The bad news is that we have to put up with dim-witted propagandists for the education sector like John Davies, who thinks UC-San Diego really, really needs a law school.
Just 50 years old – young by major university standards – the University of California San Diego rivals some of our nation’s most prestigious universities and is listed among the top 10 public research universities in the nation.Already we're in trouble. But it gets worse:
Yet one thing would make this research powerhouse even greater. A law school at UC San Diego would offer substantial benefits for the university, the UC system and the region as a whole.
Very few public universities have achieved or sustained greatness without offering professional legal education. And most outstanding law schools reside within public universities. That is why four of the major research campuses in the UC system have established law schools, and why the San Diego campus should also do so.Huh? Of the consensus (e.g. US News and World Report) top 15 law schools, 4 are public universities, and they're all major first-choice state flagships. UCLA, Illinois, Iowa, etc. have good law programs, but claiming that most outstanding ones are at public school is an outright lie. So if THAT'S why there's a law school at UC-Irvine, someone forget to read the precious rankings carefully.As an attorney and a former regent of the University of California, I know that the benefits of a university-affiliated law school are significant.
Cash?
One discipline – law – has traditionally lagged behind the development of new scientific breakthroughs in terms of creating policies and regulations. This places innovators at a disadvantage since law is a critical component of all new knowledge.Wait - are you saying you want MORE policies and regulations? And that it places innovators at a disadvantage when there are no politics or regulations? Or am I just reading your senseless argument wrong? Because if I'm not, that's the dumbest thing I've read in a long time.
Academic research today will shape our society in unimaginable ways tomorrow. Such research is rife with legal, social and policy issues. Graduates of universities that offer legal education will lead, while those from universities that lack legal education will play catch-up. (emphasis mine to accent the dumbness).Readers, did you know that if you get an engineering degree from somewhere, the value of your degree will go up or down depending on whether the school offers JDs? I bet all those kids spending money at M.I.T. and Princeton are pissed. Sucks that they and the crowds at Dartmouth, Brown, Cal-Tech, Johns Hopkins, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M, [pick favorite random liberal arts college], etc. are doomed to never lead because their schools lacked the foresight to set up a law school.
A UC San Diego law school would enjoy a unique focus. This would be a law school focused on research that defines the future. It would graduate practitioners and researchers who understand the social and policy implications of innovation. Such a school would benefit the region’s most promising economic sectors, including biotechnology, telecommunications, nanotechnology, health care, oceanography and international relations.Who wrote this, the admissions department at Florida Coastal? Is debt collection a "promising economic sector" now? Unemployment? Because very, very few Cal-Western/UCSD law graduates will be working in any of those areas, unless strained personal injury claims classify as "health care," and representing illegal hookers who crossed from Tijuana counts as "international relations."
In the long view, tough times are no excuse to forego great opportunities. Tough times just demand greater certainty about the benefits.This ain't no great opportunity for anyone.
This profession is already oversaturated, especially in San Diego, where elite Thomas Jefferson graduates are not able to find their chosen work, but the school keeps raking in enough dough to be the envy of other law schools.
If there's one thing that I'm certain about, it's that there's no need for UC-SD to add a law school, whether it's Cal-Western or one they pull out of their butt. The market doesn't need it, and a law school adds nothing to the scholarly abilities of anyone else on campus. Seriously, John, MIT and Princeton have no law schools. Look it up. They're both doing fine.
I went to Dartmouth, and, as an alum, I will never support a law school. No need. It would only ruin the place.
ReplyDeletesan diego already has two law school...University of San Diego (a private school) and Thomas Jefferson....
ReplyDeleteThis is a bad idea. Look at what happened in Massachusetts recently. Umass - Dartmouth took over that 4th tier toilet Southern New England School of Law. Its unaccredited by the ABA ...btw. So now they are running a public UNACCREDITED law school in a state that has no less than 6 schools. There is no word as to when Umass will get accreditation.
ReplyDeleteIf I am not mistaken, San Diego also has California Western. The area needs another over-priced sewage pit law school like a 90 year old man needs gasoline poured down his rectum.
ReplyDeleteHahaha Nando, I love it. Light the match, baby!
ReplyDeleteSeriously, there are way too many law schools, way too many law students, and far too few jobs. I'm sure the UCSD people know this, but they'll start a law school anyway.
Law schools are the financial pillars of our universities. They're by far the most profitable sectors of universities, and if UCSD wants to make money, they'll start up a law school. These things are like oil wells, except they pump money out of our pockets instead of the ground.
All of these responses assume that new law schools must open while others remain open. If the best colleges and universities (such as UCSD, M.I.T., Brown, Dartmouth, Johns Hopkins, etc) open or take over law schools while the mediocrte schools close, that will be better for legal education. It will also put a rest to the rankings nonsense.
ReplyDeleteThe truth, as it stands, is that most American law schools offer good legal education. But I wouldn't mind seeing a john Marshall (GA), Texas Southern, Texas Weslyan, Golden Gate, and other such schools close.
Why not "trade" some less worthy schools for better law schools supported by prestigious, well established universities? If we're going to add law schools, that is the only acceptable way to do it.