Today, the Supreme Court decided Boumediene v. Bush, affirming that terrorist suspects held in Guantanamo Bay have the right to file habeas petitions in federal courts. The case arose from a habeas petition made on behalf of Lakhdar Boumedine who was being held as an enemy combatant at Guantanamo Bay.
Majority: Kennedy, Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg, and Souter
Dissent: Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito
Sources: Reuters, SCOTUSblog
More information: Oyez, SCOTUSwiki: amicus briefs
A low average cost of education doesn’t always translate to less debt on graduation. For example, although SMU has the highest average cost of education of all law schools in Texas, graduates from SMU carry less debt on average than graduates at Baylor and St. Mary’s. Similarly, Texas Wesleyan has the third highest cost of education, yet Wesleyan graduates have the second lowest average debt. Meanwhile St. Mary’s, which has the fourth lowest average cost of education, has the highest average debt on graduation of all Texas law schools.
Some schools have lower average debt because of generous scholarship programs. Driving down the average debt on graduation at SMU are over $5 million in scholarships given out each year. Other schools have lower average debt because many of their students are employed while in law school. For example, at Texas Wesleyan, over half of the law students attend part-time, allowing students to pay a greater portion of their law school expenses as they go. This explains why Texas Wesleyan students have one of the lowest average debt burdens on graduation despite being one of the most expensive law schools in Texas.
While most law students are not able to maintain full-time jobs and attend school at the same time, students can maximize their chances of getting a scholarship by applying to schools where their LSAT and GPA scores are well above the school’s median.
The Debt to Earnings ratio is a measure of how much debt the average law student acquires for every dollar they earn their first year out of law school. Since the D/E ratio reflects the amount of debt acquired, the lower the D/E ratio is, the better.
The D/E ratio overcomes one of the limitations of the C/E ratios: artificially inflated costs of education. Since students can only qualify for loans up to the school’s published cost of education, many schools inflate the COE so that students who need extra money are able to qualify for loans. Since D/E ratios reflect loans that were actually awarded, the ratios closely track the expenses that exceed the average student’s ability to pay out of pocket. While neither the D/E or C/E ratio alone can answer the question of what law school is best for a student, both metrics provide an interesting look at factors that law students should consider as they decide which school to attend.
University of Texas law students, on average, get the most bang for their law school buck. There are only two other schools in Texas where students make more in their first year than they spend in law school: the University of Houston and Texas Tech. At the other end of the spectrum, Baylor and Texas Wesleyan graduates have to work for nearly two years before they can recoup their law school expenses.
The cost/earnings ratio (C/E ratio) reflects how much every dollar earned by a first-year associate cost the associate over the course of their law school career. Since C/E ratios reflect the cost of going to law school, the lower the C/E ratio is, the better. The Return Ratio is the inverse of the C/E ratio, and it reflects the how much each dollar expended in law school is worth on graduation.
While these numbers don’t reflect opportunity costs, the time value of money, or the cost of borrowing the money, they do offer an interesting glimpse into the economics of attending law school, and help in determining which schools offer the “best deals.”
Interestingly, higher cost/earnings ratios don’t translate directly to higher debt/earnings ratio. The D/E ratios, which I will discuss later this week, provide a better sense of the average cost of attending law school for students who use student loans to finance their education.
Sources and Assumptions: All the data used reflects 2007 figures, since that is the most recent year that a complete data set was available. Data sources include the school websites, Princeton Review, and U.S. News and World Reports.
Continuing on the theme of whether going to law school is worth it, here is a look at the average starting salaries for Texas law school graduates, as originally published by The Princeton Review Best 170 Law Schools, 2008 Edition. (The average starting salary for Texas Southern graduates was not included in the article.)
|
Law School
|
Average Starting Salary |
| Texas Wesleyan University School of Law |
$57,497 |
| St. Mary’s University School of Law |
$65,431 |
| Texas Tech University School of Law |
$68,800 |
| Baylor University School of Law |
$74,247 |
| South Texas College of Law |
$78,000 |
| University of Houston Law Center |
$85,215 |
| SMU Dedman School of Law |
$87,700 |
| University of Texas |
$101,111 |
(Click for full-size image.)
Nationally, Columbia topped the list with an average starting salary of $145,000. Duke, Michigan, Northwestern, and Chicago rounded out the top five schools, each coming in at $135,000.
To put the Texas salaries into perspective, making $75,000 in Austin is comparable to making $160,000 in Manhattan.
In response to my survey of starting salaries for entry level positions at district attorney’s offices around Texas, one of my readers wrote in asking whether it was worth going through three years of law school to become a prosecutor. I’m posting my answer here so that others can add their thoughts and comments on the subject.
First off, congratulations on getting into law school. You are in for the ride of your life!
To answer your question on whether it’s worth becoming a prosecutor, my answer is that it depends on what you are looking for.
Why become a prosecutor?
1. Experience - As a prosecutor, you will gain valuable experience from day one, that you Big Law colleagues will not get for a number of years. While they are stuck doing doc reviews, you will be trying cases. Regardless of whether you decide to remain a prosecutor or not, having a few years of trial experience under your belt will be a great asset.
2. Money - Sure, I just got done saying you’ll only make a fraction of what your big-firm classmates will be making, but the money will work itself out. There is a loan forgiveness program in place that will forgive your outstanding loan in ten years if you are doing public service work. Fortunately, public service work is defined liberally and does include prosecuting. Some prosecutors become defense attorneys later in their careers. With great contacts and extensive trial experience, they attract wealthy clientele. I know a number of Big Law attorneys who started off as prosecutors.
3. Work-Life Balance - This is a real hot topic among lawyers right now. Big firm pay means big firm billables. 2,100 hours in billables sound like a lot? Just wait till you discover how many hours young associates work (www.abanet.org/careercounsel/billable/toolkit/bhcomplete.pdf) in order to bill one hour. While a prosecutor puts in long hours, the hours are considerably fewer than that of most associates at large law firms. They also get national holidays off, great benefits, and for most, sick time and vacation time that accrues each year, so you can save up a couple of years worth (or a career’s worth) and then take one fantastically-long, paid-vacation!
4. Intrinsic Value – There is a great sense of satisfaction in being a representative of the people, and walking into court and saying that you are “present and ready on behalf of the State, your honor.” Prosecutors are an integral part of the community and the legal system. There are few jobs that can compare to the satisfaction that being a prosecutor can bring.
Your friends who claim that becoming a prosecutor isn’t worth it may have their hearts in the right place, but they are overlooking the fact that prosecutors aren’t in it for the money. It’s a calling. It’s also important to remember that while some of your peers will graduate making upwards of $120,000, many more won’t.
I would suggest spending at least one half of a summer working for a district attorney’s office to see if you like it. Your school will also be able to tell you if they have externships with state or federal prosecutors, or if they have a criminal prosecution clinic. I would also suggest taking part in mock trial or moot court competitions at your school and trying out for the state or national teams.
Good luck!
Update: For more information on loan forgiveness, check out my post on the CCRAA.
The Texas Supreme Court upheld the court of appeals decision, agreeing that the removal of the FLDS children was not warranted. The Court pointed out that there are numerous measures available to the district court to protect the children short of separating them from their parents, such as issuing temporary restraining orders, or removing the alleged perpetrators.
The full opinion is available here.
The new iPhone is set to be unveiled in less than two weeks. Here are the top new features of the second generation iPhone:
1. Browse Westlaw and Lexis Faster: 3G Connectivity
The new iPhone will run on a “3G” or third-generation network. While that translates to speeds of up to 42 Mbps, (think ten times faster than DSL or Cable), here in the United States, we likely see only a fraction of that. Initially, we will see speeds approaching the speed of your home DSL or cable connection. By the end of
the year, speeds should increase five-fold. Even at the lower speeds though, the improvement over the current offering will be dramatic, and you will finally be able to access Westlaw or Lexis on your iPhone without waiting five minutes for a page to load. It will also mean you will be able to upload large documents and multimedia files quickly. Fortune reports that only 73% of the 3G network is currently in place, but AT&T is quickly rolling about the remainder of the network.
2. When You Can’t Be There in Person: Video-conferencing
The increase in speeds will allow the new iPhones to run full-fledged video conferences, something that the current model is not natively capable of. There are also rumors that the new iPhone may have a front-facing camera to support video-conferencing.
3. Getting Where You Need to Go: GPS
The new iPhone will have turn-by-turn GPS directions. The current model triangulates you position by using cell phone towers, but it can’t really pinpoint your position, it only gives you a rough idea of where you are. This new feature will allow you to get rid of yet another gadget: your GPS device, adding to list of things your iPhone replaces: your GPS device, you phone, and of course, your mp3 player.
Unfortunately, the iPhone is still only available for AT&T. (Sprint users should check out the upcoming Sprint Instinct, which offers many similar features.) The new iPhone is an exciting addition to the Apple family and Apple expects over ten million units to be sold.
Photo: Engagdet
–
Update: Here is Steve Job’s keynote presentation squeezed into one minute.
The ABA Journal has published a must-read excerpt from Justice Scalia’s new book.
The Brief:
The Argument
Never tell prepared jokes. They almost invariably bomb. In Roe v. Wade, an assistant attorney general for the state of Texas, who was arguing against two women lawyers, led with what he probably considered courtly Southern humor:
“Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the court, it’s an old joke, but when a man argues against two beautiful ladies like this, they’re going to have the last word.”
No one laughed. Onlookers said that during an embarrassing silence, Chief Justice Burger scowled at the advocate.
The unduly accommodating lawyer—a frequently observed creature, especially in appellate courts—has given away many a case.
Read the entire excerpt here.
After promising to never release her tax records even if she became first lady, Cindy McCain released the first two pages of her tax returns today. Her gross income came in at over $6 million in 2006 and she paid over $1.7 million in taxes. While John McCain made less than 5% of that amount, Cindy McCain’s fortune comes largely from her inheritance in the nation’s third-largest beer distributor, Anheuser-Busch. She also controls the McCain family portfolio, which is estimated to be worth between $36.6 million and $53.4 million.
Yesterday, in In re Sara Steed, et al., the Texas Court of Appeals at Austin ruled that, in the case of the children of the thirty-eight mothers represented in the case, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services failed to show that there was an “immediate danger to the physical health or safety of the children.”
Prior to removing children from their homes, section 262.201 of the Texas Family Code requires a showing that (1) that there was a danger to the physical health or safety of their children, (2) that there was an urgent need for protection of the children that required the immediate removal of the children from their parents, or (3) that the Department made reasonable efforts to eliminate or prevent the children’s removal from their parents. As the court noted, the extreme measure of allowing removal of children before litigating these issues is only allowed when “the circumstances indicate a danger to the physical health and welfare of the children and the need for protection of the children is so urgent that immediate removal of the children from the home is necessary.”
In this case, while there was a showing that at least twenty females had become pregnant between the ages of thirteen and seventeen, the Department conceded that teenage pregnancy, by itself, was not a reason to remove children from their homes.
While the Department asserted there was reason to believe children were sexually abused at the ranch, the Department primarily relied on the “pervasive belief system” of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (”FLDS”) that it was acceptable to marry and procreate with females as soon as they reached puberty, and that such a “pervasive belief system pose[d] a danger to children.” However section 262.201(b)(1) requires the existence of a danger to the physical health or safety of the child before removal. The Department was unable to provide evidence, other than the pervasive belief system, that there was danger to pre-pubescent children. There was no evidence of sexual abuse outside of the females identified as having become pregnant before the age of seventeen. There was also no evidence of physical abuse.
The court held that there mere existence of the FLDS belief system did not put the children at the ranch in physical danger. The risk that “children raised in this particular environment m[ight] someday have their physical health and safety threatened” was not enough the meet the legislative threshold that the danger be so immediate and urgent that it warrants removal prior to full litigation.
The Department of Family and Protective Services has not made any statements on whether or not it will appeal this decision.
Update: 5/23/08: The ABA Journal reports that the decision will be appealed to the Texas Supreme Court.
