I'd like to know what their undergraduate majors were and whether any can speak a single foreign language. The ones that have made it to the SCOTUS seem ignorant of science, math and engineering, and, as far as I know, speak only English. Scalia, for example, is "challenged" even in his native language.

I often think we'd get more justice from an Istanbul taxi driver than from any on the SCOTUS.

There has been a slight drop-off in female enrollment in the past few years (compared to 2001-2003, when it reached a local maximum of 49% of the total, and 1992-93, when women made up slightly more than half of all law students).

The '92-'93 stat doesn't make much sense, as women never represented more than 42% of the 1Ls in the three previous years.

There are far too many lawyers, we need to tighten the admission standards, as I said when walking away from my own swearing-in. (I actually said it, BTW).

How is this cool? When do we have enough lawyers?

When supply and demand say so. Which is probably a brain-exploding paradox to those who usually bitch about the raw number of lawyers in practice.

Adam K

When you create your own market, how is cool to say that supply and demand satisfy your demands?

Lawyer: (n.) someone who learned to read and submitted to the guild initiation ritual.

I'm partial to this definition from The Devil's Dictionary.

LAW, n.

Once Law was sitting on the bench,
And Mercy knelt a-weeping.
"Clear out!" he cried, "disordered wench!
Nor come before me creeping.
Upon your knees if you appear,
'Tis plain your have no standing here."

Then Justice came. His Honor cried:
"Your status? -- devil seize you!"
"Amica curiae," she replied --
"Friend of the court, so please you."
"Begone!" he shouted -- "there's the door --
I never saw your face before!"

Lawyer: (n.) someone who learned to read and submitted to the guild initiation ritual.

Some of the latter is difficult. Such as showing you can speak coherently while at a .20 blood alcohol level.

Could do that before law school. Can I just skip my third year?

"We're the new priesthood, baby! We're coming out, guns blazing!"

- Al Pacino in "The Devil's Advocate," on the swelling number of students in law school

When supply and demand say so.

Well if you look at the starting salaries in the trade (face it, it really isn't a profession), or even median (not average) incomes, of attorneys, it is obvious that there is very relationship between the market and demand for attorneys. I bet you can pick any ABA accredited law school in the country and you will find a starting salary range from somewhere less than $30,000 (in some parts of the country) to approaching $200,000. And the range will be most extreme at the most prestigious schools.

And you would have us believe that the market is at work in setting the demand for lawyers?

I once was in a small town and the mayor quipped to me. "You know what they say about lawyers in a small town: If you have one, he starves to death, if you have two, they both get rich."

A statistic not reported on is how many law graduates practice law either initially or throughout their careers. In particular, how many of the nearly half of law students who are women spend their careers in practice. I have no figures, but I do know of a substantial number of women who have graduated from law school (sometimes with honors) who spend only a short time in practice. Others practice law only intermittently or on a part time basis. The same may be true for some men, but I suspect to a lesser extent.

There are many reasons why some law graduates spend little if any time in law as a career. At least some of the women I've known have abandoned law for family reasons, and I suppose some of them will return to practice at a later date (although probably not in high profile positions such as working for a major firm).

In any event one can argue that learning about the law, even if one doesn't want to practice, is still a worthwhile intellectual activity, just as learning about History, Anthropology or Medieval Art can be worthwhile even for someone who doesn't want to pursue those fields professionally. A great deal of the content of current affairs involves law, sometimes centrally, sometimes tangentially, and having some expertise in law is useful in terms of understanding the world today.

In any event one can argue that learning about the law, even if one doesn't want to practice, is still a worthwhile intellectual activity

I would argue just the opposite, at least as law is taught and practiced in the United States. The law in this country has become a win at any costs sport where concepts like truth, the search for justice, or creating a better society are rarely considered. "Thinking like a lawyer" means taking a set a facts and no matter what the objective truth is, twisting it to present them in the manner that is most advantageous to your client, or if that is not possible, just wearing down the other side.

One thing about law school and lawyers that truly shocked me was how anti-intellectual most lawyers are.

There was a time when many college graduates majored in theology but, in modern times, law has become the preferred choice.

I'm not sure what you mean by "modern times", but this has been true since the late 1600s.

J.F. Thomas: So, what are you suggesting? That lawyers should break confidentiality when their clients do something that's not nice? That a lawyer should abandon a client at the moment where it seems that the lawyer might lose?

Keep in mind that "truth," the "search for justice," and a "better society" are all things that require the rule of law. What's worse: a society where police officers face no penalty for searching any person they please or a society where an occasional criminal goes free because we want to protect the rights of the majority law-abiding citizens?

Keep in mind that "truth," the "search for justice," and a "better society" are all things that require the rule of law.

But they are not things that require law to be practiced as it is in the United States or even, dare I say it, an adversarial justice system.

So, what are you suggesting? That lawyers should break confidentiality when their clients do something that's not nice? That a lawyer should abandon a client at the moment where it seems that the lawyer might lose?

This of course is not what I am suggesting at all. And that you apparently have no idea what I am talking about is just in an example of how warped our legal system is.

I think this one is more precient:

SATAN, n.
One of the Creator's lamentable mistakes, repented in sashcloth and axes. Being instated as an archangel, Satan made himself multifariously objectionable and was finally expelled from Heaven. Halfway in his descent he paused, bent his head in thought a moment and at last went back.

"There is one favor that I should like to ask," said he.

"Name it."

"Man, I understand, is about to be created. He will need laws."

"What, wretch! you his appointed adversary, charged from the dawn of eternity with hatred of his soul -- you ask for the right to make his laws?"

"Pardon; what I have to ask is that he be permitted to make them himself."

It was so ordered.

How is this cool? When do we have enough lawyers?


When supply and demand say so. Which is probably a brain-exploding paradox to those who usually bitch about the raw number of lawyers in practice.

But as most legislators are lawyers, they can and do stimulate demand by changing the market as well as promoting the belief that any and all disagreements, complaints, objections, and actions can and should be addressed in the courts. Is there any aspect of human behavior over which the law has no say?

I apologize for the double posting. My browser temporarily froze and I believed that the post had not gone through.