• Home
  • News
  • It’s Official: Yale Law School Tops US News Rankings

Law Schools

It’s Official: Yale Law School Tops US News Rankings

Posted Apr 23, 2009 5:46 AM CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Updated: Bloggers who leaked an advance look at law school rankings were correct: Yale is still No. 1 in rankings by U.S. News and World Report.

Harvard and Stanford had tied for second place last year, but this year Harvard was second and Stanford, third. Duke was edged out of the top 10 last year, but advanced two spots to tie for 10th place in the latest rankings.

The National Law Journal story on the rankings begins this way: “U.S. News & World Report has released its 2010 law school rankings: Cue griping from a chorus of the publication's detractors who maintain that the list undermines law schools’ focus on providing quality legal education.”

Robert Morse, director of data research for U.S. News, is aware of talk in the blogosphere, but he says some of it is a positive reaction to the publication’s decision to combine data on part-time and full-time programs. The change was made, he tells the ABA Journal, to address concerns that law schools were gaming the system by funneling students with lower grades and admissions test scores into part-time programs.

He adds that combining the data didn’t necessarily spell doom for law schools.

“It was not the case that all schools with part-time programs fell,” he says. “As an example, Georgetown’s ranking didn’t change. … American University went up one place. University of Denver rose in the rankings. The University of San Diego rose. So there are some schools with part-time programs that rose.”

Here are the top 10 law schools, (actually the top 12 because of ties), and their annual tuition, according to U.S. News:

1) Yale University, $46,000

2) Harvard University, $41,500

3) Stanford University, $42,080

4) Columbia University, $45,674

5) New York University, $42,890

6) University of California, Berkeley, $30,944 in-state, $43,189 out-of-state

6) University of Chicago, $41,835

8) University of Pennsylvania, $44,330

9) University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, $41,500 in-state, $44,500 out-of-state

10) Duke University, $42,938

10) Northwestern University, $45,332

10) University of Virginia, $36,800 in-state, $41,800 out-of-state

Morse notes that U.S. News is using 2007 employment data in its calculations. As a result, the rankings don’t reflect job troubles associated with the economic downturn.

Yet the publication is aware of the tough legal job market. “There’s a fear: Will I have the earning power to pay off my loans? We’re fully aware of that,” Morse says. That's why U.S. News lists tuition costs along with the rankings.

U.S. News has also put together a separate ranking for part-time law schools. Georgetown University was No. 1 in that ranking, followed by George Washington University and Fordham University.

TaxProf Blog published a list of law schools with the biggest drops or gains since last year. Gainers include Indiana-Bloomington, which rose 13 places to No. 23; San Diego, which rose 21 places to No. 61; Gonzaga, which rose 18 places to No. 100; and Suny-Buffalo, which rose 15 places to No. 85.

One law school, the University of Nebraska, seemed to be a big loser. It fell from No. 73 on last year’s list into the third tier on this year’s list, Morse told the ABA Journal. But after the school got an advance peek at the rankings, officials notified U.S. News that there had been a mistake in data it submitted on 2007 nine-month-after-graduation employment. U.S. News is recalculating the rankings and will let Nebraska know the outcome.

But the publication hasn’t made a decision on whether to correct the rankings. Morse notes that all schools verify submitted data as correct, and U.S. News hasn’t made corrections when errors cropped up in the past.

Story updated at 10:50 a.m. CT to include comments from Morse and at 11:28 a.m. for a write-through.

Comments

1.

Marc J. Randazza
Apr 23, 2009 7:24 AM CST

Comment removed by moderator.

Flag this comment

2.

B. McLeod
Apr 23, 2009 7:40 AM CST

Wow.  “3rd tier” is completely gone.

Flag this comment

3.

Bob A.
Apr 23, 2009 8:07 AM CST

What happened to Syracuse Law? See- Dean “too busy to do my job” Arterian

Flag this comment

4.

Marc J. Randazza
Apr 23, 2009 9:03 AM CST

I consider the U.S. News rankings game to be, metaphorically speaking, the equivalent of academic self-pleasure and hand release in a group setting.

Flag this comment

5.

B. McLeod
Apr 23, 2009 9:12 AM CST

I think that’s a circular argument.

Flag this comment

6.

Debra VEOLI
Apr 23, 2009 10:13 AM CST

Comment removed by moderator.

Flag this comment

7.

P. Bryson
Apr 23, 2009 11:19 AM CST

#4. The Only exception I would take to your statement is the word academic. I’d replace it with administrative.

Flag this comment

8.

James
Apr 23, 2009 11:19 AM CST

I love the article on “Gripes about the Rankings.” 

The argument is that the ranks threatens diversity in the profession.  The author basically argues that if crappy law schools don’t exist than minorities won’t be able to become lawyers.  Doesn’t any member of a minority group find this argument patently offensive?

I got blasted in another post for advocating the closing of Tier 4 schools based largely on similar claims as well as antidotal evidence about how well Grad X did from Tier 4 School Y.  To the extent that US news reveals certain law schools as a continual joke kudos to them. 

It’s ironic and hilarious that the biggest detractors are from schools that get hosed by the rankings.

Flag this comment

9.

Steve
Apr 23, 2009 11:38 AM CST

One big flaw with the rankings is how old some of the data is.  e.g.  It’s 2009 and they use bar passage rates from 2007.  Why not 2008?  Or an average of the two?

Given the deadlines to apply for law schools have either just passed or are a long way away, there is no reason not to make this a June publication if they need a little extra time to use more recent numbers.

Some criteria like number of volumes in the library could be scrapped entirely, it is simply a way of implying that older endowed law schools do a better job.

For the most part, the rankings simply measure reputation, which is based on prior rankings.

With the exception of bar passage rate, these rankings are based mostly on credentials of the entering students, and the reputation of their alumni.  This kind of ranking survey does not (and can not) measure the experience of BEING a student at the given law schools.  Nor can it measure the competence and skill of all their alumni/ae.

That said, I’d advise any potential law student to follow these rankings.  Why?  Because it’s all about ROI.  And with the cost of law school, you don’t go to the school that will educate you, you go to the school that will open the most doors for you the widest.

The ‘problem’ with the rankings is the way they get used by long-graduated alumni as validation of perpetual superiority or inferiority as individual attorneys.

Because perception is reality, and loans need to be paid, these rankings should be used by prospective law students to choose a school.  But they should not be used by employers to choose candidates, especially laterals 10+ years in.

Flag this comment

10.

Steve
Apr 23, 2009 11:44 AM CST

And for tuition, in addition to listing the tuition price, they should also list the average tuition actually paid after scholarships and grants were awarded.

And more importantly, list the percentage tuition increase over the past 3 years to shame those school that have been milking the cash cow the hardest.

Flag this comment

11.

Tim
Apr 23, 2009 2:44 PM CST

Wow.  After one year of practice, it is amazing how much less I care about any of this.  It all looks so stupid from this side.  I’m kind of amazed that enough practicing lawyers care about these rankings for it to be news every year.

Flag this comment

12.

Debra VEOLI
Apr 23, 2009 8:21 PM CST

I went to what is referred to as a TTT school in New York City, but STILL got a pretty good job and am STILL working.

So it goes to show you DONT have to go to Yale or Harvard to get a good job.  Al got laid off, but he is still keeping busy.

I am done billing for tonite, and am going home.

Flag this comment

13.

B. McLeod
Apr 23, 2009 10:30 PM CST

Pretty nervy to leave so early when you and Al are down to just your income.  If you leave the lights on, though, maybe the high-rise neighbors will call your partners to complain, causing the firm to think you worked all night.

Flag this comment

14.

Debra VEOLI
Apr 24, 2009 5:42 AM CST

B, you are so silly.  Why would I have to do that?  I am there almost 18 hours every day.  A few hours home at nite with Al is the least I can do for him.

Flag this comment

15.

brad
Apr 24, 2009 5:49 AM CST

Nebraska is a mid50’s law school with the faculty and facilities they have.

With that said, there is no mistake about the 2007’s class employment.  Best class the school ever had and noone got jobs.  But then again, they probably reported truthful numbers and not the lies that they and every law school generally report and release.

Flag this comment

16.

Kevin
Apr 24, 2009 5:59 AM CST

To James in post #8—For a person who (properly) rips crappy law schools, you sure you have a poor grasp of standard English.  You have “antidotal evidence”?  Does that mean that your evidence counteracts your claim, or did you mean “anecdotal”?

Also, it’s not ironic that school administrators who get “hosed” by the rankings are the biggest haters.  It’s entirely reasonable.  That’s like saying it’s ironic that minorities get the most fired up about racial discrimination.

The bottom line is that a Tier 4 grad is not only probably going to be a poor lawyer, but apparently failed math as well.  Those schools still charge thousands and thousands per year for tuition (and not everyone gets a scholarship)—yet the only employment option for their graduates is a sole proprietorship.

But as lawyers write professionally for a living, and thus have a duty to be careful with their words, I’d bet that you’re not getting AV-rated anytime soon.  Oh, wait, that system’s a joke too?  Never mind.

Flag this comment

17.

RL
Apr 24, 2009 6:13 AM CST

Look at that in-state tuition for Berkeley.  If you play your cards right, you can become a resident after your 1L year.  The costs have gone up a lot since I paid $10k a year ten years ago, but it is still the biggest steal in academia.

Flag this comment

18.

Randy Coyne
Apr 24, 2009 6:26 AM CST

Lies, damn lies, and USN≀rankings.

Flag this comment

19.

Rick
Apr 24, 2009 6:48 AM CST

#17. It has always amazed me that the taxpayers of California stand for giving this subsidy to non-Californian law students who will mostly end up working for huge money in New York. Especially given the financial condition of the state right now, it’s pretty amazing.

Flag this comment

20.

fran
Apr 24, 2009 6:54 AM CST

I agree whole heartedly with #9

Flag this comment

21.

RL
Apr 24, 2009 7:34 AM CST

Rick,  At least when I was at Boalt, the vast majority of students stayed in California after graduation.  The low in-state tuition is part of the reason Berkeley’s acceptance rate is 11% (compared to Harvard’s 12%), which in turn boosts its rankings.  In the scheme of things, it is a small price for a big pay-off.

Flag this comment

22.

Stone
Apr 24, 2009 7:55 AM CST

The rankings wont matter if people stop giving them any merit.  They have about as much merit as pre-season College Football rankings

Flag this comment

23.

DJ
Apr 24, 2009 8:29 AM CST

How insightful of you, Kevin (#16).  I’ve been out a couple years now, and in my experience, the lawyers who went to a lower-tier school are just as bright as the pretentious lawyers, such as yourself, who went to a 1st tier school.  And they work harder.  Your assertion that they “probably failed math” is not only misplaced, but stupid.  “Kudos” to you for showing your true character and bias.  My theory is that you have never actually worked with anyone who went to a lower-tiered school, so you’re just assuming they are dumber or inferior to you.  Oh, and congratulations on your LSAT score, which is pretty much all a tier 1 school tells me about a job applicant.

Flag this comment

24.

Skeptical
Apr 24, 2009 8:29 AM CST

I would have placed Chicago, Michigan, and Penn before Berkeley, in that order, inasmuch as all three schools send many more grads to the Supremes.  What are they smoking in the Bay area?

Flag this comment

25.

John Smith
Apr 24, 2009 8:30 AM CST

I find this whole discussion to be a angels dancing on a pin discussion.

Because, has anyone looked at the job market lately? Any person who decides to go to a law school other than a top 5, needs to do the following, in order:

1) Obtain a neurological examination

2) Learn present value analysis, as in what is the additional increment in future yearly income necessary to even break even after walking out with $150,000 in additional debt, times the probability of actually being able to do so.

3) Visit a temporary attorney webiste on blogspot to see what is happening to increasingly large numbers of lawyers that graduate and just don’t “click.” Even they are being reduced from $40/hour jobs with no health benefits to $30 an less, in sweatshop conditions doing document review (because of outsourcing to India).

Law: The demand for new lawyers is not there. Don’t do it.

Flag this comment

26.

JB
Apr 24, 2009 8:45 AM CST

Hey Kevin (#16), about your extremely intelligent assumption that lower tier law school students probably failed math…you could not be more incorrect.  We were the ones kicking your butt in math and science but just can’t quite write as perfectly as you, you amazing grammar star.  I’ll take my lower tier school edumakation and my knowledge of math and science…and stick to being a patent attorney.  You can stick to putting down others.

Flag this comment

27.

DJ
Apr 24, 2009 8:48 AM CST

JB for the win.

Flag this comment

28.

JME
Apr 24, 2009 9:38 AM CST

I am still thinking Debra VEOLI is our banished friend Ellen in disguise.  Talks like her, CAPS like her.

Flag this comment

29.

SMS
Apr 24, 2009 9:39 AM CST

Comment removed by moderator.

Flag this comment

30.

Anon
Apr 24, 2009 9:50 AM CST

The lower-tiered students read the same books, take the same state BAR, and are held to the same standard as everyone else.  If you are going to assume that they’re inferior to you, then do not act surprised when you lose your client’s case in the courtroom due to your own assumptions on opposing counsel.

Flag this comment

31.

hakeem
Apr 24, 2009 10:00 AM CST

who cares about rankings anyway…I went to UCONN Law, passed the NY bar and now am all good. My best friend from Havard is still trying the Bar for the third time…I hate to see that…but its about the person…the law degree (from an ABA accredited school) is only 1/3 of the story, 1/3 is passing the bar and the 1/3 is the fight in you…Good luck wishing on the stars…

Flag this comment

32.

Kevin
Apr 24, 2009 10:06 AM CST

I made a 171 on the LSAT.

Flag this comment

33.

Older Guy
Apr 24, 2009 10:10 AM CST

And to think I passed on Yale in favor of Harvard. No wonder my life sucks!

Flag this comment

34.

DJ
Apr 24, 2009 10:12 AM CST

(gasp) You’re kidding, Kevin!  Can we hang out?!  Seriously let me buy you a drink to celebrate your monumental accomplishment!  Everyone stop what they’re doing and applaud Kevin.
Congrats, you’re still a tool.

Flag this comment

35.

celeste
Apr 24, 2009 10:12 AM CST

How many of these so-called top schools actually give “grades” to their students?  I think few or none, while the “lower” tier students have (or should have) to compete for grades and class rankings.  So connections and just getting in while get those privileged few far.  What is Harvard’s class size?

Flag this comment

36.

B. McLeod
Apr 24, 2009 10:16 AM CST

Dear me.  A 171 on the LSAT.  Well, I suppose we should all take the shoes from off our feet and properly avert our eyes when such a one passes.

God bless England.

Flag this comment

37.

Hylas
Apr 24, 2009 10:19 AM CST

The obsession with rankings does not reflect well on our profession.  It betrays a preoccupation with status, and a lack of confidence in one’s ability to identify quality through any other means.  Perhaps because there is actually very little difference in quaIity among the various law school grads.  I have seen spectacular lawyers from all 4 “tiers”. 

The clients recognize quality when they see it, and they are the ones who really matter.  These rankings seem most relevant to those hoping to coast into big firm jobs with grossly bloated salaries.  Those opportunities have collapsed, being unsustainable in the marketplace.

Flag this comment

38.

T in Tallahassee
Apr 24, 2009 10:51 AM CST

I think these rankings are lworth little more than the the wasted paper upn which they are printed.  I graduated from a 3d Tier law school, which taught me how to practice law in addition to giving me a legal education.  I am now an expert in my field, manage my own successful firm and have taught at a much higher ranked law school.  In my 9 years since graduation I have had the opportunity to co-counsel and litigate with a number of lawyers from some of the top 10 schools this year and some have been good and some have been horrible.  I have interviewed prospective associates from several law schools and even worked with law students in schools ranked higher than mine.  At the end of the day, without hesitation, I got a tremedous legal education from my law school, learned many practical skills most law schools can’t/won’t teach and was instilled with a sense of ethics and professionalism I find missing from most of the associates and law interns.  It pains me to see these rankings mean so much to students that it would discourage them from going to schools that would provide them with a good educaiton and actually make them lawyers not just memo-writing, library lumps who have never seen the inside of a court room.  I am licensed in a couple of states and the state of legal education is so bad that these states have implemented programs that all new admittees are required to take so that all new lawyers know that a judge wears a black robe, you have to actually serve all interested parties with whatever you file and that one should not cuss in court at the judge or opposing counsel.

Flag this comment

39.

Steve
Apr 24, 2009 11:00 AM CST

To summarize #9

These rankings should be used by potential law students when choosing the law school that is most likely to lead to a return on their investment.

The should NOT be used by mediocre alumni, hiring partners, law schools, or judicial nominating committees to maintain a perpetual caste system.

The NFL draft is coming up.  Those teams know that “top talent” is more likely to be found at some schools than others.  But they are willing to look everywhere, even Division III.  And after you’ve been in the league a bit and enter free agency, nobody cares what school you went to; you are judged and what you’ve proven you can do.
It’s time for that same “what have YOU done lately?” question to be asked by more than just clients.

Flag this comment

40.

James
Apr 24, 2009 11:12 AM CST

CLINICS!!!!

Take em early, take em often, and do well in em.

I had an awesome experience in my law school clinic.  It actually occurred after the semester had ended.  I had a professor ask if I wanted to try a case that was dumped by another student because it got moved to after the semester had ended and they were moving out of state.  I met my clients a day later, prepared all my trial evidence, ran around like crazy person questioning witnesses and was ready for trial 24 hours later.  Honestly that experience was probably more valuable than 3/4ths of what I did during the classroom. 

To #16.  Hey Kevin thanks for the grammer lesson.  Guess I made a typo and used a word incorrectly in a hastily written entry on an ABA board.  You’re a walking dictionary man.

Flag this comment

41.

Bill
Apr 24, 2009 12:06 PM CST

Wait a minute. After it got a sneak peek at the rankings, Nebraska “realized there had been a mistake” in the employment data it submitted???? Give me a break!!!!!

I can envision the conversation:
Neb: I think we made a mistake - that 5% employment rate we mentioned was our real employment rate.
The ABA: Wha???? You gave us real information!!!! We don’t need real information! We don’t need it, we don’t want it, we don’t allow it.
Neb: Oh, sorry. What were we thinking?
ABA: Listen, if you tell the truth, people will stop enrolling in law schools. If they stop enrolling in law schools, they’ll stop becoming ABA members. You lose money, we lose money.
Neb: Sorry, sorry. We’ll go back and just make up some BS. Give us a few weeks to figure out how many of our grads are working in McDonalds.
ABA: That’s more like it. We’ll renew your accreditation.

Flag this comment

42.

Kevin is the Best
Apr 24, 2009 12:14 PM CST

To Kevin, if you are so erudite on the English grammar and lexicon, what did you mean you you “made a 171” on the LSAT?  Do you mean you fabricated the score, or maybe you meant you “scored 171.”  I could be wrong, since I’m just a dumb immigrant, although a Tier-1 school decided to cut me some slacks, and accept me via, no doubt affirmative action, since we Asians are such an underrepresented minority in higher education.

To #23, we smoke the best in the Bay Area.  don’t hate.

Flag this comment

43.

Michelle
Apr 24, 2009 1:05 PM CST

Despite being accepted to attend higher tier law schools, I attended a tier 4 school in order to be near my home and work full time.  My school was accredited by the ABA and had many caring and dedicated professors.  The students earned and received letter grades, participated in clinics and clerked for members of the judiciary.  Did we have some students in our school who were not cut out for the legal profession? Of course—and they were weeded out through the system.  However, those of us who applied ourselves and took advantage of the available resources are now working side-by-side with colleagues from tier 1 and 2 schools.  I think the overall key to remember is that a diploma from a tier 1 school may open the door a little faster, but it’s what you do upon entering the room that really counts.

Flag this comment

44.

Government Atty
Apr 24, 2009 1:05 PM CST

yawn.

Flag this comment

45.

David
Apr 24, 2009 3:03 PM CST

I feel like the best posts are the ones I can’t read because they were removed by moderators… I am left wanting.  On another note, it’s nice to know that my tuition was paid for in cash (because my law school was an affordable 2nd tier) while the top tiers I supervise will be paying off their loans for a very long time.  Interesting how things work out.

Flag this comment

46.

BMF
Apr 24, 2009 3:19 PM CST

Bernard Nussbaum—Harvard
Joe Jamail Jr.—University of Texas
James Neal—Vanderbilt, Gorgetown
Fred Bartlit—University of Illinois
Bobby Lee Cook—Vanderbilt
James Brosnahan—Harvard
Richard “Racehorse” Haynes—Bates College of Law (now the University of Texas Law Center.)

Of the seven attorneys showcased in the March 2009 ABA Journal as “Lions of the Trial Bar,” only two (2) graduated from schools that historically ranked in the “top 10”  in USN≀.
—Several of the notables admitted they were not particularly studious. Jamail flunked torts.
—Most had at least a year of work or other experience between college an law school.
—All of them tried every sort of case they could as early as they could.
—All are not afraid to take risks.

So much for the USN≀rankings, and Big Law.

And Kenvin #31:  171? That’s all?

Flag this comment

47.

Steve
Apr 24, 2009 5:29 PM CST

to #45
...and don’t forget the earlier cover story on Abraham Lincoln.  He wasn’t even 4th Tier.

But that was then, and this is now.

All Tiers teach their students.  Students from all Tiers pass the bar exam.  Students from all Tiers end up as capable of being lawyers.
But the reality is that T1 or top 10 have an easier path.  (or in the case of the federal judiciary, the only path.)
USN≀rankings—good for prospectice law students to read, but an ego-stroking/ego-crushing waste of time for everyone more than a year out of law school.

Flag this comment

48.

V.A. Carney
Apr 24, 2009 7:12 PM CST

Yale is number one?  By whose standards?  Ask any of the six Supreme Court Justices who are Harvard alums what they think of these ratings.  Better yet, ask President & Mrs. Obama.

Flag this comment

49.

B. McLeod
Apr 24, 2009 10:43 PM CST

Ah, let us all be merry, and we’ll bicker o’ good Yale, and drink tae the health o’ the weavers.

Flag this comment

50.

Tim
Apr 25, 2009 12:11 AM CST

#43 wins.  Comment of the year.

Flag this comment

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.