1/ I adapted my Original Jurisdiction story about Yale Law, Harvard Law, and other top law schools defecting from the U.S. News rankings for @Slate (with thanks to @rebeccaonion for the excellent editing).
2/ Given Slate's audience, which is broader and more diverse than Original Jurisdiction's audience of legal-industry insiders, this piece has less Yale Law School "inside baseball" (as fun as it might be), and more in the way of broader reflections.
3/ After 4 days, we're at 6 law schools out of @usnews:
4/ As I write in my @Slate piece, I think it could be a good thing if many of the so-called "top 14" schools defect from the U.S. News rankings.
Because the T14 were almost always the same, the rankings weren't telling applicants much about these schools.
5/ "Having the T14 schools troop off to a kind of U.S. News Valhalla or Hall of Fame, while having the remaining institutions remain in the system, could be a good interim situation, allowing legal academia to assess the effect of this partial opt-out."
6/ "The U.S. News rankings have been a fixture in the world of legal education for more than 30 years, so it might not be a bad idea to run a real-world experiment and see what happens when some but not all schools defect."
7/ I took a Twitter poll the other day, asking how long it would take for the rest of the drop out of the @usnews rankings.
More than 50% said it would happen in a month or less, but more than a third said "never."
8/ I have come around to "never" bc I think @UChicagoLaw won't drop out of @usnews—based in part on Chicago alums who tell me their alma mater is "ride or die" with the rankings.
9/ In several ways (e.g., its weird grading system), Chicago charts its own path—and is proud of it. It's also proud of its rigor and accountability.
I think @UChicagoLaw might even issue a statement explaining why they're staying in @usnews despite flaws.
10/ Also, I suspect @UChicagoLaw is annoyed that @Harvard_Law has defected from the rankings, just as Chicago was starting to overtake HLS (as it did in the latest rankings, with Chicago at #3 and Harvard tied with Columbia for #4).
11/ If the T14 schools "troop off to U.S. News Valhalla," as I write in my piece, that basically "freezes" the status quo—good for some schools, less good for others.
For example, it's good for HLS, to the extent it was threatened by Chicago.
12/ It's good for @GeorgetownLaw, the one member of the T14 that sometimes wound up outside the T14, every few years.
It's bad for rising schools like Chicago, trying to wrest T3 status from HLS, and UCLA/WashU/BU/Texas/Vanderbilt, on the cusp of T14 status.
13/ Not surprisingly, schools that have been knocking on the T14 door told @anemonanyc and @ElizaFawcett of the @nytimes that they are sticking with U.S. News for now.
14/ As I wrote in my post, the @usnews rankings have far more utility outside the T14, where they can capture significant, long-term improvement (or decline)—e.g., the rise of schools like @georgemasonlaw or @PeppLaw.
15/ But @usnews wasn't offering applicants much value as to the T14, other than saying, "These schools are consistently good, year after year—if you get in and want to practice law, you should probably go!"
16/ So I think it's good that some but not all T14 law schools are opting out of the @usnews rankings.
It will be an enlightening, real-world experiment to show what happens when some but not all schools defect.
17/ And look, if the "market" punishes Yale Law or Harvard Law for leaving U.S. News, they can always rejoin; this isn't irreversible.
As I pointed out in my post, HLS opted out of the rankings the first year, then changed its mind after placing poorly (#5).
18/ None of this is irreversible. So I think it's fine to try this out & let the market send the law schools a message.
The message might be "your brand is strong enough that you don't need @usnews." Or it might be "you need @usnews more than they need you."
19/ Here are thoughts from @UChicagoLaw alum @tedfrank, who urges Chicago Law to seize the opportunity presented by other top law schools dropping out of the U.S. News rankings.
20/ I agree with @tedfrank's point that the law school admissions landscape could change dramatically if #SCOTUS rules against racial preferences in education (as I predict it will—see my story below).
21/ Also note that the ABA is seriously considering making the LSAT optional for law schools (see @Karen_Sloan1 piece below). This could help law schools maintain racial/ethnic diversity even if they must give up racial preferences.
The addition to the team of an experienced #SCOTUS advocate like Sopan Joshi is another sign of how seriously the DOJ is taking the Mar-a-Lago matter.👇
1/ Katherine Magbanua’s testimony this afternoon in her retrial for the murder of Dan Markel did not go well for her (especially compared to the first trial).
2/ At the first trial, I think the prosecution might have been surprised by Katie Magbanua’s decision to testify—understandably so, given all the evidence against her—and so the prosecution was caught a little flat-footed.
3/ This time around, the prosecution came prepared. Sarah Dugan did a very good job at cross-examining Katie Magbanua, whose demeanor was not as good this time compared to trial #1.
Why not send gun regulation back to the states—an approach that conservatives and federalists support for so many other issues (e.g., abortion)?
3/ Gun control is the quintessential issue where views will vary from state to state.
What business does it have being in the U.S. Constitution? Why shouldn't states be able to reflect the views of their citizens, free from federal constitutional constraint?
2/ Yes, it's a huge breach of #SCOTUS confidentiality, unlike anything I've seen in my 25 years of following and writing about the Court. (And it's a huge scoop for @alexbward and @joshgerstein of @Politico; whoever leaked to them put a lot on the line.)
3/ Please note: my post is about the leak itself, not the substance of the opinion or underlying issue of abortion.
For a reader's guide to the opinion, here's one by @EdWhelanEPPC, with page references to different sections:
1/ I realize @ProfDBernstein is speaking tongue in cheek, but I do like how district judges sometimes share draft dispositions with the parties and let them point out factual errors, analytical issues, and the like. #SCOTUS#appellatetwitter
I do think this presents some logistical challenges, including crazy lobbying after the release of initial drafts in controversial cases, but it's an interesting thought experiment.