On Legal Education

10 years ago I was starting my senior year of college and trying to figure out where and how I would be going to law school. One thing was certain - I knew I had to go to law school if I wanted to practice law. But, as this AP piece points out (linked from the Detroit Free Press), that's not the case in a few states. In those states, people may still take the bar exam if they get their legal training by "reading law." Basically, to "read law" is to be an apprentice with some lawyer and learn more by doing that by endlessly blathering in class. Sort of like home schooling, but on a higher level (and without that Bible-thumping). For about 100 years after the founding of the US that was the main way new lawyers were trained. By the late 19th century, however, the law school model had pretty firmly taken hold.

And for those of us who go to law school, it's a given that it will take three years. But lots of people question the value of the third year of law school, leading to this week's debate over at the Legal Affairs Debate Club as to whether that third year should be abolished. I wouldn't do away with it completely, but it could be overhauled at most schools to focus on practical lawyering skills and issues. Of course, I'm a bit of a freak because I actually liked law school, so maybe I'm wrong about that.