I'd posted a thread about whether HLS was actually "better" than other schools, but that made me think: are the people that graduated from HLS better lawyers because they went there or because they had an innately better aptitude for the law (i.e. high LSAT)?
I know that at Harvard, the professors are much more interested in their scholarly work than their students, versus a low-tiered LS wherein the professors are mostly teaching, rather than working on big projects.
Furthermore, the applicability and practicality of many things taught at schools like Harvard is rare-- rather than practicality, many top law schools focus on theory.
Are the HLS graduates better because they went to Harvard, or would they have been even better off by going to a low-tiered law school and actually learning? (In terms of aptitude and skill in the law, rather than job prospects).