It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
I was doing a bunch of research on this topic, but at the end of the day, I can't seem to really find the benefits of such programs. @oshun1 posted a discussion about JD-LLM in International Law. I'm curious about the concept of such a program, and don't see the point. For many schools, you can learn the exact same things, and can spend a semester abroad as a normal JD. The same goes for the other joint programs too. So, for those applying to joint-programs, can you please share what is the benefit of the JD-LLM, or other joint programs? Is it more prestigious during and after graduation? Does it allow for more opportunities and resources? Thank you.
Comments
I've had the same question myself! Generally, what I've seen is advice that LLMs for a great majority of law students aren't worth it, or that there's no real quantifiable advantage. It also seems like, especially in the US, that LLMs are looked upon with suspicion, that they lack prestige, and leave some employers wondering why you decided to spend your time doing that. It seems like there are some exceptions: LLMs in tax, international dispute resolution, and patent and intellectual property law have an okay rep. A lot of students who have law degrees in other countries will get LLMs in the US because it allows them to practice (but others warn that it will make an American look like a foreign-educated lawyer, which is negative for some US firms). And it seems like there are some folks out there arguing that an LLM for some of those hoping to do some kinds of International Law are useful.
(Be aware, though, that that advice is for "barristers" aka referring to lawyers in the UK, and it may not be as helpful for US JD students. That's because in the UK and in many other countries, the JD equivalent (LLB) is undertaken during when US students are in their undergraduate BA years. A lot of UN-type jobs only require a master's level degree, so if you're from the US and you have a BA and a JD, that's enough.)
Here's a law professor arguing against an LLM in international law:
Here are some good articles arguing against LLMs:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/llm-degree-worth-harrison-barnes
https://abovethelaw.com/2010/09/what-is-the-value-of-an-llm-degree/
Anyway, would love to hear any other poster's thoughts and advice.
So from the sounds of it, it sounds like some LLMs provide specialized, practical training, and allow you to meet more peers from the international community.
I have not applied to a joint degree program. That said, joint degree programs are geared toward those who are dead set on going into certain fields where their joint degrees would actually prove helpful. As far as my knowledge is concerned, the only fields where a joint degree may prove helpful for an American lawyer is (1) tax law and (2) academia. I don't know about prestige, opportunities, or resources. It would look impressive on résumé... to gullible people like me, at least.
I hope that quote was taken out of context, because the professor's explanation of "no" is nowhere to be found. If the professor left the explanation out on purpose, this lingering sense of suspicion I have acquired from reading the article will stay around for quite a while.
I'd say, though, if the main reason someone did an LLM was to meet more peers from the international community, there are definitely more worthwhile ways to do that.
lolllll, hahahaha.
Anyone have any advice a JD/Masters in Public Policy?
Sorry jack, that's way out of my wheelhouse.
I know this is an old post, but I'm wondering if JD/MS in Patent Law would be worth the extra tuition? Most patent lawyers get their training on the job, but if I could show I already know (more so) what I'm doing, wouldn't that be really good? Perhaps, though, it wouldn't make that much of a difference in the long run. I am looking at UMinn which isn't a T14 school and I'm wondering if graduating with a joint degree would help my job prospects in big law. Thoughts?