Even as the legal profession suffers and shrinks, while layoffs mount and titanic firms crumble, fresh legions of college students are applying to law school in unseen numbers. The logic is simple: the economy sucks now, so let’s wait it out in professional school until the storm passes. The newest excuse for law school matriculation is yet another in a long line of facile excuses to go to law school. Judgment is rendered on said excuses in the below Order of Court.
ORDER OF COURT
This matter comes before the court pursuant to several excuse-motions submitted by movant, dumb law school applicant (hereinafter “Applicant”).
AND NOW, upon consideration of the excuses raised by Applicant hitherto, in accordance with the determinations of the court as set forth herein, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that all excuses by Applicant be DENIED any validity, as they are stupid, naïve, and hopelessly idealistic:
To wit, Applicant offers the excuse that law school is the perfect place to wait out the economic crisis—moreover Applicant submits that by the time of the Juris Doctorate fait accompli four years hence, Applicant shall command a fat paycheck. However, Applicant’s excuse fails to consider that the road to gold is littered with peril:
Because law school matriculation is at a record high, and since there are now more unemployed attorneys than ever before, the glut of lawyers and lawyers-to-be will present an enormous obstacle to the “fat salary” Applicant desires. The much-discussed “bimodal distribution” of first-year compensation, whereby the salaries of incoming associates were seen to be distributed abnormally with prodigious spikes near $40,000 per annum and $140,000 per annum, might cede way to a flatter distribution—one with a unimodal distribution, a bigger trailing hump somewhere around, say, $0.
Moreover, because all parties expect this recession to be long and painful, a cost-conscious Corporate America will become less willing to pay for the ballooning allocation of capital for legal services. The bread-and-butter revenue raked in for years by BigLaw will become much harder to secure in the coming years.
Applicant’s undergraduate education in English and Communications, together with Applicant’s passion for reading and writing, laudable debate skills, and intellectual interest and involvement in political groups, lead Applicant to offer the excuse that an abiding love for the practice of law is a virtual certainty. This court laughs at such idiocy. Verily, most attorneys, especially the type of whom enjoy the level of salary Applicant expects, spend their careers mired in meaningless correspondence and statutory minutiae, beset by endless reams of paperwork—long days encumbered by a stress as stinging as the content is dull.
The court reprints a passage from an amicus curiae brief, submitted by one Tucker Max, Esquire: “Have you not stopped and thought about why they pay so much? Do you think it’s because the job is rewarding and fulfilling? Didn’t your parents ever tell you what it means when something looks too good to be true? … There is a reason that the legal profession has one of the lowest job satisfaction rankings of any profession in America. There is a reason that so many lawyers leave the legal field: Being a lawyer—especially a lawyer at the type of big corporate firm that pays so well— SUCKS.”
While the court admits that Applicant, given the state of the economy, does not have the unbridled freedom of yesteryear when choosing a career, the court contends that good alternative choices, even if not as potentially lucrative, abound and will continue to emerge.
The court excerpts from an additional amicus curiae brief, submitted by Philalawyer, Esquire: “You’re young. You’re debt free. You can afford to make a few mistakes trying out different careers. Cash those mulligans in now, while you can. The bad times will pass and if you keep looking, you’ll find a path that fits.”
WHEREFORE, upon consideration of the inane excuses repudiated herein, the court ORDERS and DECREES that Applicant’s facile justifications are not sufficient reasons to attend law school. Applicant may petition this honorable court for reconsideration once Applicant has worked in a legal job for no less than two (2) years, whenceforth Applicant can offer more informed excuse-motions for attending law school.
