ILNews

Indiana law schools slip from top 25 in annual rankings

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The annual ranking that law schools love to hate was released March 11, and it may stir more emotions than usual in Indiana since none of the state’s law school placed in the top 25.

US News & World Report has published its rankings of the 2015 Best Law Schools in the country. Nationwide, 145 made the list with titans Yale University filling the No. 1 spot followed by Harvard University and Stanford University sharing the No. 2 position.

University of Notre Dame is the first law school in Indiana to pierce the 2015 rankings at No. 26. This is down from its 2014 place at No. 23. Indiana University Maurer School of Law shared the No. 29 slot with the University of Georgia. In 2014, IU Maurer was ranked at No. 25.

Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law leaped to No. 87 from No. 98 one year ago. Six schools tied for the No. 87 spot, including Michigan State University and University of Louisville.

IU McKinney placed at No. 8 in the legal writing category and No. 10 in the health care law division.

University of Valparaiso Law School’s retained its listing as “rank not published” because its placement fell below the cutoff line.

The yearly ranking by the news magazine has drawn sharp criticism from the American Bar Association Task Force on the Future of Legal Education.

In its final report and recommendations released in January 2014, the task force, led by retired Indiana Chief Justice Randall Shepard, called on US News & World Report to adjust the methodology for determining the rankings. The task force recommended the magazine stop using law school expenditures and make sure its criteria for ranking “does not promote conduct damaging to the interests of law students and the system of legal education.”


 

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. 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."

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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. It's a capital offense...one for you Latin scholars..

ADVERTISEMENT