 56% from 2010 (from 346 to 152), and its LSAT median has fallen from 158 to 151.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: College dropout refuses to leave her dorm room. “She loves the college life — just not the classes. Hunter College is waging a court battle to evict a stubborn student who refuses to leave her dorm room some two years after dropping out. Delaware native Lisa S. Palmer — who has not paid rent since 2016 — refuses to leave Room E579 at the school’s 425 E. 25th St. co-ed dormitory, according to an eviction lawsuit filed in Manhattan Supreme Court. The 32-year-old ‘racked up a staggering $94,000 in unpaid residence hall charges on account of her continued occupancy, all the while ignoring Hunter College’s service of additional vacate notices,’ said the suit.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Should Law Schools Shift Scholarship Money From Merit (LSAT & UGPA Medians) To Need?

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Gallup: Only 23% Of Law School Grads Say Their Education Was Worth the Cost. But none of the degrees measured, which include PhDs, MDs, MBAs, etc., do very well.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Universities Are Using Disguised Hecklers To Shut Down Free Speech.

Just as those opposed to a speech cannot lawfully stop it by engaging in illegal conduct – everything from shouting it down to engaging in rioting – schools may not use the threat of wrongful conduct by one group as an excuse to prevent speech by a group with opposing views.

But the First Amendment does generally permit colleges to impose reasonable and limited restrictions on speech provided that they are not based on the content. Such limits – often called time, place, and manner restrictions – can be used to prevent too much noise, overcrowding of facilities, etc. – but they must be neutral and not impose more burdens on those voicing views which are controversial. Otherwise, they would unconstitutionally chill unpopular views.

Knowing that they could not ban controversial Joey Gibson from speaking just because many are likely to object, Washington tried to do an end run around the First Amendment, says Banzhaf.

Instead of banning the speaker, they simply required the student group sponsoring him to pay a huge “security fee” based upon so-called objective criteria: e.g. an analysis of violence and threats to public safety by the invited speaker, attendees at previous events or the sponsoring group, etc. Thus, the university claimed, the restriction was not based directly on a speaker’s or group’s ideology or political positions.

So the students acted in accordance with a motto Banzhaf made famous – “Sue The Bastards” – and took their university to court with the aid of the Freedom X group. A federal judge agreed that this disguised heckler’s veto was an illegal violation of the First Amendment since it would have a chilling effect on controversial groups and viewpoints, while having no such effect on completely inoffensive speech.

But, notes Banzhaf, it is speech which is unpopular, and therefore likely to offend some campus groups and/or the college administration, which needs protection from the university, whereas bland unobjectionable speech usually needs none. Speakers in favor of apple pie and motherhood have little to fear from the administration or unlawful agitators, whereas those who advocate that American women should stay home to bake apple pies for their husbands obviously need such protection, says Banzhaf.

Professor Banzhaf urges more student groups to stand up for their First Amendment rights by suing their university.

I agree.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Would A Federal Student Loan Overhaul Bring Down Law School Tuition?

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: VIDEO: Law prof: says Department of Justice a ‘sh*thole.’

More than a dozen of students and professors blasted the Illinois College of Law last week, labeling it a “sh*thole” for hosting an event that featured a Department of Justice official.

According to the school’s calendar, the college of law sponsored last week’s lecture by Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart, who was invited by the university to discuss various topics relating to the justice system.

Students for Economic Empowerment UIUC organized the protest, using it as a platform to speak out against president Trump, despite the fact that Stewart has held his role since 2008.

The video footage obtained by Campus Reform depicts a visibly frustrated law professor, Francis Boyle, berating the Department of Justice and leading the protesters in an anti-Trump chant outside of the law building, with The Daily Illini confirming that it in fact Boyle who is featured in the video.

“And I say, it is the College of Law here, the ‘Trump College of Law,’ that brought out this high-level Trump henchman,” the professor said into the megaphone. “They are the s—-holes too. And I want everyone in there to hear exactly what we think about them.”

We keep hearing about how Trump has lowered the tone of public debate in America. I guess this is what people are talking about.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: UConn offers counseling, restricts access to Shapiro event. If you treat conservatives as an invasive species, you’re not really promoting the “diversity and inclusion” you’re always yammering about:

YAF Spokesperson Spencer Brown asserted that the review process was adopted by the public university after a controversial scuffle between Gateway Pundit journalist Lucian Wintrich and a protester at his on-campus lecture in November.

“This level of review was imposed upon the conservative students at UConn who are hosting Shapiro due to the school’s inability to maintain the rule of law at a previous lecture hosted by the campus conservative club,” Brown remarked.

“Student safety may seem a noble cause for UConn to cherish, but why isn’t the same level of restraint imposed on speaking events by prominent leftists?” he asked, noting that “just last week, Anita Hill spoke on campus at UConn in an event advertised as ‘free and open to the public,’ with ‘no tickets required for entry.’”

Think of universities as politicized leftist redoubts and you won’t go far wrong.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Court denies college’s request to dismiss free speech case.

On Wednesday, California District Court rejected a motion to dismiss a lawsuit against Los Angeles Pierce College and the Los Angeles Community College District on the grounds of First Amendment violations.

Pierce College is a part of the largest community college district in the United States, the Los Angeles Community College District, yet it provides only .003 percent of its 426-acre campus to exercise free expression. In November 2016, Pierce College student and Young Americans for Liberty member Kevin Shaw was handing out copies of the U.S. Constitution when he was approached by a campus administrator and told he could not distribute literature outside of the free speech zone, a space of approximately 616 square feet. Shaw filed a lawsuit against Los Angeles Community College District with the help of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education and co-counsel Arthur Willner, a partner at Leader & Berkon LLP, on March 28, 2017.

LA Pierce asked the court to dismiss the case on the grounds of their campus policy, but the court ruled that open spaces on LA Pierce’s campus are public forums, “regardless of Pierce’s regulations.” Thus, the policy regarding the free speech zone is moot.

The purpose of a university is to encourage free and open discourse and a healthy exchange of ideas. In a press release, FIRE Director of Litigation Marieke Tuthill Beck-Coon said, “The campus is a college student’s public square. It’s their space to be engaged citizens. The public recognizes this. So do courts across the country. Now it’s time for LACCD to follow suit.”

Since the motion to dismiss was pre-discovery and was rejected, now the case will move into discovery and proceed forward.

Schools keep losing these cases. I think it’s clear enough now that officials shouldn’t enjoy qualified immunity.


After enjoying an enrollment surge in the first decade of the new century, many law schools have more recently struggled mightily amid a dearth of jobs for young lawyers, dwindling student interest, worries schools were encouraging students to take on high debts they would struggle to repay, and intense criticism that many schools had been admitting students who never had the academic chops necessary to become practicing lawyers. At the same time, the accreditation world has been grinding toward greater transparency, placing some institutions under an unwelcome harsh light.

Resulting developments epitomize the fallout from an admissions bubble. Some schools have resisted changes in the legal education market and regulatory world. Others have moved to shrink in size or exit the market entirely. Observers worry that the most vulnerable students and minority students, who have been taken advantage of in the past, are now being shut out of law schools as the market contracts.

It all comes together in a pressure cooker, because success in legal education and the legal field is so closely tied to students passing the bar examination.

If only someone had seen this coming.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Faculty Salaries And The Extraordinary Cost Of Research At A Top 25 Law School. “Second, these gaps reveal that tenure-track law faculty are comfortable with high levels of income inequality. We may criticize income inequality in other contexts, but we are comfortable with that inequality in our own workplaces. We work daily with colleagues who share our academic and professional backgrounds, as well as our institutional aspirations and much of our workload, but who earn substantially less than we earn. It surely bothers them, but it doesn’t trouble us much.”


In the private sector, bubbles, like those in the housing or stock markets, usually lead to “crashes” and sharp falls in prices along with diminished volumes of activity. In higher education, massive government subsidies mute the decline in volume (enrollment) and prevent big price (tuition fee) crashes, but some sort of correction is nonetheless observable.

Lots of signs show the bursting of the bubble is underway. Enrollments are down, lower today than six years ago –a first decline of that duration in modern peacetime American history (including the Great Depression). Tuition increases are moderating and a few colleges are even starting to cut published tuition fees (sticker prices). Even some prestigious schools such as Oberlin College are having financial problems because their freshman class is smaller than anticipated. Student loan delinquency is high and rising, remarkable since the economy has been having the best performance in years, with real output growing at over a three percent annual rate and the unemployment rate at a very low 4.1 percent. . . .

Even more ominous is a clear decline in public support for colleges. This is critical because higher education depends on governments, directly through grants or indirectly through the student financial assistance programs, for a large portion of their financial support. If higher education loses political appeal, declining public financial subsidies will quickly follow. Three surveys in 2017 show many are skeptical of higher education’s contribution. For example, a Pew Research Center survey showed 36 percent of Americans believed higher education had a “negative effect on the way things are going in this country.” A strong majority (58 percent) of Republicans had that opinion, which is no doubt one reason why a number of provisions in the recent Republican-led tax reform bill adversely impact on universities.

There are even potentially some legal clouds on the horizon. Universities are populated by lots of attractive young persons, so the possibility of sexual harassment lawsuits is certainly high. To cite an example, at my own school, Ohio University, an English professor recently lost his job (after a good deal of legal maneuvering), and the university faces potential meaningful damages in civil proceedings brought by female graduate students who allege they were sexually harassed and that university officials did nothing to stop it. Prominent faculty at other schools (for example, Columbia) are facing accusations of misconduct. Also, as evidence mounts that football head injuries have significant long-run adverse effects on human cognitive function, the potential of expensive lawsuits against universities rises dramatically.

Enrollment demand is not likely to surge soon, in large part because of a demographic reality: a stagnant population in the 18 to 24 age group, along with a longer-term problem of general declining population growth.


HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LAWS-ARE-FOR-THE-LITTLE-PEOPLE EDITION: College ignores judge’s rejection of its Title IX procedures, re-tries student with same approach.

California’s Pomona College got slapped down in court in October for denying a “fair hearing” to a student accused of sexual misconduct.

Its response? Replace the Title IX investigator, but use the same “evidence” and procedures faulted by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mary Strobel to re-try “John Doe.”

The member institution of the private Claremont Consortium is pursuing the same strategy as Pennsylvania State University and the University of Texas when courts found serious problems with their Title IX adjudications, according to Brooklyn College Prof. KC Johnson, co-author of The Campus Rape Frenzy. . . .

Pomona ignored repeated credibility problems with Doe’s accuser, its hired investigator relied heavily on school-requested Title IX investigations for business (suggesting conflict of interest), and it let the accuser skip the campus hearing – meaning she was never asked any questions by anyone in cross-examination.

Despite Judge Strobel telling the school that this failure to even indirectly cross-examine the accuser was unlawful, and that it violated its own rules by inventing an unwritten procedure to accommodate the accuser, Pomona is going forward with a new hearing against Doe.

Title IX Coordinator Sue McCarthy told Doe last month that the “same Investigation Report, Investigation Notes, and Statement of Alleged Policy Violation” issued before the May 2016 hearing would be used in the rehearing.

If I were Judge Strobel, I would not be amused.

Cost of sending your son to Pomona College to be abused: $69,725.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Fall 2018 Law School Admissions Season Opens With A Bang: Applicants Are Up 14.2%.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Jack Goldsmith & Adrian Vermeule: Elite colleges are making it easy for conservatives to dislike them.

First is the obvious progressive tilt in universities, especially elite universities. At Harvard, for example, undergraduate students overwhelmingly identify as progressive or liberal and the faculty overwhelmingly gives to the Democratic Party. Even Harvard Law School, which has a handful of conservative scholars and a new conservative dean, is on the left end of law school faculties, which are themselves more progressive than the legal profession.

Second, the distinctive progressive ideology of elite universities is relentlessly critical of, to the point of being intolerant of, traditions and moral values widely seen as legitimate in the outside world. As a result, elite universities have narrowed the range of acceptable views within their walls.

Third is the rise of anti-conservative “mobs,” “shout-downs” and “illiberal behavior” on campus, as New York University social psychologist Jonathan Haidt describes it. Conservative speakers of various stripes are being harassed and excluded with increasing frequency. “Today, on many college campuses, it is liberals trying to repress conservative ideas,” noted former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg at a Harvard address a few years ago. Harvard is actually somewhat better on these issues than many universities — it hasn’t had anti-conservative mobs, and it has been relatively respectful of conservative speakers. But even at Harvard, the pervasive progressive orthodoxy chills conservatives’ speech in the classroom and hallways.

Fourth is the public contempt of so many university academics for those who fund their subsidies. Paul Krugman, an emeritus professor at Princeton University now at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, as well as a New York Times op-ed columnist, offered a self-described “deep thought” in reaction to a Washington Post article about rising conservative anger at American universities: “Maybe conservatives are turning against learning because learning is incompatible with modern conservative ideology.” Krugman’s statement was a mere tweet. But in our experience it reflects an attitude that is widespread at elite universities.

Yep. Plus: “Conservative politicians and their constituents hear, on the one hand, that government owes universities a continuance of largesse and, on the other, that conservatives are ignorant, unworthy or corrupt. This sounds suspiciously like special pleading by an intellectual elite that wants to indulge in social criticism at the expense of the criticized, in both figurative and literal senses.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: House GOP To Cap Amount Of Student Loans For Law School, Eliminate Public Service Loan Forgiveness.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: U. Texas president caves rather than tell judge why he personally overturned student’s exoneration. “Did University of Texas President Greg Fenves unilaterally overturn a finding in favor of a student accused of rape because the accuser’s father gave the university a hefty donation? We’ll never know, because the public university settled with ‘John Doe’ rather than risk Fenves having to testify earlier today in the accused student’s lawsuit against him and the school.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: UC-Hastings Law Dean Calls Bar Exam Failure For Top Schools ‘Unconscionable.’

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: After 86% Enrollment Decline, Valparaiso Law School Stops Admitting Students And Will Likely Close. “When it hit us, it came fast.” That’s how it works.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Western Michigan-Cooley Law School Seeks TRO To Prevent ABA From Releasing A Letter About Its Accreditation Status.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, CENSORSHIP EDITION: University Of Arkansas Profs Bash Proposal That Could Fire Profs For Not Being ‘Cooperative.’

University of Arkansas is receiving heated criticism for a policy proposal that professors claim could make it possible to fire professors for not being “cooperative” or simply being conservative.

Professors allege that the university is using non-academic attorneys to draft the changes and that there is evidence suggesting that the school is trying to move swiftly to implement the changes before university faculty can sufficiently challenge them, according to correspondence obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“The policy actually goes much further than using collegiality as a standalone factor in annual reviews: it uses collegiality as a standalone basis for termination (writer’s emphasis),” said Joshua Silverstein, a law professor at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, in an email to UA faculty. “Here again is the language from the proposal: ‘A faculty member may be…dismissed…for cause on grounds including…unwillingness to work productively with colleagues.’ That smuggles in collegiality and a whole lot more. And thus collegiality is a basis for dismissal independent of the annual review process.”

Key signs of non-collegiality: A Trump bumper sticker, NRA membership, possible pro-life sympathies.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: College expelled male student after coordinated sexual assault claims fell apart, suit says.

A jealous boyfriend convinced four female students to falsely accuse a graduating male of sexual misconduct years after the alleged behavior, according to the former student’s lawsuit against a small New York liberal arts school.

“John Doe” accuses Hamilton College of changing its sexual-misconduct investigative procedures so drastically in response to Obama administration Title IX “guidance” – since rescinded by the Trump administration – that it effectively denied him due process and discriminated against him based on his gender.

As with other lawsuits alleging procedural and gender-related violations by colleges in response to Title IX investigations prompted by accusers, Doe’s complaint alleges Hamilton ignored his text-message evidence that the accusations were a setup.

“Hamilton was under enormous pressure to show it was willing to take a hard line against male students accused of sexual assault in order to dispel the notion that its campus was an unfriendly and unsafe environment for women,” the suit reads.

Cost of attending Hamilton College: $66,250 per year. That’s a lot of money to pay to be presumed a rapist if you possess a penis.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: ABA Notices To Law Schools About Potential Non-Compliance With Accreditation Standards.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Private Law School Tuition Discount Rate Rose To 39% In 2016.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Law School Responses To Speech Protests, From Best (Georgetown), To Worst (Seattle, Thurgood Marshall).

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Sander & Steinbuch: Mismatch And Bar Passage: A School-Specific Analysis. “Past research on law school mismatch has been hampered by the absence of school-specific data, thus requiring scholars to estimate individual levels of mismatch through various indirect techniques. In this paper, the authors use data on nearly four thousand students at three law schools to directly measure mismatch levels based on LSAT scores or an academic index. The analysis shows large and statistically significant effects of mismatch; when one controls for mismatch, racial effects lose statistical significance. The results highlight the importance of mismatch in explaining both racial bar passage gaps and individual outcomes on the bar. The results also illustrate the great importance of individual school-level data across a range of schools in studying mismatch.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Seattle Law School Latest Flashpoint Over Campus Speech. “The controversy comes on the heels of the Department of Justice’s decision to take an active role in protecting campus free speech, and a Black Lives Matter protest that shut down an American Civil Liberties Union free speech event at the College of William and Mary Oct. 4.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: ‘When Clients Sneeze, Law Firms Catch A Cold; Law Schools Get The Flu; And Law Students Contract Pneumonia.’

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: 25% Of Law Schools Plan To Accept The GRE. I’m pretty sure this is just about getting more warm bodies while finagling the U.S. News rankings.


Amy Wax, professor of law at the University of Pennsylvania and contributor to our magazine, has angered her law school colleagues. The statement they have written appeared in The Daily Pennsylvanian under the title “Open letter to the University of Pennsylvania community.”

The opening reads,

We write to condemn recent statements our colleague Amy Wax, the Robert Mundheim Professor of Law at Penn Law School, has made in popular media pieces.

The infinitive in this sentence is telling. Professor Wax has made some pointed remarks, but the 33 respondents don’t wish to disprove, dispute, or disagree with them. They condemn them. We know from the start, in other words, that we are not to witness an academic debate. The trial is over, the verdict is in. We are now in the sentencing phase. . . . If you read their brief statement in full—it’s only a few paragraphs long—you won’t find any disconfirming facts and exposures of invalidity. The authors of the letter don’t bother with refutation. The first and last aim is, as noted above, condemnation.

They don’t want to debate, because they know their ideas would lose. They want to silence their critics. Sometimes they succeed, but at the cost of looking both ridiculously self-important and childishly mean.

Honestly, if some evil genius of the right had invented a scheme to discredit academia, xe couldn’t have done better than academia has done itself.

And how ridiculous is it that half the faculty of an Ivy League law school couldn’t muster a single argument? Pretty damn ridiculous, but not, these days, especially surprising.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, PENN LAW SCHOOL EDITION: “Nearly half the professors at the University of Pennsylvania law school have published an open letter condemning their colleague Amy Wax for her by now (in)famous op-ed on bourgeois values. The result? The quality of reasoned debate at the University of Pennsylvania has dramatically worsened, even below the already abysmal standards set by the graduate student and alumni screeds which preceded this latest open letter.”

Plus: “Do the authors rebut these arguments? Do they offer counterevidence? No. Apparently the thesis of Wax’s op-ed is so patently beyond the pale that it is enough for the signatories to assert: ‘We categorically reject Wax’s claims.’ In the absence of any attempt at refutation, that is simply a case of virtue signaling.”


HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: The U.S. News Law School Rankings As A ‘Roach Motel’ (You Can Check In But You Can Never Check Out).

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Amidst Controversy Over Proposed Changes In Reporting Of Law School-Funded Jobs, ABA Defers Decision Until Late Fall.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Applicants Plunged 52%, And Acceptance Rates Increased 20%, At Non-T14 Law Schools From 2008 To 2016. Here at Tennessee, we’ve managed to increase our class size while holding numbers steady, but that seems to be counter to the general trend.

Plus, from the comments: “Depending on where we look in the T14, the drop in applicants has had a more pronounced effect. At Georgetown, for instance, the 25th / median 75th percentile LSAT splits have gone from 168 / 170 / 172 for matriculants in 2010 to a 162 / 167 / 168 this past fall. In other words the 25th percentile LSAT score at Georgetown six years ago is equal to the 75th percentile LSAT score there last year.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Ted Balaker: This University President Can’t Take a Joke.

A university president recently addressed his campus community about an incident that had shaken his Wisconsin school.

“The last few days have been painful ones for many members of our community, as they have also been for me,” wrote Lawrence University’s Mark Burstein. “The event and its aftermath have left many students wondering whether the University cares about their safety.”

Again and again, Burstein returned to the issue of safety: “We are working closely with the Appleton Police Department to investigate all instances where physical safety is threatened. If there is anyone who has an immediate safety concern, please contact Campus Safety….”

Television news crews captured the aftermath of an event so disturbing that Burstein never identifies it specifically. So what was it? A spate of muggings? A murder?

No. The disturbing event was a campus screening of my documentary, Can We Take a Joke? The film examines the clash between comedy and outrage culture, and in it comedians ranging from newbie college jokesters to successful veterans such as Gilbert Gottfried, Penn Jillette, Adam Carolla, Lisa Lampanelli, and Jim Norton push back against the “Outrage Mob” and stand up for comedy and free speech.

The film includes a variety of free speech scholars, and pays special attention to the college scene. It explains how universities have taught generations of students that they can shut down opinions they don’t like simply by declaring they’re offended.

Read the whole thing.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Amid Criticism, ABA Pulls Back On Change To How Law Schools Report Jobs.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: University of Texas Student Sues President Over Sexual Assault Suspension:

A University of Texas student claims in a lawsuit that UT President Gregory L. Fenves misapplied the school’s sexual assault policy and suspended him for five semesters even though his accuser agreed to have sex after a sorority formal in spring 2016.

The case, which raises questions about the rights of the accused, comes amid national and local concern over the prevalence of campus sexual assault.

According to the lawsuit filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Austin, Fenves on April 12 overruled a university hearing officer who determined that there had been no assault. In a letter informing the student of his suspension, Fenves asserted that the woman was highly intoxicated and “someone who is intoxicated cannot give consent to sexual activity because they are incapacitated.” . . .

The lawsuit accuses Fenves of coming up with his own standard for incapacitation and ignoring the university’s standard, which defines it as “a state of being that prevents an individual from having the capacity to give consent” and “could result from the use of drugs or alcohol.”

The lawsuit also says Fenves has a possible conflict of interest because the father of the woman is a university donor who gave a significant sum within a month of her allegations. And, while the school’s investigation was ongoing, the lawsuit says the university brought on the father to be an adviser at the school.

Sounds shady, to say the least. Here’s the complaint. It notes that the hearing officer found consent. One of the woman’s friends is quoted as saying “I think she might have been using being drunk as an excuse.”

What I love is that this is done under a program called “Yes Means Yes,” but the actual finding is that “yes” can mean “no,” if the University President later so decides.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: UNC Votes To Block Law School Civil Rights Clinic From Taking On New Clients. A state university can only function for so long in opposition to its own state government. From the comments: “They can still offer litigation clinics. They just can’t run a public interest law firm under the UNC name any longer. They can even start a civil rights clinic. The disinformation campaign against this proposal was disgraceful.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: UNC’s arrogance over academic scandal has tainted the school’s once-great image.

In 2011, the newspaper obtained a transcript of UNC football star Marvin Austin showing a B-plus grade in a senior level African studies class he took before his freshman year began. UNC officials were at a loss to explain how he got into a high-level course before his first football practice.

Reporters and investigators began digging, and the results were appalling.

From 1993 through 2011, about 3,100 UNC students – nearly half of whom were athletes – took African studies classes that proved to be bogus. Classes generally did not meet; homework was not assigned.

Most required little work – a simple term paper at the end of the semester often sufficed.

UNC hired attorney Kenneth Wainstein to investigate, and he found that about 40 percent of those term papers were at least in part plagiarized, yet were accorded an average grade of A-minus.

Many of the term papers were graded by Deborah Crowder, a former academic administrative assistant and an avid Tar Heels fan. She gave A and B grades, Wainstein found, regardless of the quality of the work. Never mind that she was not a faculty member and was not supposed to grade papers.

These “fake” courses helped athletes remain eligible, Wainstein wrote, including members of UNC’s 2005 national championship basketball team.

The News & Observer later reported that five members of that team took a combined 52 fake courses. Rashad McCants, a starter on that team, has said (his claims are disputed by former teammates) that tutors wrote term papers for athletes.

Here’s what an academic counselor told Wainstein about fake classes: Athletes “didn’t go to class. They didn’t have to take notes, have to stay awake. They didn’t have to pay attention or necessarily engage with the material.” . . .I’d feel some sympathy for UNC officials if they had earnestly tried to get to the bottom of all this. But instead of opening up, they lawyered up and stonewalled investigators. They blamed a false “media narrative” for forcing the NCAA to investigate and have distanced themselves from the Wainstein report

The school already has spent $18 million on the academic scandal, mostly in legal fees.

And yet any effort by the legislature to bring some adult supervision to this clown show is treated as some sort of fascism.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: California Considers Lowering Passing Score On July Bar Exam. “I’d like to thank the deans of law schools around the state who provided invaluable input.”

The tension is between two self-interested groups: Law deans who want a higher pass rate to help their applications and rankings, and the bar which wants a lower pass rate to ensure that there’s not competition that might — shudder! — drive down fees.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: ABA Censures Texas Southern Law School Following Gender Discrimination Complaint By Associate Dean.

Texas Southern University Thurgood Marshall School of Law was publicly censured and must pay $15,000 for not complying with an American Bar Association standard that prohibits schools from discriminating against faculty members. . . .

James Douglas, interim dean of Thurgood Marshall Law, denied that there is sex discrimination or sexual harassment happening at the school.

“There were people who said, ‘I think that there is sexual discrimination in the law school.’ But no one has been able to find that to be a fact. The allegation and what the ABA is critical of is that that is what some of the females believe, and because some of the females believe it, we have an obligation to deal with it,” Douglas said. “They did not find that there was any truthfulness to the allegation, just the fact that the allegations existed and we didn’t respond in a manner they though the law school should have responded.”

Sorry, fella. Once there’s a complaint of sex discrimination, you’re presumed guilty.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: ABA Meets To Consider Elimination Of 49% Adjunct Professor Cap And Use Of GRE In Law School Admissions. Easier admissions, cheaper faculty — problem solved!

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: The Moral Case For Renaming UC-Hastings Law School Due To ‘Indian Hunting’ By Serranus Hastings In The 1850s. The brand-destruction caused by this sort of renaming is enormously expensive. Right-wing conspiracists could never have done as much damage to higher education as it’s doing on its own at the behest of the Left.


HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Trump And Devos Deliver One-Two Punch On Law School Loans. “For young lawyers hoping that public service loan forgiveness could be an answer to a lifetime of student debt burdens, President Trump has some bad news. Rather than remedy the problems with a program that can provide enormous help to many recent grads and the organizations for which they work, he wants to eliminate it altogether.”

That’s a good idea, actually. This is just a subsidy for the left, and one that encourages students to underestimate the damage done by student loan debt. Next, make student loans dischargable in bankruptcy, but with a portion charged back to the institutions that received the money.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: The Number Of Law School Applicants With 160+LSAT Scores Has Declined 61% Since 2010.



HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Proportion Of Law School Applicants With LSATs > 160 Is Down 35% Since 2010; < 150 Is Up 146%.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, AT WAR WITH THE STATE LEGISLATURE EDITION: UNC Law School Alums Rally Against Proposed ‘Catastrophic’ 30% Budget Cut As Payback To Liberal Faculty (Especially Gene Nichol). “The school ranks 38th currently in U.S. News & World Report’s ratings. In 2000, it ranked 22nd.”

UPDATE: Eugene Volokh emails: “Might it be useful to note that the budget cut would actually be only about 13% of the school’s budget ($4M out of $31M)? The 30% is the fraction of the school’s state appropriation that would be cut.” Good point. Still a major cut, but not as bad as it sounds.


HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Eight Of The Twelve Law Schools With The Highest Unemployment Rates Are In California.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Law School Entry-Level Faculty Hiring Down 25% (63% From 2008).

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: A Law School Should Not Impose Its Faculty’s Social Justice Views On Students Through Mandatory Pro Bono Or Clinics (Unless There Is A Sufficient Variety Of Clinical Offerings).

Mandatory pro bono is just do-good posturing at someone else’s expense. Which, to be fair, is how most do-good posturing works.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: The Number Of Law School Graduates Has Fallen 28% Amidst Declining Demand For Legal Services.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Overcapacity In Legal Education. “Between 1971 and 2010, the average entering 1L class at an ABA-accredited law school was 246 students with a very narrow band of fluctuation. The high-water mark was 262 in 2010. Every year since 2012 has set a new historical low. As the chart above shows, the average has tumbled by a staggering 31%.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Comparing the Class of 2016 employment outcomes with the classes of 2015 and 2014. “Because there was a significant decline in the number of graduates across these law schools between 2014 and 2015, and again between 2015 and 2016, however, this modest increase in the percentage of graduates in these positions masks an actual decline in the number of graduates in such positions. . . . In the three-year period, then, between 2013 and 2016, the number of first-time takers from ABA-accredited law schools taking the July bar exam who passed the exam and became eligible for jobs requiring bar passage declined by roughly 12,466, or by 32%. In that time period, however, the percentage of those eligible for full-time, long-term bar passage required positions who landed such positions has increased from 66.6% to 86.8% between 2013 and 2016.”

Plus: “Some geographic differences also are noteworthy. The percentage of graduates of all law schools in states with more than one law school who were in full-time, long-term, bar-passage-required or JD advantage jobs was over 80% in five states (Missouri (82.4%), New York (82.1%), Pennsylvania (81.9%), Tennessee (81.7%), Virginia (81%)). In nine states, however, it was less than 70% (Arizona (69.7%), Ohio (69.4%), Washington (67.8%), Michigan (66.3%), Louisiana (66.2%), Florida (65.5%), California (64.3%), Oregon (63.1%), North Carolina (59.6%)).”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Whittier Law School Died Many Years Ago, When It Strayed From Its Founding Mission To Prepare Students To Pass The Bar And Succeed As Lawyers.


HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: Temperature Rises In Debate Over Closure Of Whittier Law School; Are 5-25 Law Schools In A ‘Death Spiral’ Leading To Closure Over The Next Five Years?