How does it take to get through law school?

Answer 1

Answer 1: Law school generally takes three years of full-time study, although there are a few two-year programs available (such as Northwestern, Dayton, and Southwestern).

Answer 2: There is no single answer that is accurate for the entire United States. Law is a profession that is regulated on a state-by-state, and not a federal, basis. That said, any lawyer's admission to practice in the federal court system is, of course, a strictly federal matter...

...however, any lawyer admitted to practice in even the federal system must first be licensed to practice in his/her state system (which, by default, includes all of the state's county and city and other local court systems).

Lawyers are licensed by state. There is no such thing as a federal law license, even if one is a federal prosecutor (either a "Deputy US Attorney," or the "US Attorney," himself/herself); and even if one is admitted to practice in the federal court system.

And so, then, ultimately, it is each state which decides -- on its own, separate and apart from all other states -- what kind of legal education is required in order to be licensed and admitted to said state's bar, and to then practice law there. So, then, the first answer is, necessarily, inaccurate... at least as it does or doesnn't apply toall states.

The US Department of Education (USDE) approved accreditor for law schools is the American Bar Association (ABA). ABA standards call for law school to be a three-year-long period of study at an ABA-accredited law school; which three years of study may typically not begin until the law student has first earned an undergraduate bachelors degree (in pretty much anything, frankly) from a US "regionally" accredited college or university; and which three years of law study result in the awarding of a "Juris Doctor" (JD) degree.

The JD is misleading, though, because it's not really at the academic doctoral level. In fact, years ago lawyers would earn a "Bachelor of Laws" (LLB) or "Bachelor of Science in Law" (BSL) degree, after their regular undergraduate bachelors degree; but it was confusing to some for them to have two Bachelors Degrees; and for the law degree to be at a higher level. And so the ABA changed things and required that all its accredited schools start calling their law degrees "Juris Doctor" or "JD" degrees, even though they're not really academically doctoral-level degrees.

In the world of professional (as opposed to academic) degrees like the JD, it's common for them to be given a higher-level name than they may actually be, at least as measured on the true academic scale. The JD's coursework is arguably not at the academic masters level, yet it's earned after a bachelors degree, just like a masters degree is earned. The proof of all that is that the next-higher (above the JD) academic degree is the "Master of Laws" (LLM); and there's even an academic doctoral level degree for lawyers called the "Doctor of Laws" (Legum Doctor) (LLD), or "Doctor of (the) Science in(of) Law" (SJD) or (JSD) (the actual title and initialism depending on the school).

The pharmacy profession does something similar. Pharmacists used to earn a "Bachelor of Pharmacy" (BPh) or (BPharm) or a "Bachelor of Science in Pharmacy" (BS) or (BSPh) or (BSPharm), and that was because a pharmacist's degree is really only at The Bachelor's level, academically speaking. A typical pharmacy degree, both back then, and now, is typically begun after only the sophomore year of regular undergraduate college; and then lasts through the normal junior and senior years, plus two more very-pharmacy-studies-specific years, for a grant total of six (6) years... all at the at least academic(not professional, mind you, but academic) undergraduate level. And so, then, to call a pharmacist a "doctor" of anything is just misleading. However, a little while back the USDE-approved accreditor for pharmacy schools decided to give Pharmacists a better-sounding (because it sounds at a higher level, just like the JD) degree, and so, now, the very same six-year-long, academically-undergraduate-level pharmacy degree as before is called a "Doctor of Pharmacy" (PharmD). Again, professional -- but never academic -- degrees are sometimes that way; and proof, again, that I'm right is that the next-higher-level academic degree that a PharmD may earn is a master'sdegree in such as "Pharmacological Studies" or something like that. There are, in fact, many academic masters which PharmD holders typically pursue, depending on what, beyond just being a pharmacist, they'd like to do in life.

It's the same with the "Master of Divinity" (MDiv) degree that clergy gets. As recently as the '60s, all mainline denominational clergy earned a "Bachelor of Divinity" (BD or BDiv) from schools accredited by the USDE-approved "The Association of Theological Schools in the United States and Canada" (ATS). However, again, there was confusion because clergy would have two bachelors degrees, the second (the BD or BDiv) allegedly at a higher level. And so ATS changed things, and told its accredited schools to start calling their "Bachelor of Divinity" degrees the "Master of Divinity" (MDiv). In fact, all BD/BDiv holders from ATS-accredited schools even got a letter in the mail offering to officially change their BD/BDiv's to MDiv's. They were unabashed about it; and so whenever anyone holding an MDiv gets his/her hackles up because someone like me tells them that at a true academic (not a professional, mind you, but an academic) level, their MDiv is really not at the masters level, I just tell them that provable history, and it makes 'em furrow their brow and... well... not like it very much.

In the true academic system, the next-higher-up degree for an MDiv holder is the "Master of Theology" (ThM), an academic (and not professional) masters-level degree; and then, after that, if they want to stay on the academic and not professional track, then they can get either the "Doctor of Theology" (ThD) or "Doctor of Philosophy" (PhD). If an MDiv holder wants to stay on the professional track, though, then the next-level-up degree for him/her is a "Doctor of Ministry" (DMin). However, all those lines and tracks get blurred when the degree-grantor is a seminary, and not a "regionally" accredited secular college/university. If the seminary is ATS-accredited (and even if it's also "regionally" accredited, which most of them also are), it will sometimes allow a professional MDiv holder to go directly from there into a ThD or PhD program. Academicians don't much like it, but it is what it is.

I explain all that to make the very important point that a JD is a professional-- and not an academic -- degree, just like an MDiv or PharmD.

Yes, the JD typically comes after the undergraduate academic bachelors degree, but it's by no stretch of the imagination at the academic doctoral level... heck, it's not even at the academic masters level. And so, then, if you ever stumble onto a lawyer who calls himself "Doctor," or wants others to do do, then s/he is delusional in some way, and probably needs to be disbarred (if s/he hasn't been already).

Three years of full-time study -- 90 semester credit hours (or 135 quarter credits, if the law school is on that system, rather than the semester credit hour system) -- is required by the ABA for a typical JD degree. And remember that "full time" means 15 semester credit hours per Fall and Spring semester, with no classes during the summer; or 12 semester credit hours per Fall and Spring semester, with two courses (six semester credit hours) during the summer. In either case, "full time" means 30 semester credit hours per calendar year.

I make that point because I don't want the first answerer's two-year programs at such as Dayton, Northwestern and Southwestern (as well as at any others in the US) are all still 90 semester credit hours in length...

...that's still three (3) years, if taken by the normal 15 semester credit hours per Fall and Spring semesters method. Those two year programs simply have the student go to classes year 'round, through the autumn, the spring, and all summer, too. It only takes two years not because the student takes fewer courses, but, rather, because all three years worth of courses are packed into just two years. It's very rigorous and difficult; I could not more strongly recommend against it!

So, then, all ABA-accredited JD programs are normally three years long. Period. That some law schools will allow students whom they think can handle it to knock-out all 90 semester credit hours worth in just two years doesn't change that all JD degrees contain 90 semester credit hours of coursework... er... well... at least the ABA-accredited ones do.

The thing is, though, that not all states absolutely require that JD degrees be ABA-accredited. Oh, sure, they all prefer it... most even require it. But a few states allow non-ABA-accredited law schools to operate within their borders; and their respective state bar associations (if that's who regulates such in the state), or their Supreme Courts (if that's who does it... remember, it all just depends on the state) approve their graduates to sit for their state bar exams.

California is the most famous (and some would say "notorious") for this. California's Committee of Bar Examiners (CalBar) allows non-ABA-accredited schools of three types to operate within its borders...

1) CalBar-accredited three-year law schools

2) CalBar-approved four-year night/weekend law schools

3) CalBar-registered four-year distance learning law schools

...the graduates of any of which may sit for the California Bar Exam, right alongside the graduates of the three-year ABA-accredited law schools.

And California is the only state to have distance learning law schools. A few other states have their own non-ABA-accredited (but still state approved) law schools (Tennessee and Massachusetts come immediately to mind, but if memory serves, I believe there are at least two others) which qualify graduates to sit for just their state bar exams; but no state other than California allows them to be distance learning law schools.

California even allows people to sit for its bar exam who haven't been to law school at all, as long as some California licensed lawyer or judge will swear that they've studied, full-time, for four years, under their tutelage. While nearly every state once allowed that sort of Abe-Lincoln-style law study, very, very few of them allow it anymore.

After the first year of law school, the unaccredited CalBar-approved four-year-long night/weekend, and the CalBar-registered four-year-long distance learning law school students must take a special exam called that "First Year Law Students Exam" (FYLSE) to prove that they're good enough law students to continue and finish the 2nd through 4th years; and, also, that there's a sufficiently high likelihood of their successfully passing the bar exam when they finish law school. The FYLSE, then, is intended to wash-out those who just can't cut it, just as the rigorous admissions process and the taking of the LSAT is intended to do the same thing at ABA-accredited law schools.

The three-year CalBar-accredited law school students, however, do not need to take the FYLSE. Three-year CalBar-accredited law schools tend to be every bit as good as ABA-accredited ones, but the reason they're not actually ABA-accredited tends to be because of something which has nothing to do with their academic quality or rigor but, instead, has something to do with a technicality which keeps them from being ABA-accredited, such as, for example, that they're just too darned small, and don't generate the kind of revenues that the ABA believes a law school needs to generate in order to be successful.

Once a graduate of any of California's non-ABA-accredited law schools graduates with a JD, then passes California's bar exam, and also passes the ethics exam, and also clears the comprehensive background check, then s/he may be licensed as an attorney exactly the same as any ABA-accredited law school graduate. All bar cards are the same color, and once a person gets one in his/her pocket, s/he's just as much a lawyer as any other lawyer... able to practice in any and all areas in which any other lawyer may practice. In fact, even graduates of CalBar-registered distance learning law schools, once they're admitted to California's bar, may be admitted to practice in the federal court system.

However, unlike graduates of ABA-accredited law schools, those who've graduated from one of California's non-ABA-accredited law schools may not be allowed to practice, or sit for the bar exam in, other states. Certain other states require that all their lawyers have graduated from only ABA-accredited schools, and that's it. Certain other states, however,will allow people to become lawyers in them if they've graduated from other than an ABA-accredited law school in another state, but usually only after they've practiced law, full-time, in their original home state (in which they got their non-ABA-accredited legal education) for a few years... typically from 3 to 7 years, in most states; and I believe it's 10 years in, for example, Florida.

That said, there is one state -- Wisconsin -- that will allow a graduate of a non-ABA-accredited law school located in other than Wisconsin to sit for its bar exam without having first practiced law, full-time, for a certain number of years back in his/her home state where his/her law school is located...

...however, Wisconsin does require that s/he is already a member of his/her home state's bar, first. So, then, in other words, a person could get even only a CalBar-registered distance learning JD (during which, of course, s/he necessarily passed his/her FYLSE); then pass both the California bar and its separate ethics exam; then clear the hurdle of California's comprehensive background check; and then become a member of California's bar, licensed to practice law in California...

...and thens/he could immediately go sit for Wisconsin's bar exam (and its ethics exam, and clear its background check), and immediately become a lawyer there, too. No other state will allow that.

Some states -- like Texas, for example -- will allow graduates of non-ABA-accredited law schools to sit for their bar exams after they have practiced law for a certain number of years back in the state in which said law school is physically located; however, they specifically exclude distance learning law schools from any of that.

So, then, Wisconsin is at one end of the permissability spectrum when it comes to states other than California admitting to the practice of law those who have graduated fromCalBar-registered distance learning law schools, and Texas is at the other end. Of course, if you stop and think about it, much the same sort of thing can be said for the two states' respective politics, as well. [grin]

The ABA publishes an annual guide (usually downloadable from the ABA website) entitled the "Comprehensive Guide to Bar Admission Requirements" which explains every single state's various requirements -- via many pages of comprehensive (and quite excellent, to be candid) tables, with excellent footnotes -- to become licensed to practice law in them. I could not more strongly recommend it for anyone considering becoming a lawyer.

Down in the "sources and related links" section of this web page, I've placed a link to the ABA web page from which a PDF file version of the ABA's "Comprehensive Guide to Bar Admission Requirements" may be downloaded. Just go to that ABE web page (linked to in this web page's "sources and related links," and then scroll on that ABA web page down to...

ADMISSION TO THE BAR

The criteria for eligibility to take the bar examination or to otherwise qualify for bar admission are set by each state, not by the ABA or the Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar. Students and applicants to law schools should always check with the bar admissions authority in their state conc[e]rning their eligibility to take the bar exam. Information on each state's rules about the legal education that students must obtain in order to sit for that state's bar exam and a directory of state bar admission agencies can be found in the Comprehensive Guide to Bar Admission Requirements.

...that last part (the name of the guide), in italics, being clickable on that page; and so, if clicked upon, it will cause the guide PDF file to begin downloading.

Do go download it. It's indispensable for anyone considering the practice of law.

So, then, the bottom line answer to the question, "how [long] does it take to get through law school" is: It depends...

...on the state, and the school, and several other factors. Generally, though, it's three years of full-time study... at least at most ABA-accredited laws schools.

Hope that helps!