GPA? I'd say a 3.8+ is pretty solid. LSAT scores? You definitely need a 170+ to be in the running for admissions and a 175+ for a solid chance.
This is just wrong. Coming from an undergraduate school other than Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc., you generally need both an outstanding LSAT and an excellent GPA to be admitted at Harvard (or Yale, or Stanford) The average undergraduate GPA at Harvard Law School is 3.9.
It does matter. Law school is a $250,000, three year investment.
With regards to coveted careers in academia and the wet dream of a SCOTUS clerkship, Yale, Harvard, Stanford, and Chicago beat out the rest:
The numbers reflect the cultural values--this a profession in which prestige is paramount.
Again where is your evidence. At Michigan (a low T-14 school) a 3.5 GPA is not even in in the 25th percentile of the entering class.
The 25th percentile GPA at Georgetown (officially no. 14) is 3.45. The idea that they would let someone in with a 3.0 based on a high LSAT is ridiculous.
I'm no expert on law school admissions, but I can read a graph, and EMM1 is wrong.
According to Georgetown's graph at Law School Numbers, it looks like with a 171+ on the LSAT, you've got pretty decent odds of getting accepted with a GPA of about 2.9 or above.
However, with a 170, you need a 3.7.
Well, let's see. The 25th percentile GPA at Georgetown (officially no. 14) is 3.45. The idea that they would let someone in with a 3.0 based on a high LSAT is ridiculous.
Its all about the lsat.
Then you get clowns like me who screwed around and got mediocre grades and make up for 3.5 years of flakiness in 3.5 hours of test taking! How's that fair?!
I would argue that getting a 3.0 in engineering from MIT is much harder than getting a 4.0 in English literature from Arizona State University.