School Bells Ringing, For Now: But What Can Happen to Those 1Ls and the 198 Accredited Law Schools, Sooner Than Later?

 The numbers aren't in yet. But since applications to accredited law schools were up 25 percent this year as compared to last year, there probably are a lot of students beginning their investment of time, energy and money in law school in 2025. In 2024, enrollment of 1Ls was at 39,689. 

The question on the minds of those observing this surge is: What could happen to those entering law school in 2025? That is, if they intend to practice law. Of course, as law school deans hammer, there are myriad other uses for a law degree. 

Those playing it cautious project that the future for new lawyers focused on practicing law can range from uncertain to definitely being on the wrong side of supply and demand. The significant variable is Generative AI. Not only is it already taking over document-heavy tasks. Another reality is that it's on those tasks that entry-level lawyers traditionally learned their trade. 

Well, the chair of law firm Paul, Weiss Brad Karp orbits in the universe of caution. But in Lawyer Monthly last March, Karp didn't massage his assessment about the negative impact of Gen AI on demand for inexperienced lawyers. The headline reads:

"Junior Lawyers Will Be ‘Significantly Replaced’ by AI & Tech Experts, Says Paul Weiss Chair"

The details include:

" ... the future of the legal industry is changing fast, with junior lawyers at risk of being replaced by technologists and data scientists ... Karp predicted that law firms will increasingly rely on AI-driven technology, reducing the need for traditional entry-level legal roles."

Yes, Paul, Weiss is already implementing AI for document tasks, be it analysis or synthesis. It has been the first law firm to co-design and deploy Gen AI tool Workflow Builder, developed by Harvey. That serves to create fresh value for clients, along with cost savings from efficiency.

Okay, what Karp has said and what Paul, Weiss has been implementing should provide clarity to law students about their ability to land that first job, hold on to jobs and loop into career mobility. Consumers Beware, especially since for state schools the average annual tuition + fees in 2025 is $47,822 for in-state and $52,868 for out-of-state.

But the real elephant in the room is this: What will happen to those 198 accredited law schools?

History shows that law schools are slow to close. Even when enrollment plunged 40 percent during The Great Recession, most made it through. Since 2010 only 20 shuttered or merged. 

But Gen AI introduces new variables. This is a very different ball game.

Think about it. There could be a collective Ah-Ha moment when not only seniors in college but current law students get it: This career path isn't worth investing in. In sales they put it this way: This dog don't hunt.

In addition, universities housing law schools, just as they're doing with many undergraduate and graduate programs, could be forced to close the law school for financial reasons or pressure from a range of power structures. Another option is to restructure the law school for technology law, business law, compliance and/or non-JD degrees and certifications. 

No question here: The top law schools, such as Harvard and Yale, will survive as law schools. But they too probably will have to overhaul the curriculum. If they don't the value of their alumni's degrees could depreciate. 

Meanwhile, financially challenged universities during the Trump administration eventually could decide to make a killing selling the real estate associated with the law school. That could be especially attractive if the real estate is in a major city.  

When it comes to the human fallout - for example, full-time law faculty - there will be jobs eliminated and not coming back. In undergraduate/graduate programs that's already happening. At the University of Akron, 97 faculty were let go. At UW - Milwaukee the 32 cut were tenured.

What I know from coaching former academics, both faculty and staff, is that they've always had special challenges resetting a career path. The insular nature of academia tends to imbue a feeling of being special. In addition, their scholarly persona can be off-putting. Case in point: complimenting the interviewer on "asking a good question." Given the present ethos of anti-intellectualism they'll have to shake off much of what helped them succeed in an academic career.

My primary coaching message is: Boost your Adaptability Quotient. Rolling with the growing number of whatevers smoothly and without referring to how things used to be is even more important than Emotional Intelligence.

Thrown off your game, maybe the first time since you started working? You made all the right moves and then the world moved in another direction.

Intuitive Coaching. Special expertise with transitions, reskilling and aging. Psychic/tarot readings, upon request. Complimentary consultation with Jane Genova (Text 203-468-8579, janegenova374@gmail.com). Yes, test out the chemistry. There’s no risk.