<p>lawfuture:</p>
<p>my preference for usc is because their big law placement outpaces ucla’s (and even some t14’s). usc has beaten ucla in big law hiring i believe all but one year (2010) in the past 5-6 years. additionally, it has similar clerkship/public interest placement, so it really doesn’t lose anything there, either. here are two sources for last year’s big law numbers showing usc’s relatively strong placement:
[Law</a> Blogs Best Big Law Feeder Schools - Law Blog - WSJ](<a href=“Law Blog's Best Big Law Feeder Schools - WSJ”>Law Blog's Best Big Law Feeder Schools - WSJ)
[THE</a> GO-TO LAW SCHOOLS](<a href=“http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202543436520&THE_GOTO_LAW_SCHOOLS&slreturn=20130119223832]THE”>http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202543436520&THE_GOTO_LAW_SCHOOLS&slreturn=20130119223832)</p>
<p>it is important to note, however, that both usc and ucla are PEERS in just about every sense of the word. however, the biggest difference (and the reason why usc has better placement) is because its class size is about 100 students fewer. firms in california will hire roughly the same amount of grads from both schools, so usc’s percentage will naturally be higher since they have 100 less students competing for jobs. if the legal economy doesn’t recover, or tanks even further, the impact will be felt less at USC considering the class size and its stronger alumni network. because of this, i think USC better insulates their grads from the depressed legal market.</p>