I think they're pointing out the ridiculous costs of law school and the wealth barrier of entry that creates.
Someone who could pass the bar exam, and could end up being a great lawyer isn't even given the chance, because they can't afford to attend law school (which is necessary to take the exam, from what I gather, but IANAL & I'm not from the US).
Financial aid is readily available at all top tier law schools for anyone that could plausibly end up a “great” lawyer. As much as I dislike the hierarchical nature of post secondary school, there is no doubt in my mind that the hypothetical person who has not distinguished themselves to the point where a top tier law school would notice them and offer financial aid by the time they’ve completed an undergraduate degree and taken the LSAT does not exist or, if they do, they are so rare as to not exist.
Now, are people who could pass the bar exam and be merely a “good” or “acceptable” lawyer being frozen out by the wealth barrier? Absolutely. But actually probably not: these people can go to a lower tier and cheaper school.
I don't know enough about the system in the US and I might be talking out of my ass here, since most of my impression are formed by reading online discussions, but here goes... I was always under the impression that you can just buy into most unis in the US? There's the scholarship programs, but I was also under the impression they're often through sports rather than grades (and to me it's obvious that there's not necessarily a correlation between someone good at American Football and law).
> . I was always under the impression that you can just buy into most unis in the US?
This is true at the richest levels. If you are willing to write a multi-million dollar check as a donation (name a building/room after your family), you will probably be admitted. In 1999, apparently a $2.5 million donation secured Jared Kushner's admittance into Harvard. This has to be adjusted not just by regular admission but also by the increased competition (it is more than twice as competitive). So I would expect we might be getting closer to a $10 million donation. Although schools would probably cap it/auction it off if they got too many donations.
This is by far the minority of admissions.
Other cases where people "pay to get in" are literally bribes, and people can and have gone to jail.
> There's the scholarship programs, but I was also under the impression they're often through sports rather than grades
There are a lot of scholarship types: academic, need-based, interest based (an engineering may spend money to help aspiring engineers), corporate (we'll pay your tuition if you work here for 2 years after), and athletic. Not all schools offer all types, and some (like interest based scholarships) are unaffiliated with any school (although athletic scholarships are).
Also, athletic scholarships are limited to your undergraduate (pre-law or pre-med or your BA/BS in X).
In all cases, the scholarships help you pay for school, but tend to be different from the actual admittance process. So the correlation would be between someone good at Football and someone who can afford school. Which, if you think about it as a job (they make the school a ton of money) is fair in a way.
Minor clarification. Sports scholarships are limited by duration, and often apply to BS and MS for 5 years max, with 4 years of playing time.
Generally switching schools requires a year off, but there are some loop holes by applying to a grad major that is not present in the original school. Basketball and football players seem to use these often. You can google for more information, and I believe it still wouldn't work for law/doctor programs, but I haven't looked into this.
Post-baccalaureate study scholarships are unrelated to sports scholarships. Law is a post bachelor degree. “Buying” your way into a top law school is possible but basically entails buying your way through an undergraduate degree as well which means that you might have “bought” your way in but you’re still ultimately incredibly well prepared. And these people who buy their way in subsidize the exact people you’re concerned about being kept out: poor but well qualified candidates who can become “great” lawyers.
I'm not trying to erode society down to nothingness. I dislike academic credentialism.
I just want there to be many paths to learning. Formal schooling. Apprenticeship. Private mentoring. Hell, you could probably get a series of YouTube channels (with a very low success rate) or something closer to a MOOC.
Obviously, you need to demonstrate you learned from those paths. And I wondered if the bar exam was sufficient to show that. So I asked someone who claimed to be a lawyer on the internet as I don't know how sufficient the bar is as a measure.
I don't do my own roofing. The idea that I would have to argue my own case in court sounds horrible. I don't know how. And then the people who right now are (or become) lawyers would just use their superior system knowledge to extort others. Far better that the responses available to a claim of some tort are "I guess I should call a lawyer" and not "I guess I should pay $5,000 for this to go away or spend the next 2 years learning the law to fight it on my own."
Someone who could pass the bar exam, and could end up being a great lawyer isn't even given the chance, because they can't afford to attend law school (which is necessary to take the exam, from what I gather, but IANAL & I'm not from the US).