Law school limit admission options

Several top-tier universities recently made headlines by publicly doing away with their early admission programs. Harvard was the first to make the change, saying that the early admissions program favored privileged students who didn't have to worry about financial aid. Princeton and the University of Virginia quickly followed suit. The trend has been replicated in several law schools: the top three law schools (Yale, Stanford, and Harvard) do not have early decision or rolling admissions policies. And the although the next four schools (Columbia, NYU, Chicago, and U. Penn.) have early decision, they do not offer rolling admissions. Other law schools in the top twenty do not have early decision or rolling admissions, and this approach seems to be catching on -- Vanderbilt Law School, which is ranked 17th, announced earlier this month that it would discontinue its early admission program.

While the equality and diversity interests recently cited by Harvard are unquestionably part of the equation, I can't help think that they would be unnecessary if law school tuitions were not so high. Top tier law schools can charge almost $40,000 a year, which can be difficult for under-privileged or middle class students. In fact, tuition increased 267% between the 1990 and 2005 school years. And with thousands of students vying for spots in those top law schools, the schools don't have to worry about filling the seats in the classroom. Eliminating early decision seems like a business decision more than a matter of equality. Wouldn't it be better for lower-income students if they could get a good legal education for under $100,000?