Most states (including Indiana) have too many lawyers

July 5, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

This news doesn’t help Indiana Tech in its explanation for why it’s decided to open up a law school in northeast Indiana. Economic Modeling Specialists Inc., a consulting company that looks at employment data and provides economic analysis, found there are more attorneys than jobs available in nearly every state.

According to its data, it estimates there will be 339 annual openings each year from 2010 to 2015. Sounds good for those recent grads and unemployed attorneys looking for jobs, right? The bad news is that in 2009, 602 people passed the bar here. If we took these numbers as fact, then every year, 263 would not be able to find a job in the legal profession. Granted, you have to consider that maybe some of the people who passed the bar may take jobs out of state or jobs in which they don’t need to become members of the bar. But that still leaves more attorneys than jobs here.

New York fared the worst – EMSI estimates it has more than 7,600 attorneys than jobs in that state. For those with legal degrees willing to go where the work is, try Nebraska, Wisconsin or Washington, D.C. The report shows Nebraska could actually use three more attorneys, Wisconsin has a deficit of 14 attorneys (although the number could be skewed because you don’t have to pass the bar to practice in that state), and D.C. is looking for nearly 350 lawyers. Overall, the nation has a surplus of more than 27,000 attorneys.

This is just one study, but it does offer a glimpse at how tough the job market is for attorneys right now. EMSI used the number of people who passed the bar in each state and compared that to an estimate of job openings for attorneys in those states. It also looked at data from the Department of Education on law school graduates to determine the number of new lawyers.

Tell me why then Indiana Tech thinks it’s a good idea to open up a law school. They claim their research tells them Indiana is actually underserved when it comes to lawyers.

ADVERTISEMENT
  • It's obvious
    Indiana Tech is trying to make sure that some out of work lawyers get jobs as faculty at their new law school...after all, it will be 3 years that they will help the attorney employment percentage in Indiana before they have their first graduating class...makes sense don't you think?
  • Nonsense!
    Why doesn't the ABA mandate lawschools limit law school students to some number to justify the the excessive tuition. I pity young law students.
  • Missing the point
    I believe you all are missing the bigger picture. Though there are out of work "lawyers" in every state, there are still many JDs getting jobs where they aren't practicing (by choice and design) all over the country. In addition, there are more law school applicants than there are law school open slots. Why shouldn't Indiana Tech provide a service to people interested in a law school education? Practicing law isn't the only purpose for obtaining your JD.

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. I have had an ongoing custody case for 6 yrs. I should have been the sole legal custodial parent but was a victim of a vindictive ex and the system biasedly supported him. He is an alcoholic and doesn't even have a license for two yrs now after his 2nd DUI. Fast frwd 6 yrs later my kids are suffering poor nutritional health, psychological issues, failing in school, have NO MD and the GAL could care less, DCS doesn't care. The child isn't getting his ADHD med he needs and will not succeed in life living this way. NO one will HELP our family.I tried for over 6 yrs. The judge called me an idiot for not knowing how to enter evidence and the last hearing was 8 mths ago. That in itself is unjust! The kids want to be with their Mother! They are being alienated from her and fed lies by their Father! I was hit in a car accident 3 yrs ago and am declared handicapped myself. Poor poor way to treat the indigent in Indiana!

  2. The Indiana DOE released the 2015-2016 school grades in Dec 2016 and my local elementary school is a "C" grade school. Look at the MCCSC boundary maps and how all of the most affluent neighborhoods have the best performance. It is no surprise that obtaining residency in the "A" school boundaries cost 1.5 to 3 times as much. As a parent I should have more options than my "C" school without needing to pay the premium to live in the affluent parts of town. If the charter were authorized by a non-religious school the plaintiffs would still be against it because it would still be taking per-pupil money from them. They are hiding behind the guise of religion as a basis for their argument when this is clearly all about money and nothing else.

  3. This is a horrible headline. The article is about challenging the ability of Grace College to serve as an authorizer. 7 Oaks is not a religiously affiliated school

  4. Congratulations to Judge Carmichael for making it to the final three! She is an outstanding Judge and the people of Indiana will benefit tremendously if/when she is chosen.

  5. The headline change to from "religious" to "religious-affiliated" is still inaccurate and terribly misleading.

ADVERTISEMENT