Updated with 2026 seat deposit deadlines for all ABA-accredited law schools.
International students face unique challenges in the U.S. law school admissions process. This article presents an analysis of how top law schools treat international applicants, using data from the past three cycles, and explains what's new for 2024-25!
Being admitted off the waitlist is actually pretty simple—okay, not easy, but simple. There are really only three factors that law schools consider.
Submitting a LOCI is a necessary step in trying to get admitted off any waitlist—this blog will walk you through some key "dos" and "don'ts" to keep in mind while you're drafting yours.
Most applicants understand the basics of what it means to be waitlisted, but in this blog, we wanted to give a quick look at why and how law schools use their waitlists from an insider perspective, then outline the differences between a waitlist and a "hold" or a "hold tight email."
This comes from Joe Pollak, a consultant at our firm who took the time to look at schools' messaging and share his thoughts. Mike added a bit at the bottom.
Early in my admissions career, a former boss of mine would often use the following Niels Bohr quote when speaking of law school admissions: “prediction is difficult, especially when it involves the future.”
The waitlist is a tough place to be. It’s better than being rejected, but usually it’s tough to tell where you stand.
It's that time of year: waitlist movement time. Many first and second deposit deadlines have passed, and schools are starting the process of finalizing their entering 2019 classes. That's good news for thousands of nervous applicants who are sitting on waitlists anxiously hoping for news. Those of you who were around in the 2017-2018 cycle remember it as a summer of disappointment. The dramatic 7.9% increase in LSAT applicants in that cycle overwhelmed many schools unprepared for such drastic
In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Mike, joined by LSAT experts Graeme Blake and Ellen Cassidy, discusses the changes coming to the LSAT this August and the federal class-action lawsuit that LSAC is currently facing over CAS fees.
Graeme has been teaching the LSAT for over 15 years and is the founder of LSAT Hacks, and Ellen is the author of The Loophole in LSAT Logical Reasoning and founder of Elemental Prep.
The group discusses the specific changes that are being made to the LSAT starting with the August 2026 administration (2:09), whether the changes will result in fewer high scores and a leftward shifting of the LSAT score bell curve (8:26), what you should know about the changes being made to the LSAT test-taking interface (16:48), tips for individually customizing the new interface (25:01), the most difficult part of the modern LSAT (29:06), the questions of whether the Logical Reasoning section has gotten harder since the Logic Games section was removed (27:44) and whether the LSAT is getting harder in general (29:06), hopes for the future of the LSAT (31:52), and a discussion of the federal class-action lawsuit that LSAC is currently facing over CAS fees (38:04)—plus, the LSAT score threshold where you should probably stop retaking (14:30).
There have been two highly relevant updates since we recorded this episode:
First, the final changes to the new LSAT user interface were completed earlier this month. LSAC expects no further changes to be made this cycle.
Second, LSAC’s motion to dismiss the federal class-action lawsuit being brought against them in Risner v. Law School Admission Council, Inc. was denied, and the case will now move forward to discovery.
You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps below.
In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Legal Education Access Pipeline (LEAP) Founder & CEO, Cindy Lopez, joins us for a conversation with Paula Gluzman, Spivey’s Director of Diversity & Inclusion and a J.D. Admissions Consultant. Cindy is a retired career Deputy Attorney General for the State of California, served as Board President of a college access nonprofit for underserved young women, and founded LEAP in 2019. Paula is a former admissions officer at UCLA Law and the University of Washington Law, a former attorney, former law school career services professional, and has been an integral advisor for LEAP since its inception.
Cindy and Paula discuss LEAP, what it offers, and how it originated (2:35); Cindy’s story from applying to law school without help to a career as a California Deputy Attorney General to founding LEAP (12:59); advice for how to find a mentor (17:13), Cindy’s top three tips for how to be a good mentee (19:37), and the one question Paula always tells people to ask their mentors (21:15); how Cindy has seen admissions change in the wake of the 2023 Supreme Court decision in Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard (22:42); the funding challenges that LEAP is facing under the new administration in a changing political climate (28:40); what gives Cindy hope in a time when diversity efforts in higher education are under attack (30:50); Cindy’s best advice for prospective law students today (35:00); and the importance of having fun and celebrating your wins (37:18).
You can find more information about LEAP, including eligibility criteria, application information, and volunteer opportunities, here.
You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps below.
In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Mike has a conversation with Orin Kerr, a prominent law professor and legal academic who currently serves as a Professor of Law at Stanford Law School and a Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution. In his 25+ years as a law school faculty member, Professor Kerr has written 75+ law review articles, authored casebooks, and been cited in 4,500+ academic articles and 500+ judicial decisions, including several U.S. Supreme Court opinions. He has held tenured positions at Stanford Law, GW Law, USC Law, and UC Berkeley Law, and he has been a visiting professor at UChicago Law, Penn Law, and Yale Law.
In addition to his career in academia, Professor Kerr completed two clerkships, including a Supreme Court clerkship with Justice Anthony Kennedy, argued before the Supreme Court, and practiced law for a number of years, including as a trial attorney for the Department of Justice in the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section and as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. He has a bachelor’s degree in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering from Princeton University, a master’s degree in Mechanical Engineering from Stanford University, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School.
Professor Kerr discusses how law schools try to balance preparing students to be practice-ready with teaching how to think like a lawyer (5:49), what Professor Kerr sees as the “ideal” legal training (11:27), what professors actually think when someone messes up a cold call (37:58), how and when he knew he wanted to become a law professor (1:47), the “old way” and the “new way” that law schools hire faculty (3:41), advice for prospective law students who want to become law professors (12:32), the different types of law professors (12:51), every professor’s least favorite part of the job (23:12), the built-in advantages that some students enter law school already having (32:48), Professor Kerr’s most-read law review article (33:50), and more.
They also discuss a video that Professor Kerr recorded last year, “So You’re About To Start Law School: A Law Student’s Guide with Stanford Law Professor Orin Kerr.” You can watch that video for free on YouTube here.
You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps below.
In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Anna Hicks-Jaco discusses the strategy of reapplying to law school, joined by former law school admissions officers and Spivey consultants Sir Williams and Julia Truemper. They give a great deal of insider insights and strategic advice, including common reapplication mistakes (8:11, 17:57, 34:26), how to explain why you’re reapplying (32:15), whether admissions officers review reapplicants’ previous applications (2:31), whether they hold a previous denial against reapplicants (5:25), how discrepancies between the previous application and the current application can be problematic for reapplicants (3:52, 30:06), whether and how you need to revise and create new materials for a reapplication to the same school (6:32, 16:06), how to critically assess your previous application (10:43, 17:57), how you should change your school list (23:07), advice for the sometimes difficult process of rewriting your personal statement (25:42), how law schools look at reapplicants who were previously admitted (and how to mitigate potential negative impacts of that) (30:41), advice for reapplicants who weren’t admitted anywhere the previous cycle (40:01), and more.
You can find Part 1 of this two-part series, “Should You Reapply to Law School,” here.
Other resources mentioned in this episode:
You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps below.
In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Mike has a conversation with Vincent Sheu, an attorney and AI startup founder with a JD and a Master’s in Computer Science from Stanford (in addition to degrees in Statistics, Molecular and Cell Biology, and Bioengineering).
Mike and Vincent discuss how he uses AI in his legal work today (19:20, 22:20), how he expects to be using AI in legal work in the future (37:23), how important his human contributions are vs. the contributions of AI (25:32), whether AI will be able to learn EQ (27:12), the sorts of AI tooling skills that employers are (and will be) looking for (29:19, 42:45) and how they screen for those skills (33:39), the benefits of using AI for legal work as well as the risks (24:04, 31:21, 44:23), how the next generation of lawyers will be advantaged and disadvantaged in the new landscape of legal practice (30:03), whether Vincent would hire a new lawyer who was brilliant and likable but has no familiarity with AI (32:52), Vincent’s recruiting process out of law school (14:03) and what his hours looked like in biglaw vs. as an in-house general counsel (19:36), how Vincent went 23 for 25 during his law school admissions cycle as a “super splitter” (3:32), and more.
Near the beginning of the episode, Mike and Vincent chat about a viral video from 2014 in which Vincent rapidly completed a Rubik’s Cube at a college basketball game. While the original video is now private, you can find the referenced SportsCenter article here.
Mike also mentions the recent case of a defendant attempting to use an AI avatar to make their opening argument in court. You can find that video here.
You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps below.
In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Anna Hicks-Jaco has a conversation with two Spivey consultants and former law school admissions officers, Kristen Mercado and Nathan Neely, on the decision whether to reapply to law school. What are good reasons—and what are bad reasons—to reapply? How much of an LSAT improvement is enough to justify reapplying (6:00)? How much of an impact can improved work experience have (16:09)? Can it be a game-changer if the only thing you do differently is applying earlier (36:09)? Does it ever make sense to reapply based purely on the hope that next cycle will be less competitive overall (38:17)? And what advice can we share for applicants who weren’t admitted anywhere (47:10)?
This is part one of a two-part series. Coming late next month: part two all about the STRATEGY of reapplying.
You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps below.
