ILNews

ABA committee formed to study law school cost and debt

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Former Mayor of Detroit Dennis Archer has been appointed to lead a special task force to examine the cost of legal education and the spiraling loan debt of students.

The American Bar Association has formed the Task Force on the Financing of Legal Education to look at the cost of attending law school as well as the financing of law schools, student loans and educational debt. It will also review how law schools use merit scholarships, tuition discounting and need-based aid.

Pointing to the increase in tuition and debt loads coming at a time when job opportunities are limited, ABA President James Silkenat said the organization must conduct a thorough examination of costs and financing of legal education. He asked task force members to conduct a comprehensive study of the complex economic and political issues involved and produce sound recommendations.

Convening a task force specifically to untangle the money issues was the recommendation made by the ABA Task Force on the Future of Legal Education when it issued its final report in February. The group, led by retired Indiana Chief Justice Randall Shepard, found the questions surrounding the financing of legal education were too big for them to tackle and advised a separate committee be formed just to examine those concerns.    

Archer, an attorney, served two terms as mayor of the Motor City from 1994 to 2001 and as an associate justice on the Michigan Supreme Court from 1986 to 1990. He was also ABA president from 2003 to 2004. His current responsibilities include service on the board of InfiLaw, a consortium of independently owned and operated ABA-approved law schools.

He will lead a 13-member task force comprised of practicing lawyers, judges and law school deans.  
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  2. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

  3. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  4. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  5. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

ADVERTISEMENT