We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
The law grads dominant in India are either goondas from DU and various TLCs, or just 3-4 elite seniors like AMS and Sibal (Jaitley and Jethmalani before them).
What could be the reason?
The real reason is that the BJP and Congress only promote chanchas, goons and nepo kids.
2. You say: "A monkey can score well"
Please prove it by producing your LSAT score.
LSAT may not be an "entrance exam" the way that the CLAT is, but you know perfectly well that people whose scores are below a certain level, regardless of other achievements, won't dare apply to Yale or Harvard. I believe that cutoff is generally understood to be 165 or 170.
The fact is, the LSAT is not like the CLAT, and Ivy League schools have many nepo babies. We are talking about how nepo babies get into Ivies. Unless you are in the admissions committee for Harvard or Yale, you are not in a position to speak authoritatively about what the cutoff for someone with legacy parents and powerful networks is.
If this is how you talk to people you know, it is remarkable that anyone is willing to engage with you.
We know elections aren't won in classrooms; they're won in the trenches.
Our legacy? Unmatched. Sibal, Jaitley, and the heavyweights who actually shape policy and power.
NLU hires? Sure, they're sharp clerks for the grunt work. But top firms tap them for filing briefs, not for litigation mastery or political chess. That's DU territory.
On the other hand visit JNU, DU or BHU. Not a day goes by when some or the other socio-political BS-ing is happening. The class work is negligible, but the street work is aplenty. The kids may not be book smart, but they're street smart. These kids will not make it to corporate, because even corporate knows they'd question everything in the internal structures. That's why they make better lawyers, judges and civil servants.
So, if you want to live a simple salaried life, then join NLUs, where you'll be taught to be a paper pushing corporate slave.
Or, get your hands dirty in the real nitty gritty streets by joining DU, JNU or BHU.
The NLUs are an assembly line for law firms.
Beyond law firms they meet earthiness quick.
Now tell me, of the people graduating today or those who did between say 2005-2019ish, or even today, where a good majority of these NLU graduates choose a law firm, how many of them will become such judges/SAs? True, their contribution and share would increase, but it will never be the same or even close to TLCs till the day NLUs stop producing clerks joining law firms.
Get it thru your head - people in law firms may call themselves lawyers- but at the end of the day, as regards the OP's question- these law firm clerks would never ever know and get into politics. Every single politician, or even a very high majority of them, have been from litigation.