Search the Lounge


« ABA Seeks Input On Addressing The Economics Of Legal Education | Main | Chapter 9 Bankruptcy »

January 24, 2013


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Online Schools

Very good job, thanks a lot for sharing with us !!

John Doe

It is easy to understand why the ABA is having some problems with granting accreditation to this or any other Chinese law schools. Students are not guaranteed anything close to what we, in the U.S., would consider rudimentary freedom of speech, and law professors cannot select (not even bring into China) textbooks that the regime may consider dangerous. These seem to me to be rather important elements of the U.S. system of legal education. Why foster the proliferation of law schools that do not abide by these basic principles? While I support gradual convergence, this does not appear like the right way to go about it.

Friend of STL

Sorry, John Doe, but what you say is not true. The students at STL study First Amendment with the legal director of the ACLU of Southern Calfornia and human rights law with a former ABA president. See The country censors, but on campus speech is free.

Steve Diamond

"The country censors, but on campus speech is free." Oxymoron.


I see where you are going, John Doe. The real problem with accreditation of overseas law schools is that, while they might spread the rule of law and western legal values such as free speech, they might slow the flow of foreign LL.M. tuition dollars. We need that money to maintain our current leisure/teaching balance, on which so much depends. American academics should make all possible arguments to protect that vital income stream.

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad