Law Schools Expect Enrollment to Remain Steady Amid COVID-19
Law school admission offices are also counseling admitted students not to defer for a year, saying that scholarships will likely be harder to come by in 2021.
July 28, 2020 at 02:54 PM
4 minute read
The COVID-19 pandemic brought an unprecedented disruption to the law school admissions cycle, but most law schools are expecting the same number of new students to start this fall, and some even anticipate an increase.
Among the 94 law school admissions offices recently surveyed by Kaplan Test Prep, 52% said they believe their entering class size will be on par with 2019. Another 26% said it will be larger, while 22% said they expect their class size to be down. Those predictions jibe with national applicant data from the Law School Admission Council, which show a 1% increase in applicants.
"While this has arguably been the most unusual law school admissions cycle in decades, the stability, in terms of just the numbers, is remarkable," said Jeff Thomas, executive director of legal programs at Kaplan Test Prep. "If you look at an application increase of just under 1%, the casual observer might think that things were business as usual, but behind the scenes there has been a lot going on to ensure a seamless process during unpredictable times, from the rollout of the first at-home version of the LSAT to extended application deadlines."
The cancellation of the LSAT in both March and April resulted in fewer people applying to law school by early summer. But the May introduction of a shorter, online version of the test dubbed LSAT-Flex helped usher in a late flux of applicants. Law school admissions offices also modified some policies to accommodate this year's latecomers, the Kaplan survey found.
Among the responding admissions offices, 67% said they made application policies more flexible this year to entice undecided applicants. Those measures include extending application deadlines and relaxing deposit requirements. Though some schools allowed people to apply with unofficial LSAT scores, all but one still required applicants to take the LSAT or the GRE, the survey found.
But it's still unclear whether more admitted students will make a last-minute decision to defer for a year given than many law schools will hold classes entirely or largely online during the coming semester. But many survey respondents said they are advising admitted students against deferring. For one thing, the employment market is not great right now.
"I would counsel prospective students to consider what they would be doing instead of enrolling in law school," wrote one survey respondent. "If they do not have alternative plans that would allow them to fill their time productively, they might want to proceed with their law school enrollment. I also believe competition will be stiffer next year and budgets will decrease, so applicants can expect admissions rates and scholarship offers to decrease."
Many admissions offices said that fewer scholarships are available for this fall's new students—a trend that is likely to ramp up next year as universities face budget shortfalls. And this year's deferrals mean that fewer seats will be available for next year's applicants, they noted, which may result in a more competitive admissions cycle for 2021.
"If you are an accepted applicant still deliberating about what to do, our advice is to consider the long term," Thomas said. "While the COVID-19 crisis is likely to continue for at least the rest of the year, your future legal career is something that will last for many decades. Also listen to what admissions officers are telling us. Next cycle might be more competitive and budget shortfalls may make financial aid less available. Overall, this may be a more advantageous year to enroll."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllUniversity of Chicago Accused of Evicting Student for Attending Gaza-Israel Protest
3 minute readSanctioned Penn Law Professor Amy Wax Sues University, Alleging Discrimination
5 minute readThe Met Hires GC of Elite University as Next Legal Chief
Trending Stories
- 1'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 2Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 3‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 4State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
- 5Invoking Trump, AG Bonta Reminds Lawyers of Duties to Noncitizens in Plea Dealing
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250