More law schools, fewer jobs

June 18, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
According to a recent news story, there are now 200 ABA-accredited law schools in the United States, with some states looking to add even more schools. Indiana currently has four, and just a few years ago, two Indiana colleges were looking into opening up their own law schools. Those have fallen to the wayside at least for now, but one businessman with more than a decade of experience in higher education but not an attorney himself is still pursuing his goal of opening up the Abraham Clark School of Law (http://abrahamclarklaw.com/) in Indianapolis with a goal of reaching working adults who are looking to go back to school.

Last year, a record 150,000 students enrolled in law schools nationwide. Law school has historically been seen as an automatic, successful career; a well-respected option if you are unsure of what you want to do after college. It makes sense that the demand for a law degree is at an all time-high because right now, the economy is struggling. When the economy is down, many people choose to go back to school. Yet as the story points out, more people in the job pool means more competition for the same legal jobs. In fact, with a slowing economy, those new grads may find themselves with few or no job prospects as firms, courts, and government offices cut back hiring to curb costs.

Colleges and universities are trying to start new, ABA-accredited law schools to meet this high demand, but are they doing a disservice to their students by admitting them, teaching them, and then sending them out into the world with a mountain of debt and bleaker employment prospects than in years past? Or more importantly, does Indiana or the United States need more attorneys? If you look at the public defender’s offices or legal aid offices in most counties, you’d say yes, we need more lawyers to help keep up with the demand for these services. However, many attorneys want to work at higher paying jobs at law firms in order to pay off their school debts. Perhaps if law school debt wasn’t approaching $100,000 or more for some students, more people would look to lower-paying jobs where there may be more of a need for lawyers as opposed to working for large law firms where there may be fewer job opportunities.
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
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT