My email has been stuffed with queries on the Simovicic-McIntyre (S&M) study on the value of a law degree. I like data and empirical findings, so I appreciate the contribution of the S&M study. If the composition of the U.S. and global economy did not change over time, giving rise to new industries and marginalizinng others, I would be willing to say that S&M authored the definitive study on the value of a JD degree.
That said, there are several trends lines that intersect with S&M’s historical sample that would make me reluctant to generalize too far into the future. And isn’t that the real issue here? If the legal industry of the last 20 years is going to be similar to the legal industry of the last 20 years, then S&M’s study is a reliable guide to the value of a law degree.
But is the past-as-prologue assumption a sound one? Below are four trend lines that give me pause.
Trend 1: The legal sector grew rapidly from the late 1970s to the mid-2000s
Scholars at the American Bar Foundation conducted two seminal studies on the Chicago bar based on large representatives samples of lawyers draw in 1975 (Chicago Lawyers I) and 1995 (Chicago Lawyers II). The big takeaway from the Chicago Lawyers I study was that the profession was divided into two hemispheres, one serving individuals and small businesses and the other serving organizations (mostly corporations). See Heinz & Laumann (1982).
When the study was replicated in 1995, the researchers found that the “hemisphere” label no longer applied, as 2/3 of Chicago lawyers were not working for organizational clients. It was not the personal services sector had shrink — it grew in rough proportion to the Chicagoland population. Rather, the corporate side of the business had grown dramatically, leading to large real income gains for corporate law firms. See Heinz et al., Urban Lawyers (2006).
The trendlines captured by the Chicago Lawyers I and II studies are entirely consistent with a graph created by Marc Galanter in his 2006 “The Plant of the APs” article in the Buffalo Law Review:
As shown as the chart above, from at least the late 19070s to the early 2000s, legal services were growing as a percentage of U.S. GDP. Drawing upon the findings of the Chicago Lawyers I and II studies, it is likely that the overwhelming driver in the growth of law jobs — and legal income — was work for relatively large businesses. The trend line reflected above is not normal — its extraordinary. Lawyers (mostly corporate lawyers) are getting a proportionately bigger slice of a growing pie.
Below is another data point that corroborates the extraordinary nature of the last 30+ years. It is a chart (generated by Bruce MacEwen of Adam Smith, Esq) that shows the number of lawyers working in NLJ 250 law firms versus incoming 1Ls and outgoing JDs. Remember, the blue and red lines are supply that is ostensibly glutting the legal job market. The upward trajectory of BigLaw was a boon to law schools. Yet, is itreasonable to think the green line will go on forever at that same slope?
Trend 2: Over the Last Decade, Jobs in Private Practice have Either Stagnated or Declined
Well, the green line has indeed flattened out. Below is a chart that will be published in the August issue of the NALP Bulletin. Thanks to data provided by NALP, I was able to calculate the number of summer associate jobs at firms that appear in the NALP Directory of Legal Employers — roughly 600 law firms throughout the U.S. I compared 2002 to 2012 because I wanted reference points that got us beyond the great Great Reset of 2008.
As shown above, over the last decade, the volume of the most lucrative entry level jobs have been cut in half. Because the displaced students have relatively shor
business clientele. the legal profession. It was this relative prosperity that made law school an attractive career option for so many college graduates.
am skeptical. last 20 years is goinrofession of the last 20
Early on in my academic career, one of my statistics mentors warned me to not let statistics get in the way of clear thinking. “Use it as a tool for thinking,” he said, “never a replacement.” Specifically, look at all available evidence and apply Occam’s Razor to formulate the simplest possible explanation that consistent that widest swath of data points.
The S&M study is a data point. To my mind, it willAfter reading S&M’s study,