“Sematic” means “serving as a warning of danger” and is generally used in biology to describe traits of animals. I assume meant Semitic. Do you mean the protests against the genocidal Zionists or the ones against the Palestinians and other Semitic people?
I think 10:06 meant the protests against genocide and indiscriminate killing of any and all Palestinians because they are Palestinians and the use of US supplied weaponry and ammunition to do it.
How old are you 11:11? “Genocidal Zionists”? Are you 12 and listen to TikTok? Forgive me but this is just an unbelievable amount of stupidity coming form a theoretical Doctor of Jurisprudence.
May I respectfully and calmly suggest to those on any of the many sides of this discussion, that there are many people who are centrists and moderate throughout Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank enclaves. The challenge as I see it is that none of them are in any government in those areas. Politics is the art of the possible and I would suggest that dropping the personal invectives and exploring practical compromises would be a first good step. This assumes that those in control of the varying parties actually want a solution and don’t prefer to maintain the status quo for internal political reasons.
I’m usually very cynical about politics, but I thought I’d take a break from that today and hold out for something positive.
11:11 here – I’m slightly over 60. On occasion I watch TikTok, usually when someone forwards something entertaining or funny. I get my news from the BBC, Democracy Now, Reuters, the AP, and a few others. I formerly relied on the New York Times and Washington Post, but not so much anymore. My JD is very much real as I have been actively practicing law for over 30 years. Slaughtering babies and children because of their race/religion/nationality is genocide.
I agreed with your first post, 11:11. I also agree with your last sentence in your 1:49 post, but want to add that Hamas is guilty of that too, albeit on a smaller scale. (Smaller only because Hamas has not be able to do so on the same scale; Hamas certainly aspires to do the same thing to Israel.) It’s genocidal Zionists vs. genocidal Hamas.
I’ve never agreed with Schrager on anything, but he nailed this.
Guest
Anonymous
February 28, 2025 9:41 am
CA bar failure
The CA bar exam has always been extraordinarily well organized and efficient. The move away from the traditional exam, including allowing applicants to take the exam remotely, just begged for trouble.
SBN should take note.
I don’t want to sound like the old man that says everything was better back in the day… but while we all recognize the Bar is a somewhat flawed process that doesn’t necessarily equate to being a good lawyer putting someone through the stress of the exam does somewhat equate to feeling the stress of being an Esquire. I guess what i’m trying to say in a ham fisted way is that all these bar exam alterations seem like lawyers just having an unnecessary fixer’s mentality and the so called fixes are causing more problems than the actual problem.
The motivations for change have always seemed academically esoteric rather than something meant to make the profession better.
Law schools now see fewer high-aptitude applicants. Smart kids figured out that borrowing money for a JD doesn’t typically pencil out. Smart kids now go into other fields like tech.
Desperate to continue the inflow of student loan money, law schools are admitting and graduating more and more nimrods.
Pressure is placed on state bar organizations to admit these idiots. State bar organizations are more than happy to oblige; they too need to increase their numbers of dues-paying members.
Thus, barriers to entry into the profession are being kicked down in order to keep the money flowing. In ten years there won’t be anything like a bar exam anywhere.
It doesn’t need Elon Musk. Two simple solutions will fix it. 1. Restore bankruptcy protection for student loans. 2. Force institutions accepting federal loan money to indemnify a portion of the loans, even 5-10% should be enough to do the trick.
End government financing of Elon Musk, profitable oil companies, unnecessary military projects, and other private corporations that are taking subsidies and paying nothing in taxes. Corporate welfare is a much bigger waste of money than funding the education of students.
Or, just have the US government get out of it all together.
Turn it over to banks – which are far more adept at assessing creditworthiness.
And yes, that would probably disproportionately affect minorities and people of low socioeconomic status. But “loaning’ money that will never be paid back disproportionately affects taxpayers (and far more significantly, I might add). So it cancels out.
The problem, not just for law, but all degree programs is that there is no review or oversight of the quality or reasonableness of pricing by lenders.
The ABA and US News are not quality indicators.
The ABA is a political machine, now concerned with self preservation. US News, in part, focuses on how many students graduate. A surefire way to improve law stats is to lower admission standards while simultaneously making it easier to pass courses. To use a bad pun, law schools are “lowering the bar”.
Universities are in empire building mode. You can teach law in an ordinary office building.
This is right. Universities have shifted toward a business model, prioritizing revenue generation rather than academic or intellectual pursuits. The focus on law school rankings, especially those that depend on factors like research output or faculty credentials, can drive universities to push out research and publications quickly, sometimes at the expense of quality. There’s a growing critique of legal scholarship regarding the quality of academic output noting it does not always justify the time and resources devoted to it. Law review articles, for example, are often written by law professors who have months to develop their work, yet the final product may not be groundbreaking or even well-written. Many articles are geared toward impressing peers rather than offering valuable insights to the wider public or practical legal field. Most articles plagiarize scholarship in other fields, and attempt to apply scientific studies to their area of law, without fully understanding the conclusions and limitations in the scholarship in other fields. It’s embarrassing. Now it’s typical for law students to come out of law school with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt.
I went from tech to law. Your comment doesn’t make sense. You assume everyone in tech has a high salary. It doesn’t work that way if you live in Nevada and don’t want to or can’t leave.
@1:24 High aptitude students
Of there are some in every incoming class. The commentators have noted that students who could not have seated in the past, are now getting admitted to law school. No one here has said that all L1’s are stupid.
Schrager acting all righteous is kind of funny. He sold out to represent Uber who is essentially like a Musk and the other greedy fucks he references. Put your money where your mouth is or keep quiet as it is just pure hypocrisy.
Is there a single living human who has contributed more towards the advancement of humanity than Elon Musk? Serious question. If so, who? And why do their contributions exceed Elon’s contributions towards alternate/clean energy, space exploration, and free speech?
So, if this is true, then what? We can’t question his motives or actions? We should be grateful and just look the other way? We should assume his actions are beyond reproach?
Bravo, Schrager.
Did Schrager miss the anti-sematic protests on college campuses last year?
“Sematic” means “serving as a warning of danger” and is generally used in biology to describe traits of animals. I assume meant Semitic. Do you mean the protests against the genocidal Zionists or the ones against the Palestinians and other Semitic people?
10:06 probably means “semiotics”. The use of signs and signifiers on campus are an uncommonly reported problem by the media.
I thought he meant Anti-Semantics. But I am not here to argue semantics.
I think 10:06 meant the protests against genocide and indiscriminate killing of any and all Palestinians because they are Palestinians and the use of US supplied weaponry and ammunition to do it.
How old are you 11:11? “Genocidal Zionists”? Are you 12 and listen to TikTok? Forgive me but this is just an unbelievable amount of stupidity coming form a theoretical Doctor of Jurisprudence.
welcome to 2025
May I respectfully and calmly suggest to those on any of the many sides of this discussion, that there are many people who are centrists and moderate throughout Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank enclaves. The challenge as I see it is that none of them are in any government in those areas. Politics is the art of the possible and I would suggest that dropping the personal invectives and exploring practical compromises would be a first good step. This assumes that those in control of the varying parties actually want a solution and don’t prefer to maintain the status quo for internal political reasons.
I’m usually very cynical about politics, but I thought I’d take a break from that today and hold out for something positive.
11:11 here – I’m slightly over 60. On occasion I watch TikTok, usually when someone forwards something entertaining or funny. I get my news from the BBC, Democracy Now, Reuters, the AP, and a few others. I formerly relied on the New York Times and Washington Post, but not so much anymore. My JD is very much real as I have been actively practicing law for over 30 years. Slaughtering babies and children because of their race/religion/nationality is genocide.
I agreed with your first post, 11:11. I also agree with your last sentence in your 1:49 post, but want to add that Hamas is guilty of that too, albeit on a smaller scale. (Smaller only because Hamas has not be able to do so on the same scale; Hamas certainly aspires to do the same thing to Israel.) It’s genocidal Zionists vs. genocidal Hamas.
I’ve never agreed with Schrager on anything, but he nailed this.
CA bar failure
The CA bar exam has always been extraordinarily well organized and efficient. The move away from the traditional exam, including allowing applicants to take the exam remotely, just begged for trouble.
SBN should take note.
I don’t want to sound like the old man that says everything was better back in the day… but while we all recognize the Bar is a somewhat flawed process that doesn’t necessarily equate to being a good lawyer putting someone through the stress of the exam does somewhat equate to feeling the stress of being an Esquire. I guess what i’m trying to say in a ham fisted way is that all these bar exam alterations seem like lawyers just having an unnecessary fixer’s mentality and the so called fixes are causing more problems than the actual problem.
The motivations for change have always seemed academically esoteric rather than something meant to make the profession better.
It’s simpler than that.
Law schools now see fewer high-aptitude applicants. Smart kids figured out that borrowing money for a JD doesn’t typically pencil out. Smart kids now go into other fields like tech.
Desperate to continue the inflow of student loan money, law schools are admitting and graduating more and more nimrods.
Pressure is placed on state bar organizations to admit these idiots. State bar organizations are more than happy to oblige; they too need to increase their numbers of dues-paying members.
Thus, barriers to entry into the profession are being kicked down in order to keep the money flowing. In ten years there won’t be anything like a bar exam anywhere.
Such it is with any bureaucracy. Well asserted.
Seems the problem could be solved by tightening up the student loan program. Maybe Musk is on to something.
It doesn’t need Elon Musk. Two simple solutions will fix it. 1. Restore bankruptcy protection for student loans. 2. Force institutions accepting federal loan money to indemnify a portion of the loans, even 5-10% should be enough to do the trick.
End Govt financing of Student loans.
End government financing of Elon Musk, profitable oil companies, unnecessary military projects, and other private corporations that are taking subsidies and paying nothing in taxes. Corporate welfare is a much bigger waste of money than funding the education of students.
End education.
Or, just have the US government get out of it all together.
Turn it over to banks – which are far more adept at assessing creditworthiness.
And yes, that would probably disproportionately affect minorities and people of low socioeconomic status. But “loaning’ money that will never be paid back disproportionately affects taxpayers (and far more significantly, I might add). So it cancels out.
The problem, not just for law, but all degree programs is that there is no review or oversight of the quality or reasonableness of pricing by lenders.
The ABA and US News are not quality indicators.
The ABA is a political machine, now concerned with self preservation. US News, in part, focuses on how many students graduate. A surefire way to improve law stats is to lower admission standards while simultaneously making it easier to pass courses. To use a bad pun, law schools are “lowering the bar”.
Universities are in empire building mode. You can teach law in an ordinary office building.
This is right. Universities have shifted toward a business model, prioritizing revenue generation rather than academic or intellectual pursuits. The focus on law school rankings, especially those that depend on factors like research output or faculty credentials, can drive universities to push out research and publications quickly, sometimes at the expense of quality. There’s a growing critique of legal scholarship regarding the quality of academic output noting it does not always justify the time and resources devoted to it. Law review articles, for example, are often written by law professors who have months to develop their work, yet the final product may not be groundbreaking or even well-written. Many articles are geared toward impressing peers rather than offering valuable insights to the wider public or practical legal field. Most articles plagiarize scholarship in other fields, and attempt to apply scientific studies to their area of law, without fully understanding the conclusions and limitations in the scholarship in other fields. It’s embarrassing. Now it’s typical for law students to come out of law school with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt.
9:50 here. good Occam’s razor analysis. while a bit pessimistic, i can’t deny the logic here.
I went from tech to law. Your comment doesn’t make sense. You assume everyone in tech has a high salary. It doesn’t work that way if you live in Nevada and don’t want to or can’t leave.
There are high aptitude students at every law school.
In decreasing percentages
@1:24 High aptitude students
Of there are some in every incoming class. The commentators have noted that students who could not have seated in the past, are now getting admitted to law school. No one here has said that all L1’s are stupid.
Schrager does not live in reality.
Perception is reality. You have a different perception, and hence, a different reality.
nothing in the opening paragraphs has any basis in reality.
“You have a different perception, and hence, a different reality”
Yes, if you go ask Alice and the rabbit. But most of us are not stoned.
In decreasing percentages.
Schrager acting all righteous is kind of funny. He sold out to represent Uber who is essentially like a Musk and the other greedy fucks he references. Put your money where your mouth is or keep quiet as it is just pure hypocrisy.
Is there a single living human who has contributed more towards the advancement of humanity than Elon Musk? Serious question. If so, who? And why do their contributions exceed Elon’s contributions towards alternate/clean energy, space exploration, and free speech?
So, if this is true, then what? We can’t question his motives or actions? We should be grateful and just look the other way? We should assume his actions are beyond reproach?
No. But given the context of his past contributions to humanity as a whole, it seems illogical to assume his motives are all selfish.
Yeah, he’s not doing it for personal gain or profit or anything like that
Hahahaha…..hahahahaha…..Let me guess, you think the DOGE numbers are accurate too for ‘savings’….hahahahaha
RIP Tracy Difillippo
https://obituaries.reviewjournal.com/obituary/tracy-difillippo-1092713829
Wow, this is really sad. I haven’t spoken to Tracy for quite some time. She was so young. What happened?
there is a mention on the Armstrong Teasdale of a memorial on Thursday. Some of these before their time passings are hitting me a bit.
I saw something mentioned about a long battle with cancer and heard it was colon cancer, but not 100% sure on details.