I'm a 3L at the University of Minnesota. I remember taking the LSAT and thinking the same thing. Get used to it! I'm currently enrolled in a class that was offered after the events of Sept. 11 entitled The Constitution in Times of War & Crisis. Despite the fact that the professor is THE conservaitve prof. on campus, most of my 'classmates' make me want to vomit with their liberal, whiny thoughts!

I know from speaking to associates who have attended Lschool that there is an inherent liberal bias among faculty. I just did not think it spread to the entrance exam.

My answer to all this? www.avemarialaw.edu A law school in the classical liberal tradition. (I hope no one misunderstands that term).

This is worth, say, 20 points. Why should you have to concern your mind with this issue when you are competing with others?

A socialist-minded person would not have any cognitive dissonance and would perform better.

They are stacking the career deck against conservatives.

Your right. It is liberal. I'm an editor and at my company I work on LSAT books, among other things, so I've seen just about every test given in the last ten years.

But let's keep it in perspective. The reason they use such background material is because it provides easily recognizable topics for a reasonably educated person. Since the exam tests your understanding of the logical structure of an argument, the thing that the test writers are looking for is 1) an issue with well known arguments, so people can focus on structure as opposed to what the subject matter is talking about, and 2) an issue that people actually argue about, so that they can lift arguments and statements form newapaper editorials and the like.

In other words, they won't have an argument that deals with libertarianism versus social conservatism mainly because it doesn't get coverage outside the conservative press. Instead, they'll have an argument that deals with environmental concerns versus private property rights, mainly because its the kind of thing everyone recognizes and the terminololgy of the debate doesn't require explanation.

There were enough "Chicago" mind at Northwestern Law School to make it tolerable.

Oddly, I was a Democrat at the time, although my liberal friends thought of me as conservative because I bought into the intellectually undeniable tenets of Law and Economics.

My Torts professor once announced to the class that we should all quit school and go work in the rice paddies with the workers of the world. And he was dead serious too.

Bingo !

I thought that as well.

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS DELIVERS INAUGURAL AVE MARIA LECTURE

200 Members of Michigan Bench and Bar Gather to Hear About Federalism

 

Ann Arbor, MI (November 19, 1999) – Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the inaugural address of the Ave Maria Annual Lecture Series at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Ann Arbor, Michigan on Tuesday, November 16, 1999.  The lecture series, endowed by the faculty of the Ave Maria School of Law, was designed to present timely topics that are at the forefront of legal and political debates.  Those in attendance at this event included 200 leading members of the Michigan Bench and Bar and special guests of the Ave Maria School of Law, including its Board of Governors.  All future lectures will be open to the public, as well as to the students of the Ave Maria School of Law. 

Justice Thomas’ comments addressed federalism and how both federal and state governments need to protect the individual liberties that were provided to each of us by the framers of the Constitution.  During his remarks, Justice Thomas also gave his endorsement for the Ave Maria School of law.

“We are honored to have a highly esteemed Supreme Court Justice initiate our lecture series,” commented Bernard Dobranski, Dean of the Ave Maria School of Law.  “His many years in public service give Justice Thomas an insight into the law and an understanding of the way the law should operate in today’s society.”

“This series will provide opportunities for future law students to see the law in new and interesting ways as presented by prominent legal figures,” said the Honorable James L. Ryan, U.S. Appellate Judge for the Sixth Circuit and member of the Ave Maria Board of Governors.

The Ave Maria School of Law is the 26^th Catholic law school in the U.S. and offers students a comprehensive legal curriculum enriched by its grounding in natural law and the enduring teachings of the Catholic Church.  The administration of the school has begun the process of obtaining accreditation with the Michigan Board of Education and the American Bar Association.  More information on Ave Maria School of Law can be found on the World Wide Web at www.avemarialaw.edu.

	Home | Philosophy | Curriculum | Faculty | Student Life | Career | Admissions | News | Library Statement of Non-Discrimination | Approval of the American Bar Association
	For more information, please contact the Office of Admissions, info@avemarialaw.edu

The key to taking a test is to give the tester what he wants. Usually it is very obvious. Put you politics aside and work out the logic. Look, I got 99th percentile in the LSAT but one of my preferred law schools did not find me acceptable because I did not meet their political criteria. I was a man and a former naval officer, probably a war criminal. So what!

I agree with you. I took it early last year, and it was the same deal. The questions deal with social issues, and I specifically remember several of the reading comp. passages were excerpted from liberal/activist authors' books. Maya Angelou was one I remember.

This is worth, say, 20 points.

Since the scale is from 140-180...(or is it 120-180?) 20 points sounds good to me!!...too late now though :(

I suppose I just wanted to make sure I wasnt paranoid. I realize that most well known issues, like environmentalism, are more liberal than conservative. But nevertheless, there were points during the exam where I had trouble conceiving how they justify asking such a blatently biased question.

If I hadnt practiced as much as I did before the test, I would have been totally distracted during the exam. Fortunatley by the time I sat for the test, I was able to chuckle to myself.

Yes, you are correct. I ordered that exam as a practice test and CLEARLY remember reading that passage. I didnt let it effect my performance, I just thought it was typical of the establishement and wanted to consult fellow freepres. THanks.

No kidding. It was that way when I took the LSAT in 1969 and when I took it in 1977 before finally deciding to go to law school. The general bias in the profession is liberal and most law professors are liberals or further to the left. If you can't recognize it and can't figure out that you must consistently answer the questions as a good liberal would, you probably don't belong at a top tier law school.

Oh, the ignominy of only scoring in the 99th percentile when my girlfriend got an 800!

I do agree. But let me ask you this, if the test was focused on conservative issues would you expect to hear an out crying from the press denouncing the test writers ?

Your right. It is liberal. I'm an editor