Thursday, December 5, 2013

ABA Laying Down the Authority on Rutgers-Camden

One of the first rules of admissions-slutdom is that if you can find a way around those pesky "take the LSAT" or "earn a college degree" requirements to get yourself more action, you do it.  Law schools are, in many ways, like horny college guys.

Between 2006 and 2012, the [Rutgers-Camden] admitted dozens of students who took tests other than the LSAT. In 2009, the [ABA] sent a memo to all accredited law schools clarifying its policy requiring the LSAT, except with prior arrangement.
But Rutgers-Camden continued to admit students who did well on other tests.
If you're a "real lawyer," ignoring bar association admonitions might cause trouble.  But this is a fucking law school.  And did they benefit?
That amounted to fewer than 80 students between 2006 and 2010...
Heh.  "Fewer than..."  And the punishment for this creative practice?
Rutgers-Camden has been fined $25,000, and a public censure document is posted on both the bar association's website and at the bottom of the law school's home page.
But...but...that's, like, part a student's tuition!  For ignoring rules and admitting almost 70-80 students!  How totally unfair!

Face the facts, scambloggers:  ABA is basically gumming the law schools.  A public censure document, oh no!  Like any 0L is actually smart enough to read public censure documents.

And why did they admit people without the LSAT? Was it a nefarious plot to cut out LSAT fat and preserve rankings?
"It was not related to rankings at all. We reported every LSAT we had . . . we did this to round out the class, and to identify qualified people who decided to come to law school after the May registration, for the most part," [Dean Rayman] Solomon said.
Rayman, you're all right.


  1. Compared to many of things law schools have done this seems very minor. Why hasn't the ABA sanctioned law schools who have submitted false student-faculty ratios? Why hasn't the ABA sanctioned law schools that misrepresented their job placement figures? Why hasn't the ABA sanctioned law schools that have employed their own graduates for a few months just to move up in the us news rankings? Why hasn't the ABA sanctioned law schools who have used deceptive merit scholarships (bait and switch)? Why hasn't the ABA sanctioned law schools who started night programs just so that they had more scholarship money for day students?

  2. I agree. There are so many questionable law school practices. Why did the ABA pick this one to punish?

    1. I would presume because it's easy and in black-and-white. It's how far too many cops, prosecutors, and regulatory bodies operate. Including the bar.

  3. The American Bar Association cockroaches had to "take a stand" on something, and show that they are not to be trifled with by their member schools/dung pits. The politicians on these ABA commiTTTTTees are not any different than their spiritual kin in elected office, i.e. committees are formed, hearings held (for show), perfunctory research performed, meaningless recommendations, and lukewarm reports issued months later.

  4. The problem is that the ABA has been captured by the wrongdoers. This is like Washington and Lee clearing its own law school of impropriety in counting applications.

  5. Fascinating article. I hadn't heard of this one before. When one avenue of cheating gets cut off the scam deans find another one.

  6. Do you think the ABA will do anything about this? Ha ha

  7. Correction. The article was about the University in general not about the law school.