Once
upon
a
time,
the
U.S.
News
&
World
Report
law
school
rankings
served
a
purpose.
Not
a
particularly
noble
purpose,
mind
you,
but
a
functional
one.
Instead
of
nurturing
its
reputation
as
a
magazine
chronicling
“U.S.
News”
or
giving
a
“World
Report,”
it
would
churn
out
annual
school
rankings.
The
line
between
the
99th
and
100th
best
Drama
degree
programs
was
a
mostly
vacuous
distinction,
but
it
gave
prospective
students
something
to
guide
genuinely
life-altering
decisions
other
than
brochures
put
together
by
school
marketers.
In
a
significant
if
imperfect
way,
USNWR
democratized
insider
knowledge
by
distilling
institutional
gravity
into
a
crude
but
legible
hierarchy.
For
all
the
nonsense
fueling
the
law
school
rankings,
U.S.
News
provided
useful,
broad
guidance.
As
a
marker
of
prestige
and
future
portability
of
a
degree,
was
Yale
really
better
than
Harvard?
Maybe,
maybe
not.
But
the
“HYS”
schools
—
in
whatever
order
—
were
roughly
better
for
prospective
students
than
the
“CCN”
schools,
which
were
in
turn
roughly
better
than
the
rest
of
the
top
14,
which
we
all
decided
would
be
better
than
the
next
tier.
We
won’t
know
precisely
how
USNWR
ranks
the
schools
until
the
Spring,
but
Professor
Derek
Muller
has
released
his
updated
projections
for
the
2026-2027
U.S.
News
law
school
rankings,
and
we’ve
entered
the
full
clown-car
phase
of
this
exercise.
Yale
and
Harvard
are
tied…
with
Duke.
At
5.
Nothing
against
our
friends
at
UVA,
but
if
you’re
going
there
over
Yale
you’ve
messed
up.
There
are
ranking
philosophies
that
rightly
put
UVA
higher.
For
instance
the
Above
the
Law
rankings,
which
are
designed
for
the
express
purpose
of
putting
the
thumb
on
the
scale
of
best
outcomes
for
the
price.
But
that’s
not
what
USNWR
has
ever
stood
for
and
not
what
anyone
picking
up
that
list
expects
it
to
reflect.
USNWR
markets
its
list
to
prospective
students
as
a
barometer
of
prestige
and
—
if
these
rankings
bear
out
—
this
ain’t
it.
Muller
used
publicly
disclosed
information,
which
gave
him
roughly
75
percent
of
the
data
used
in
USNWR’s
current
—
as
of
last
year,
anyway
—
methodology,
He
notes
that
the
latest
USNWR
methodology
increases
compression
and
volatility
so
the
final
results
could
swing
a
bit
from
his
projections,
but
if
the
final
results
come
out
wildly
different,
it
will
seem
like
the
publication
intervened
to
tweak
the
system
and
at
that
point…
what
good
are
rankings
anyway?
The
boycott
—
and
the
changes
made
to
deal
with
it
—
really
screwed
all
this
up.
Yale
decided
in
a
huff
to
stop
cooperating
with
USNWR
on
its
rankings,
bringing
a
number
of
schools
along
for
the
ride.
Schools
couched
the
boycott
as
a
matter
of
respecting
public
interest
work
and
standing
up
for
financial
aid,
which
sounds
great
until
you
scratched
the
surface.
But
most
of
all,
cutting
off
access
to
critical
data
prevented
U.S.
News
from
doing
the
one
thing
U.S.
News
did
well:
democratizing
insider
knowledge.
The
schools
wanted
out
of
the
rankings
game.
U.S.
News
adapted
in
ways
that
made
the
rankings
less
meaningful.
Prospective
students
now
have
to
do
more
independent
research
to
understand
what
different
schools
actually
offer.
Perhaps
that’s
the
outcome
the
boycotting
deans
wanted
all
along.
Or
perhaps
they
just
didn’t
think
this
through.
Let’s
go
with
the
latter.
Rankings
never
captured
the
whole
picture.
Do
you
want
to
live
in
New
Haven
or
Palo
Alto?
Does
the
school
have
strong
clinics
in
your
area
of
interest?
Can
you
afford
it?
These
are
better
questions
than
“but
which
one
is
technically
ahead
of
the
other
this
year?”
That
said,
the
complete
breakdown
of
U.S.
News
as
a
useful
signal
for
top
schools
creates
real
problems.
A
first-generation
college
student
researching
law
schools
benefits
from
an
external
source
validating
which
schools
open
which
doors.
With
Yale
projected
at
#5,
that
student
might
reasonably
wonder
if
Yale’s
placement
power
has
actually
declined
(it
hasn’t)
or
if
they’re
looking
at
garbage
out
(they
are).
This
couldn’t
come
at
a
worse
time
for
students.
U.S.
News
deserved
the
criticism
it
took
over
the
years
for
overprivileging
inputs
like
undergrad
GPAs
and
LSAT
scores
over
outputs,
but
right
now
those
inputs
carry
more
importance
than
ever.
Now
that
Biglaw
has
accelerated
its
recruiting
process
to
extend
summer
associate
offers
before
students
have
even
received
their
first
semester
grades,
whole
careers
are
getting
decided
on
vibes.
If
employers
are
making
hiring
decisions
with
no
regard
to
the
actual
learning
the
law
part,
it
means
they’re
making
hiring
decisions
based
on
the
school’s
admissions.
It
is
a
very
stupid
way
to
hire
lawyers,
but
it’s
the
way
we’re
doing
it.
And
a
reliable
ranking
of
perceived
prestige
would
come
in
handy
right
about
now.
Because
those
elite
Biglaw
recruiters
are
not
thinking
“let’s
lower
our
hiring
target
for
Harvard.”
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.