How Partisan Bias Affects Law School Rankings

U.S. News & World-Report 2022 rankings

by James A. Bacon

Virginia is known for the number and quality of its law schools. Eight law schools are located in the state, making almost one for every 1.1. million residents. Nationally, there are 192 law schools for 330 million people, or roughly one for every 1.6 million. Woohoo, we have lawyers out the wazoo!

The University of Virginia is widely held to be the most prestigious of the Virginia law schools, holding an 8th place ranking in the latest U.S. News & World-Report survey. The George Mason University and William & Mary law schools are highly regarded as well, tying for No. 30 on the list. Washington & Lee and University of Richmond (almost) also place in the Top quartile.

One can argue whether college and university rankings are worthwhile or pernicious, but there’s no question that they confer bragging rights and drive applications. Sadly, Michael Conklin, a professor of business law at Angelo State University, has found that the rankings are influenced by the political leanings of the law school deans and select faculty whose views are incorporated into the “peer rankings” of law school reputation.

The peer ranking is assigned a 25% weight in the overall ranking formula. Writing in “Law School Rankings and Political Ideology: Measuring the Conservative Penalty and Liberal Bonus with Updated 2023 Rankings Data,” Conklin argues that in our politically polarized era, partisan views affect those peer evaluations. Comparing peer-review scores with overall scores of the 10 most conservative law schools with those of the 10 most liberal, he finds that a partisan or ideological penalty drives down the most conservative schools 14.4 slots in the national ranking and gives the most liberal schools a 9.6-place bump.

The implication is that GMU’s Antonin Scalia Law School, ranking 4th from the top of Conklin’s list of most conservative law schools in the country, would rank significantly higher in the U.S. News & World-Report ranking if subjective reputational criteria were excluded.

The Regent University law school ranks 142 nationally, and Liberty University ranks toward the bottom of the U.S. News scale, residing in an undifferentiated mass of the bottom 45 schools that U.S. News does not rank individually. Most likely the two schools, which are part of universities founded by fundamentalist Christians, would qualify as “conservative,” and it’s a good bet that their rankings are dragged down by the peer reviews as well.

Conklin cites a 2013 finding that 82% of law school professors were Democrats while only 11% were Republicans. A 2015 Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy study determined that the disparity between conservative and liberal law professors was due to partisan or ideological discrimination. Conservative faculty members were likely to be more credentialed, as measured by service with former Supreme Court clerks, participation in law review, and the number of articles published.

Political polarization — and skewing of law school reputation — appears to have gotten worse in the past two years, Conklin says.

When he first conducted his study in 2020, Conklin found a 20.8-point spread between the most conservative and most liberal schools. In 2020, the spread has increased to 24 points.

The harm from discrimination against conservatives extends beyond the harm done to conservatives who can’t get jobs as law professors. Discrimination provides an inferior legal education, Conklin argues. When a majority of court districts have Republican-appointed judges, law school students pay a high price for not being exposed to conservative thought. Understanding the best arguments from the conservative side would better equip liberals to argue for liberal causes. Likewise, he suggests, “most people would likely prefer to hire a lawyer who is familiar with — and therefore better equipped to address — conservative arguments and conservative judges.”

The solution, suggests Conklin, is simple. Stop including peer review scores in the rankings and rely upon objective measures such as student-faculty ratio, average student debt, per-pupil spending, and the rate of passing the bar.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

35 responses to “How Partisan Bias Affects Law School Rankings”

  1. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    The rate of passing the bar seems like the most useful criterion.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      On the 1st try.

  2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    What are the definitions of a “liberal” law school and a “conservative” law school?

    1. I think Conklin relies upon the definition provided by the Princeton Review.

      1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        That does not tell me anything.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      One teaches the laws of 2022 and the other 1861, or ecumenical.

  3. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Also, ad dollars affects ranking.

  4. James McCarthy Avatar
    James McCarthy

    It is a pandemic feeling that conservatives are continuously underrated. In this case, it is well to deem the rankings pernicious rather than worthwhile. Over time, conservatives will assume dominance in all educational institutions. Fear not.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Yes, entropy is increasing.

  5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “When a majority of court districts have Republican-appointed judges, law school students pay a high price for not being exposed to conservative thought.”

    Wait a second! So it is ok for Republicans to preferentially hire Conservative lawyers to actually be judges but it is somehow nefarious for Universities to supposedly preferentially hire Liberals to teach law… a real head scratcher there…

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      “When a majority of court districts have Republican-appointed judges, law school students pay a high price for not being exposed to conservative thought.”

      So does the entire nation.

      Funny, so many articles on BR on how broken the system is, and yet….

  6. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
    f/k/a_tmtfairfax

    I don’t buy this argument. Lots of factors go into rankings, including bar passage rates and grads getting jobs.

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      I agree.

  7. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    “When a majority of court districts have Republican-appointed judges, law school students pay a high price for not being exposed to irrational thought.”

    FIXED.

  8. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    My favorite TV lawyer went to the University of American Samoa. On the list? I mean, really, who cares? They learn more in their first few years on the job than in any classroom, and if they can’t cut it, you find out on the line. The resumes I put on the top of the pile at the AG’s office had other qualifications besides the degree: previous jobs like engineer or accountant, or even as a legal assistant for example.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Perry Mason?

      1. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        Jimmy McGill aka Saul Goodman!

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          And here I thought you meant a REAL TV lawyer, e.g., Gerry Spence.

    2. Matt Adams Avatar
      Matt Adams

      Isn’t there a saying about being last is still that profession?

      In this instance as long as you attend an accredited University and pass the Bar, you’re a lawyer.

  9. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    As other commenters indicate, the rankings mean little. In this context, they mean even less. Jim tries to use Conklin’s rankings to further his thesis that conservatives have it bad in higher education. However, what constitutes a “liberal” law school as opposed to a “conservative” law school is never defined. Apparently, we are supposed to accept Conklin’s designations as valid.

    1. M. Purdy Avatar
      M. Purdy

      Agree. For instances, conservatives are welcomed with open arms at UVa Law. They have one of the more active Fed. Socs. around, and a bunch of professors who are conservatives.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      It doesn’t matter now. Omnishambles.

  10. walter smith Avatar
    walter smith

    What happened to trusting “science?”
    The peer rankings are absolutely a self-gratification circle, if you know what I mean…
    And that will be the purpose of the DEI peer review – the wolves will vote to eat the chickens…democracy!
    And the proposed solution is naive. It won’t fix law schools. It would remove the self-boosting aspect of fellow Marxist professors voting for their Marxist friends’ schools. They will still be turning out little Marxists…who leak drafts of Supreme Court opinions…and who won’t say they know what a woman is…because the Court (all levels) is not about the Constitution or justice blindly administered, it is about power. Period.
    Is it ok to call them Marxists? Or do I have to say the Frankfurt/Marcuse/Gramscian schools of thought?
    And I don’t think JAB’s “thesis” is that conservatives have it bad in higher education. Isn’t that a gross simplification?
    I think his “thesis” might more accurately be framed as higher education has become horribly corrupted and is not teaching how to think. That it is heavily skewed to “what” to think.
    And the evidence is overwhelming, but you Lefties (is that ok?), deny it. Leaked Supreme Court opinion…95% political contributions one way…Ministry of Truth because mostly liberal Elon Musk wants to allow free speech on Twitter…mostly peaceful protests ok but sorta riot by Trumpists is worthy of Star Chamber…illegal vaccine mandates with an experimental medical product based on a flawed bureaucracy are A OK, including firing, and so what if it violates the Nuremberg Code…and doesn’t work.
    You turn a blind eye to it. Cuz your “side” is in control.
    But let a Youngkin win, and all the world is ending! Danger! It’s called projection. You fear Republicans acting like you do. But that is the ultimate problem. It is why Whitaker Chambers thought Communists would ultimately win. Commies aren’t bound by rules and will do anything for power.
    I think I heard there are “protests” at the Supreme Court. Is that true? Are they trying to intimidate the Court, like in Derek Chauvin or Kyle Rittenhouse cases or in the Kavanaugh confirmation?
    If Ketanji Brown Jackson can’t say what a woman is, does that mean we can overturn the Notorious RBG VMI case? Shouldn’t RBG have recused herself from that case? Notice the hypocritical pattern?
    So, as someone who graduated from LAW school, at UVA, I can tell you it is profoundly Marxist. The Dean is Marxist. UVA brags about the Federalist Society, which is something like 60 students. Out of about 1200. The Federalist Society is tolerated for show. It is controlled opposition. Maybe 2 professors aren’t extreme Left…
    Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt…

    1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “So, as someone who graduated from LAW school, at UVA, I can tell you it is profoundly Marxist.”

      You graduated from a Marxist “LAW” school? No wonder your propaganda skills are so honed…

      1. walter smith Avatar
        walter smith

        Haha! Sort of funny.
        From 1984… (coincidence? Maybe not) to now…from Left leaning to Marxist…but it clearly started with my class… And, the evil of evil happened on January 1, 1984 when the generic building was named Withers Hall (for $3 million) and later had to be taken away because he was a … RACIST! It’s all becoming clear now…
        Thanks for pointing it out. I was blind, but could not see…

        1. M. Purdy Avatar
          M. Purdy

          Wait, you went to UVA law? And you think it’s marxist? Something like 80% grads end up at top law firms. They just places a Barrett clerk a couple days ago. What are you talking about?

          1. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            I am talking about the Dean of the Law School and all of the celebrated recent hires. I am talking about the “free speech” expert who advocates censorship. I am talking about the “healthcare” expert who found no HIPAA violations with the administration of the Covid mandates, not did any civil libertarians, nor the my body my choice crowd, who are now remembering what a woman is and proclaiming my body my choice.
            The school has gone off the rails as to teaching law. Still smart kids go there, but UVA wants most to become left-wing, by any means necessary, activists.

          2. M. Purdy Avatar
            M. Purdy

            The Dean is a liberal, not a marxist. And the two prior deans were conservatives. Balance is good. Who is the free speech expert? Citron? She’s an expert on the first amendment and the limits thereof. Not sure the healthcare person you’re referring to. Didn’t they teach you how to engage in actual discourse in law school?

          3. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            No. They did not.
            What is the difference between a liberal and a Marxist in your view?
            Based on her scholarship in vagrancy and civil rights, I conclude she is a Marxist. Based on her testifying in support of KBJ, I conclude she is a Marxist. Based on her hires, I conclude she is a Marxist.
            Here is a review of her civil rights book, obviously not by a fan…

            Prof. Goluboff wishes that the civil rights movement had been one prong of the effort to radically reshape the Constitution to support radical economic goals. Behind her historical analysis lies the Marxist idea that Jim Crow laws were essentially no more than a racist sub-category of the capitalist exploitation of workers. Prof. Goluboff would have liked the civil rights lawyers of the 30s, 40s, and 50s to demand affirmative constitutional economic rights – i.e., universal entitlements to housing, salary, and other tangible goods. And she believes that such “rights” stood a chance of being recognized, even though the whole country in the 40s and 50s was growing less sympathetic to the more radical parts of the labor movement of the 20s and 30s.

            In fact, Prof. Goluboff’s viewpoint is similar to that of Pres. Obama, as he expressed it in 2001 in a radio interview:

            “…the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties.”

            Whatever the depth of Prof. Goluboff’s research, she has used it to support a simplistic idea of the economic system, and to promote an unjustified distortion of the Constitution. There is nothing in the Constitution to support what she longs for, but, because she longs for it, she has found a way to make the Constitution require it. She aims at nothing less than the elimination of the Constitution as a constitution, to make its words infinitely malleable – to “break free from the essential constraints,” as Pres. Obama candidly put it. But those “essential constraints” are indeed essential – as a bulwark against tyranny and a guarantee of liberty. Once the constraints are lifted, what is to prevent the abuse of power? Power once given is very difficult to take back, and the stated good intentions of the rulers never stop them ultimately from doing whatever they decide is necessary.

            Moreover, what Prof. Goluboff and her numerous, like-minded academic comrades fail to understand is that the cause of racial justice stands on its own. It is not exclusively the property of any political group, and it certainly has no place as a mere prop in a leftist morality play. It is, in fact, the cause of the entire nation, and has been from the start. As Frederick Douglass said, “The problem is whether the American people have loyalty enough, honor enough, patriotism enough, to live up to their own Constitution.”

            The professor would do well to consider the chapters in Ralph Ellison’s “Invisible Man” in which the protagonist joins a communist organization. The Brotherhood, as it is called, is only too ready to let him serve as a public face to the group. He soon discovers, however, that, in the eyes of the leadership, he is nothing more than a tool, a means to an end in their quest to gain power for themselves. Such would have been the fate of the members of the civil rights movement had it been subsumed, as Prof. Goluboff wishes had happened, within a movement of economic radicalism.

          4. M. Purdy Avatar
            M. Purdy

            Oh, well, since you cite a review of her book, it must be right. BTW, is that your own review?

          5. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            No. I have read a fair amount of her vagrancy book.
            So…did you go to UVA Law?
            Do you get the UVA Lawyer Magazine?
            Do you read it?
            I answer “Yes” to all 3 questions.
            I also had a father who went to UVA Law. And he learned that law was derived from natural law, that law existed from the beginning of time. That was not being taught when I went, but it was not being denied either. I do not believe that is the case now.
            Are you an appointee of Risa Goluboff? Do you also know Ketanji Brown Jackson? Do you know that Dean Goluboff’s husband is on UVA Law faculty? I remember when Leftists were against nepotism…
            I guess it’s OK when they do it. Sorta like Dr. Fauci’s wife, Christine Grady (ever notice how the power couples don’t have the same last name? Wonder why…), who is supposedly in charge of Bioethics. She used to believe informed consent was essential…

          6. M. Purdy Avatar
            M. Purdy

            Yes, went to UVa Law. Get the mag. Don’t believe in wild right wing conspiracies.

          7. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Ah…a conspiracy…
            So you agree that UVA lauding Robert Mueller and his RUSSIA investigation was a stupid political thing? Did Russians flip the 2016 election? Was J6 “an insurrection?” Danielle Citron said so from way back. Have you noticed use of similar terminology by people like…”the Big Lie” or “the insurrection” or “white supremacists” or “mostly peaceful protests?” Is that a conspiracy? Law exam question for you.

          8. M. Purdy Avatar
            M. Purdy

            Walt, are you still a lawyer?

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “So, as someone who graduated from LAW school, at UVA, I can tell you it is profoundly Marxist.”

      You graduated from a Marxist “LAW” school? No wonder your propaganda skills are so honed…

Leave a Reply