Does Indiana need another law school?

March 1, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Despite all the news about law school grads struggling to find jobs, the massive amounts of debts students amass, and layoffs hitting firms and government offices, a lot of people still want to be lawyers. More than 3,400 people applied to be a part of the 2010 entering JD class at Indiana University Maurer School of Law in Bloomington, but only 251 enrolled. At University of Notre Dame Law School, a little more than 4,000 applied and just 172 of those people made up the 2010 entering class.

With such a small percentage of people being accepted to Indiana’s four law schools, it makes financial sense for an institution to capitalize on people’s desire to go to law school. A few years ago, there was talk of two possible law schools opening up – one in Fort Wayne and one in Indianapolis – but nothing has materialized. Now, Indiana Tech, a private school based in Fort Wayne with satellite campuses throughout the state, is going to study the possibility of adding a law school to the Fort Wayne campus. The study committee is scheduled to report to the Board of Trustees on May 13.

It’s all speculation at this point as to what this potential law school will be like. Will it cater to those already working who want to switch careers? How many students will it take? When would it become accredited? How much will it cost?

Those who go to the law school, especially when it first opens, would be taking a big risk because it’s a brand new school without a reputation. It would be an even bigger risk if it takes a while for it to become accredited.

There’s been talk that the pool of available lawyers is already pretty deep and creating more law schools and having more graduates only leads to more students who can’t find jobs and are left with a lot of debt. There are only going to be so many legal-related jobs right now, and unless the economy quickly recovers and flourishes, it’s going to be like that for the foreseeable future.

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Is this a joke?
    IU-Indy law school has 800 students. Indiana's four law schools are more than plenty to serve our state's population. New schools should only be approved by the ABA if the population is underserved. I think the population is served just fine. If you can't gain admission at one of the State's 4 schools or one of the nations 200+ schools, well then you may need to find another industry. Handing out so many JD's is detrimental to the profession.
  • Damaging the Profession
    This makes "financial sense" for no one but the institution that desires "to capitalize on people�s desire to go to law school." What about the students competing for a dwindling number of jobs and the taxpayers who will have to pick up the tab for yet more defaulted student loans? The nation's law schools already graduate more J.D.'s than the market can support. The ABA should stop accrediting new law schools. It is damaging the profession.
  • Reall?
    I can't argue with either comment above. There are currently too many JDs and not enough jobs to support them.

    I would recommend NOT attending law school if you have to get loans to pay for it. You're no longer guaranteed a job afterwards.
  • How many is too many?
    We have too many law schools training people to get a declining # of jobs w/Big Law. We don't have enough law schools providing legal education at a price that will enable graduates to serve people who don't qualify for free service but can't afford most lawyers. The ABA won't approve such law schools, but who cares?
  • law school
    Find Lawyer...yes idiana needs a another law school
  • Nice comments
    This comments is the best and i like it.
    =====
    Find Attorney
  • Totally Irresponsible of Indiana Tech - A school that I have never even heard of...
    This is totally irresponsible and shameful. First of all, there are - at best - only 2 low paying jobs for every 3 graduates from well known university-based law schools. Most of these law schools have been around for decades if not a century or more. Now Indiana Tech - a school that I have never even heard of wants to take money (tuition) from students to get a JD from a law school with zero pedigree in a grossly oversupplied market? And these rocket scientists need to commission a study??? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? In my opinion, they should be fired for being both callous and reckless. These are educators? Indiana Tech??? Shame on them.
  • Wait...this is a joke, right? Indiana Tech Law School, you're kidding me
    This article has to be a joke! Commissioned a study to determine the obvious... Indiana does not need another law school. Not even if Purdue wanted one. Let alone Indiana Tech or whatever it's called!

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. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT