…I’ve never seen quite such a blatant example as the op-ed by attorney Mark Greenbaum in today’s LA Times which suggests that we need to throttle back law school accreditation to keep the revenues of those in profession high.
…the problem can be traced to the American Bar Assn., which continues to allow unneeded new schools to open and refuses to properly regulate the schools, many of which release numbers that paint an overly rosy picture of employment prospects for their recent graduates. There is a finite number of jobs for lawyers, and this continual flood of graduates only suppresses wages. Because the ABA has repeatedly signaled its unwillingness to adapt to this changing reality, the federal government should consider taking steps to stop the rapid flow of attorneys into a marketplace that cannot sustain them.
Ah, the attitudes of the Ottoman Empire. Where every pasha and wali could know that the office they had dearly bought would be profitable.
In case you ever wonder why the legal system seems to do such a bad job of defending markets…ask no further.
–
I just did a quick and very cursory google, and found recent articles that describe a shortage of public defenders in Missouri, Minnesota, Kansas, Georgia, Nevada, Michigan and Tennessee. And I doubt that Los Angeles County, for example, has too many of these sturdy folk.
Can’t afford to be a public defender because of your six-figure debt and your oozing sense of entitlement? Then let us dis-accredit Harvard and Ann Arbor, and force people to attend decent state schools that cost one fifth as much.
And of course, TORT REFORM would keep some of the sharks out of the pond.
Instead of going after small law schools, the ABA should disbar more scumbags. I think they make an honest effort, but they lack the enthusiasm of the Tonton Macoutes.
G.W. at #1: Before gettin’ snarky, figure out that the ABA can’t disbar anyone, scumbags or otherwise; they accredit law schools, not lawyers.
The individual states govern admission to practice lawin state courts; admission to Fed practice generally requires an admission to state practice.
They write the code that governs disbarment in every state except California. The California bar won’t adopt a code that bans attorney-client sex, because they like to screw their clients in the literal sense.
GW, at #3: wrong again. ABA wrote the model ethics rules; (i.e., “Don’t do X”) how they’re enforced, and the remedies that are applied for violating ’em, (“If you do x, then the following things happen, and by x, we mean x(1), but not x(2)”) vary widely from state to state.
Someone else please explain GW the nuances of the differences between the Cal. State Rules of Professional Responsibility and the ABA model rules to Glen, who apparently thinks they have primarily to do with sex with clients. Actually, California has a rule addressing the issue.
Greenbaum’s piece was dumb; GW’s response largely knee-jerk. I’m done responding to this sorta nonsense for the day; gotta go sweep up the living room…
Are you sure about that? I think in California the rules about that are made by local pimps.
Is there any profession better at creating useless work for itself than the legal one?
I’d be more worried about too many lawyers creating jobs for themselves, than worried about too many lawyers going hungry.
Where every pasha and wali could know that the office they had dearly bought would be profitable.
This would be OK if there wasn’t such a severe shortage of bowstrings.
I can’t stop weeping for the plight of thewse these poor fellows.
Lawyers who graduate law school should earn the minimum wage for the first 5 years. Lawyers who obtain their education in the manner of Abraham Lincoln would be exempt from the wage provision.
Prosecutors who commit legal/ethical violations to obtain convictions should be punished with the same sentence that would have been imposed on the defendant they were prosecuting, regardless of the guilt of the defendant.