Case for More Lawyers

People often complain that there are too many lawyers. I would make the argument we don’t have enough lawyers. What I mean by this is that occupational licensing restricts the number of lawyers than there otherwise would be. According to the American Bar Association in 1963 there were 135 law schools with around 9,600 people getting law degrees. By 2009, the number of law schools increased to 200 yet there were over 44,000 law degrees awarded. One could argue that the number of law schools has increased by not at the rate of law schools being awarded. Four times as many law degrees are being awarded yet there hasn’t even been a doubling in the number of law schools. From 2009-2010 the attrition rate for all law schools was 9%. This means that 91% of first year law students stayed in school.

Nearly all law students take the same classes. Anyone that goes to law school has to take contracts, torts, criminal law, property, and other courses. Usually in a graduate degree program you can specialize in a certain area. For instance, for an MBA people can choose to have a concentration in Finance, Marketing, Management or whatever the school offers. Law school is just a general degree stating you have completed the courses and passed them.

In my industry there are estate planners who have to go to law school. Some people can claim they do estate planning, however estate planners are the people that usually write wills, create trusts, and will show up to court if there are any problems with the estate. However, estate planners may only have one or perhaps two courses on estate planning in law school yet in theory these should be the only one or two courses people need to become an estate attorney. There probably is some background knowledge you might need before the course, but I seriously doubt three years is needed. Lawyers might be overeducated because they take one time courses that they never use again. In a way this is like college, where you take many classes yet very few are actually used in your job. One explanation as to why colleges and law schools do this is to help students discover what they want to do.

The American Bar Association (ABA) creates a cartel by deciding if a law school can become a law school. Of course they have an incentive to restrict the number of law schools. If the ABA can restrict the number of law schools they can restrict the number of lawyers which increases their value. The ABA is claims it is voluntary I don’t know of any school that isn’t ABA accredited. In order to sit for the bar exam you have to attend a ABA accredited school. So even if there were ABA schools it would be worthless since in order to become a lawyer you have to pass the bar. California allows anyone to take the bar exam which might help explain why the pass rate is between 35-55%. There was a documentary I saw just about the bar in California called “A Lawyer Walks into the Bar”. One guy in the documentary had taken and failed the bar 41 times. Apparently, anyone that goes to University of Wisconsin doesn’t even have to take the bar and graduates are ready to practice law. I really don’t think people need three years of courses to practice law. Especially considering there are many different types of law. In my own state of Texas there are around 24 areas lawyers can practice in. It would be make more sense to offer degrees in these instead of law school.

One show that has destroyed this whole notion of needing a law degree is “Suits” on U.S.A. The show is about a young guy who has never been to law school yet knows all the laws because he has studied law books and has a photographic memory. Current law is based off previous law or precedent. If we let anyone who wanted to become a law school there would be more lawyers which would not only drive down the price of lawyers, but allow more people to get legal education. Some people now may go into other fields because they are rejected or because law school is too expensive. By allowing anyone to establish a law school it will increase the supply of lawyers.

The laws of supply and demand are always in motion. I have a feeling the ABA will continue to maintain their cartel like status given so many politicians and legislatures are lawyers. However, everyone would benefit if we allowed anyone to become a lawyer.

Dead Children Make Bad Laws That Don't Make Us Safer

A week or so ago America (most American mothers) were outraged when they heard the verdict of the Casey Anthony trial. The prosecutors didn’t have any evidence that Casey Anthony killed her child. People seemed to think the Florida jurors lost their minds. However, I believe Americans are suffering from a fallacy of presumption. The burden of proof is beyond reasonable doubt which means that the jury has to be 90% sure that Casey Antony killed her daughter. I don’t the reason people got upset was because no one really believed a mother would not report her own daughters’ murder while partying in the meantime. There is no doubt however that the odds of Casey Anthony getting arrested for something completely unrelated to this are high.


Now people in Florida want to create a new law called Caylee’s Law which would make it criminal if a parent did not report their children missing to the authorities within 24 hours. Parents would even be guilty if it turns out their child wasn’t even harmed. The problem that might occur is innocent parents would be penalized even if it wasn’t their own fault. If kids decided to sneak out of the house and stay at with a friend the parents would still get in trouble. Should police really be concerned with this when there are must more serious crimes being committed. Advocate groups who I have no doubt have the best of intentions don’t realize the law of unintended consequences. For instance, laws intended for sexual offenders like Megan’s Law and the Adam Walsh may have the best of intentions but the data begs to differ. For instance, the recidivism rate for Michigan was 3.5% for registered sexual offenders. The other 96.5% are first time offenders with no prior felonies or sexually related crimes. A study in New Jersey showed that these types of laws had little effect to decreasing the amount of sexually offenses. Sarah’s Law had similar consequences. The reoffender rate over a 6 year period was only 8.5%. So in essence the vast majority of sexual offenders are very unlikely to commit the same crime again. The punch line really is all of these laws have not made kids any safer yet have probably made everyone else less safe. People in media might make you believe that children are snatched up randomly from crazy people but the chances of a victim knowing their offender are pretty good. Sexual offenses are horrible. However, what about other crimes people commit like murder, burglary, arson etc? Instead of enforcing these laws I would much rather spend more time and energy enforcing existing laws that prevent people from harming one another. Tradeoffs do exist. People have to understand perfection is not for this world or this lifetime.