what is law school essay examination

• Find a Lawyer
• Ask a Lawyer
• Research the Law
• Law Schools
• Laws & Regs
• Newsletters
• Justia Connect
• Pro Membership
• Basic Membership
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• Platinum Placements
• Gold Placements
• Justia Elevate
• Justia Amplify
• PPC Management
• Google Business Profile
• Social Media
• Justia Onward Blog
• Studying for a Law School Exam

Students are often tested on their legal knowledge through examinations given at the end of the semester or year. While students may be familiar with final exams that cover a large amount of material, they may be less familiar with the hypothetical format of many law school exams or the unique nature of a law school open book exam. A bit of preparation and practice will help even the newest law students succeed.

How should I study for a law school exam?

Studying for a law school exam can be a daunting task. Some professors may point students to specific topics to study, but often anything covered during class or in the syllabus will be fair game. It is a good idea to gather any study materials recommended by your professor, as well as any of your professor’s old exams or practice exams, which may be posted online in places like your library’s course materials webpage. You may also want to review your outlines and use some of your study time to draft more concise outlines to study or use on an open book exam.

What if my professor allows me to use notes?

You may feel relieved to learn that your exam will be open book, but this does not necessarily mean that you will be able to earn a great score without any preparation. Law school exams are typically limited to two or three hours, and you will probably use all of the allotted time. Crafting specific notes (sometimes called “attack outlines” or “mini outlines”) for open book exams is a great way to ensure that you are using this time efficiently. Your notes should be structured with your particular professor and course in mind, but a good place to start is to make a condensed one-page or half-page outline for each major topic that will allow you to access the relevant information with the flip of a page. For example, a portion of a mini Torts outline may look like this:

• False Imprisonment
• One person intends to confine another without consent or legal authority
• Their actions directly or indirectly cause confinement, and
• The other person is conscious of the confinement or is harmed by it
• The person confined knew of a reasonable means of escape and declined to use it
• Shopkeeper’s privilege — a store owner reasonably believed an individual stole or attempted to steal their property and detained the individual for a reasonable time in a reasonable manner
• Threats of immediate physical force may be sufficient
• Withholding important property, such as a passport, may be sufficient
• Big Town Nursing Home, Inc. v. Newman

As you can see, not all of the information that you will have learned will be contained in these condensed notes. Instead, they should provide you with the bare bones of each topic and jog your memory as to the details. Some professors award extra points when students cite specific cases in their exam answers, but it may be best to leave cases (or at least full case names) out to save space if your professor confirms that citations will not be necessary. Whether or not you include case names, you may also want to include summaries of important concurrences and dissents studied in class. Finally, remember to include notes about the specific points that your professor has noted are important and your professor’s personal interpretations of the law, which may be more helpful on an exam than the general rules that you may find online or in commercial study materials.

Justia provides outlines of key cases for over 30 law school topics, which contain links to the full text of each case. These outlines may be helpful in preparing notes and studying for law school exams.

Once you have completed your attack outlines, you may want to put them to the test by taking at least one practice exam and timing yourself. You will learn not only whether you need to include different information in your notes, but also whether the length or format of your mini outlines is slowing you down.

What is the best way to answer a law school exam question?

While law school exam questions will vary in style and structure, especially for advanced courses, many of these questions are posed as hypotheticals that students must analyze. You may have already heard of the “IRAC” formula: I ssue, R ule, A pplication (or A nalysis), C onclusion. The best exam answers will typically follow a rough outline of this formula, with students identifying each relevant issue contained within the question, correctly recognizing the rule(s) of law implicated, applying the rule of law to the issues, and drawing a clear conclusion based on their analysis.

A student’s issue-spotting section should be little more than a recitation of each issue that the student will address. In the rule section, a student should strive to synthesize a clear rule based on the many cases and resources studied in class. It may be helpful to have already written such a rule in an attack outline in preparation. Students should be careful to save all of their analysis for the application section, where professors are likely to be looking for a few key points. The best students will often also include the caveats or arguments that go against their analysis and distinguish them. Finally, in the conclusion section, a student should be sure to write one clear sentence stating their conclusion and reiterate their issue, rule, and application sections very briefly. Students are sometimes taught to begin their conclusion with “probably yes” or “probably no,” acknowledging when their application may be subject to interpretation or they are lacking sufficient information.

In addition to IRAC, some students are taught “CREAC”: C onclusion, R ule, E xplanation, A pplication, C onclusion; or “TREAT”: T opic sentence, R ule, E xplanation, A pplication, T opic sentence. These formulas are more or less the same and should be used only if required by professors or genuinely helpful to students. Otherwise, clear and organized answers, in whatever form, are best.

The best way to answer a law school exam question is to be as clear and organized as possible. Most students should avoid legalese and superfluous phrases. Outlining answers before answering in full may help students keep themselves on track. They may also find success with using introductory paragraphs, topic sentences, and descriptive headings to distinguish each section of an answer.

How are law school exams graded?

There are many different ways in which a professor may award points for a law school exam question. One professor may give equal weight to each IRAC section, while another may award the majority of points only when a student arrives at the correct conclusion. Some of the nicest professors will actually note, either before the exam or within the exam, how many points each question is worth and how they recommend that students divide their time. It doesn’t hurt to simply ask your professor how they grade exams during class or their office hours. If in doubt, it will likely pay off to give the most attention to your application section.

What are some common mistakes that students make in exams?

The biggest mistake that students can make is assuming that they do not need to prepare for open book exams or neglecting to ask their professors questions. However, even prepared students can make mistakes. One mistake that new law students commonly make is misreading the “call of the question.” The “call of the question” refers to the specific question that the exam is asking the student to answer. While this may seem obvious, law school exam questions, especially hypotheticals, can be extremely long and complicated. Some exam questions even include completely irrelevant information. If a student is not careful, they may end up answering a question not even posed by the exam. Many students find it helpful to highlight or underline the call of the question (there may be more than one!) as they read and to double-check that they have answered it by the time that they are finished drafting.

Another mistake that some law students make is not showing their work. Much like math teachers, many professors will award partial credit when students show their work, even if they do not arrive at the correct conclusion or run out of time answering. One way that a student can show their work is to mark up the question sheet. For example, a student may circle or underline each issue that they spot in a question and outline their answer on the question sheet or within the answer box. If the student then runs out of time or forgets to include something in their answer, a professor may award partial credit. It may be a good idea to mark up each exam question and outline all of your answers before going back to write them out in full.

Is there a difference between law school and undergraduate essay questions?

Undergraduate essay questions are often answered with a recitation of information learned throughout a course, with little of a student’s personal additions. However, law school essay questions are best answered not by regurgitating rules and cases, but by taking the rules that may be extracted from the materials studied in class and continuing your analysis by using the same strand of logic. While it is important to demonstrate to your professor that you can identify the relevant issues and rules, it may be more important to show that you can think like a lawyer by fully analyzing a legal situation.

Last reviewed October 2023

US Law Schools Contents   

• US Law Schools
• Justia Case Law Outlines
• Connecticut
• Massachusetts
• Mississippi
• New Hampshire
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Pennsylvania
• Puerto Rico
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• Washington, D.C.
• West Virginia
• Law Professors Blogs
• Writing a Law School Outline
• Paying for Law School
• US Law Schools FAQ
• Bankruptcy Lawyers
• Business Lawyers
• Criminal Lawyers
• Employment Lawyers
• Estate Planning Lawyers
• Family Lawyers
• Personal Injury Lawyers
• Estate Planning
• Personal Injury
• Business Formation
• Business Operations
• Intellectual Property
• International Trade
• Real Estate
• Financial Aid
• Course Outlines
• Law Journals
• US Constitution
• Regulations
• Supreme Court
• Circuit Courts
• District Courts
• Dockets & Filings
• State Constitutions
• State Codes
• State Case Law
• Legal Blogs
• Business Forms
• Product Recalls
• Justia Connect Membership
• Justia Premium Placements
• Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
• Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
• Testimonials

Popular Articles:

Essay writing part i - before the exam.

Long before you take your first law school exam, or the bar exam itself, you should begin acquainting yourself with the communication skills necessary to succeed both as a law student and as a lawyer. The first and foremost skill, communicating logical arguments, is honed by perfecting your legal essays.

Before you begin writing, though, you need to be in the right mindset. Forget that you are writing to your professor or bar examiner, and imagine that you are writing to a judge. The career that you are preparing for requires you to gather the relevant facts, laws, and case precedent in order to present them in a logical, professional, and efficient manner to a judge. The sooner you begin operating with the mindset that you are the lawyer, and your professor is the judge, the sooner you will begin producing quality exam essays.

The following guides will help you reach this goal:

Write Efficiently

To write the best essay possible, you need to first master the art of efficient legal writing; which is the ability to write only what is necessary in as few words as possible while retaining readability. While this process is difficult and will go against most of your writing habits, your first year of law school should present you with many opportunities to hone this skill; and you should embrace them. Training yourself to write efficiently will provide two general yet major benefits for you as a law student:

First, legal exams are timed events and you need to maximize that time. By writing in an efficient fashion, you will provide yourself the time needed to thoroughly address the main issues of the question as well as less relevant issues; thus maximizing the points earned. Basically, you will be maximizing the points you can earn for every minute of exam time. If you can state the same legal argument with 50% less words than your peers, you will have time to address more issues in the current essay question or get a head start on the next essay.

Second, this extra time will provide you with additional time to think and outline your answer, creating a much more elegant response. This is handy because the more readable your answer is, the easier it will be for your professor (or bar examiner) to understand your logic, thus give you points for proving arguments that might otherwise be lost in a disorganize essay.

For more information, see: Legal Writing.

Embrace The IRAC Method

If you haven't heard of the IRAC method or something similar, you should acquaint yourself with it HERE to better understand the terms used in this article. 

Briefly though, the IRAC method is comprised of four parts: Identifying the Issue at hand and facts that make that issue relevant, identifying the Rules (statutes or court precedent) that pertain to that issue, Applying the relevant rules to the facts, and then your Conclusion based on that application. This system is good for organization, but is not the best layout for a (usually) complex essay. For a good essay answer for a question that involves two or more issues, you may have to mingle your issues, rules, and application sections to maintain readability and efficiency.

For more detailed information, see The IRAC Method.

Begin Studying Long Before The Exam

Last, but definitely not least, you need to study every resource available to you before your law school exam or bar exam.

This is the last item on our list only because disciplined study habits are not something that can be gained from a website. All we can do is emphatically point out the need for such disciplined study. Basically, the more you study, the more the essay will write itself. If you have studied thoroughly enough, you will have a decent grasp of all the laws and case precedent regarding the subject of the exam, and the obscured legal issues within the question will become obvious.

If you have studied adequately and knowing the legal rules surrounding a subject, the relevant issues will make themselves obvious to you as you read the fact pattern of the question. By taking notes during this reading of these relevant facts that relate to the rules, you will already have created a rough outline of your essay answer. With a little more fine tuning, you will be ready to write an excellent essay answer, and breeze through your final exams, or even the bar exam.

Weather Alert Block

Reunification.

For up-to-date information regarding the reunification of Penn State's two law schools, please click here .

Lewis Katz Building, University Park, PA

• Dean's Welcome
• Innovative Legal Education
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Student Life
• Strategic Plan
• Our History
• J.D. Program
• LL.M. Program
• S.J.D. Program
• Specialized Fields of Study
• Joint Degrees
• Academic Advisement
• Academic Affairs Office
• Office for Academic Success
• Research Centers
• J.D. Admissions
• LL.M. Admissions
• S.J.D. Admissions
• Current Students
• Employment Data
• Contact Our Staff
• Employer Information
• Beyond the Bar
• Legal Clinics
• Externships
• Extracurricular Advocacy Experiences
• Legal Research and Writing
• Practice-Oriented Courses
• Summer Experiences
• Full-Time Faculty
• Adjunct Faculty
• Affiliated Penn State Faculty
• Emeritus Faculty
• All Faculty
• Education Abroad
• International Curriculum
• International Law Practice & Extracurricular Activities
• Research and Visiting Scholars
• About the Law Library
• Faculty Resources
• Student Resources
• Alumni & Visitor Resources
• Penn State Law eLibrary
• Ask a Law Librarian

RESOURCES FOR LAW SCHOOL EXAM WRITING​

• Christine S. Chong,  The Perfect Practice Exam: The Skill of Legal Analysis  (2017)  
• Suzanne Darrow-Kleinhaus,  Mastering the Law School Exam: A Practical Blueprint for Preparing and Taking Law School Exams  (2d ed. 2023)  
• John C. Dernbach,  Writing Essay Exams to Succeed in Law School (Not Just to Survive)  (4th ed. 2014)  
• Charles R. Calleros,  Law School and Exams: Preparing and Writing to Win  (3d ed. 2021)  
• S.I. Strong,  How to Write Law Exams: IRAC Perfected  (2d ed. 2020)  
• Charles H. Whitebread,  The Eight Secrets of Top Exam Performance in Law School  (2d ed. 2007)  
• Steven J. Bracci,  Sum and Substance Audio on Exam Skills: Essay Writing  (1996)  
• Helene Shapo & Marshall Shapo,  Law School Without Fear: Strategies for Success  (3d ed. 2009)  
• Andrew J. McClurg,  1L of a Ride: A Well-Traveled Professor’s Roadmap for Success in the First Year of Law School  (4th ed. 2021)  
• CALI: On CALI, you will find extensive lessons and podcasts about law school success, including exam preparation and writing lessons and podcasts. The relevant lessons and podcasts can be found in the categories of Legal Concepts and Skills, Law School Success, and Legal Writing.
• Transfer Students

Practice Skills

• Clinical Training
• Extracurricular Activities
• Academic Calendar

International

• LL. M. Overview
• S.J.D. Overview
• LL.M & S.J.D for International Lawyers
• Practice International Law
• Research with Impact
• School of International Affairs

Information For

• Prospective Students
• Faculty & Staff
• Open Positions
• COVID-19 Info

PENN STATE HOME >

Make a Gift > Apply Now >

View Sitemap

The LSAT - Law School Admission Test

The first step in your legal education journey

Are you ready to start your law school journey?

Studies have consistently shown the LSAT to be the single best predictor of first-year law school performance, even better than undergraduate grade-point average. An integral part of law school admission, the LSAT is also the only test that helps prospective law students determine if law school is right for them. Some law schools will accept tests other than the LSAT for admission. However, students who want to maximize their chances for admission and be best prepared for law school are encouraged to take the LSAT.

Learn more about the LSAT advantage

LSAT Format Changes — Starting August 2024

Starting with the August 2024 test, the multiple-choice portion of the LSAT will consist of two scored Logical Reasoning sections and one scored Reading Comprehension section, plus one unscored variable section.

Testing Formats for the 2023-2024 Cycle

The LSAT at a Test Center

In response to feedback from test takers since 2020, LSAC will offer individuals the option to take the LSAT at a test center starting with the August 2023 administration. Find out where your nearest test center is, and get details about using this modality.

The Remote LSAT

LSAC will continue to offer the LSAT in a digital, remotely proctored format through the 2023-2024 testing cycle. Find out more about this modality, including technical requirements and other details to inform your decision.

LSAT Writing

LSAT Writing is a required part of the LSAT for all test takers and is administered remotely using secure proctoring software. You can complete LSAT Writing as early as 8 days prior to the multiple-choice test.

Latest LSAT News You Can Use

June LSAT Scheduling

A New Approach to LSAT Writing Will Debut on August 1, 2024

August 2024 Practice Tests now available on LSAC’s LawHub

Testing Accommodations

Through our deep commitment to disability rights, we will continue to address the needs of all individuals with disabilities who require testing accommodations. Whether you choose to take your LSAT in person at a test center or remotely on your own computer, we will make every effort to ensure all individuals are able to fully demonstrate their skills when they take their test.

Learn More about testing accommodations

Components of the LSAT

The primary part of the LSAT is a four-section, multiple-choice test. It’s important you familiarize yourself with the different types of LSAT questions so you can optimize your test preparation and put yourself in a position to succeed. All LSAT takers are also required to complete a written essay called LSAT Writing.

Learn More about the LSAT

Start Planning for Test Day

Upcoming LSAT Dates

Registration for the 2024-2025 testing cycle will open in mid-May. Test dates and score release dates are available now to help you decide which upcoming administration best fits your schedule.

Find Test Dates

Review the Candidate Agreement

The Candidate Agreement sets forth the terms and conditions for the LSAT. Review this document for details about prohibited items and other rules pertaining to test day.

Read More - Candidate Agreement

June 2024 LSAT ends April 23, 2024 . -->Registration for the 2024-2025 LSAT testing year opens in mid-May .

Register for this Test --> Check out the test dates

Top law school final exam tips

High-level tips to help you prepare for your law school finals.

1. What to expect 2. Professor preferences 3. Read the facts 4. Answer the question 5. Organize your thoughts 6. Before you start writing 7. IRAC format 8. Argue both sides of legal issues

What to expect from your law school final exams

A full semester of taking copious notes, reading, briefing, outlining, classroom discussions, and surviving the Socratic Method culminates in one final act. Writing law school final exams.

Most professors give essay exams for law school finals. Some are single-topic, short-answer questions. Others can go on for pages — known as issue-spotter exams. Some are taken in class, while others are take-home, allowing students more than the traditional amount of time to answer the essay questions. There are open-book and closed-book exams. And there are those few professors who create multiple-choice exams or (in rare cases) give oral exams.

Whatever type of exam your professor chooses to administer, you will be tested on your ability to analyze and resolve legal problems and demonstrate your grasp of the materials. Your course grade will be largely, if not exclusively, based on your final exam performance.

Here are some high-level tips to help you prepare for your law school finals.

Understand your professor preferences

The foundation for success on your law school finals is to know who is grading the exam. Your mission is to make that person’s life easier. Ultimately, different professors prefer different types of answers. Some want extreme detail — every possible interpretation of every possible fact. Some like answers straight to the point within a page count. It’s okay to ask your professor.

It’s a given that all professors expect well-organized, legible answers, no matter how brief or expansive.

Read the facts carefully

Read the entire problem through once rather quickly to get a general understanding. Focus on the question you are being asked to respond to at the end of the problem.

Then, read through the scenario again, slowly and carefully. This time, evaluate every word and phrase to identify all potential issues. Applying the law to the facts presented is critical in any law school exam. And changing the facts even slightly could result in a completely different result.

Answer the question that is being asked

Always keep in mind the specific question you are actually being asked to answer. Although you may receive credit for ancillary information provided in your answer, you will only receive maximum credit if you specifically answer the question that is presented. Therefore, you must determine what role the professor is asking you to assume before answering. Are you the defendant’s attorney, or do you represent the plaintiff? Are you a judge trying to resolve the dispute? It makes a real difference in how you answer.

Attempts to include unrelated material in your answer could backfire if your professor believes you are incapable of ruling out irrelevant information.

Organize your thoughts

Organization is critical to writing a strong essay answer on any law school finals. After all, if the professor cannot follow your analysis, how can they grade it fairly and appropriately?

Before you start writing, chart the issues in the manner in which you will resolve them. Again, make sure the issues are related to the actual question you are being asked to answer. Arrange the issues in the sequence in which you would expect a court to address them (i.e., normally jurisdictional issues first, then liability, then remedies). Capture the points you will discuss in sufficient detail to prompt you to think the problem through to a fair and practical solution.

Complete your analysis and organization before you start writing

You may find that you devote a solid one-fourth of the time allocated to reading, analyzing the problem and organizing your answer. That’s okay. A logical organization and clear expression of ideas will strengthen your answer. This purposeful approach may even bolster an answer that’s somewhat weak.

Use the IRAC format for each issue raised

As you begin to write out your answer, we recommend you analyze each dispute using the IRAC method.

First, state the issue in precise legal terms (i.e., “Did the defendant’s mistake in computing his bid prevent the formation of an enforceable contract?”). Be careful to avoid generalizations or oversimplification of the issue.

Next, state the applicable law. Be sure to define the pertinent elements of a rule as well as any terms of art.

Application

Then, apply the rules to the facts using arguments. Avoid the common error of stating a rule and then jumping straight to the conclusion. Your professor will not infer a supporting argument for you — you must spell it out. Remember to use the Issue T you created earlier to remind you to discuss which facts in the fact pattern support (or prevent) application of the rule. Discuss and weigh each fact given and the logical inference to be drawn from it. Be sure to include counterarguments where possible.

Finally, come to a straightforward conclusion on each issue. Make sure you have clearly answered the question asked, and you have not left an issue hanging. If a number of outcomes are possible, discuss the merits of each, but always select one position as your conclusion and state why. In close cases, it is generally best to select the most practical and fair conclusion. Just don’t consider yourself bound by the “general rule” or “majority view” in answering on a law school final exam unless the question clearly calls for such.

Argue both sides of legal issues you spot and remember policy concerns

Once a dispute has been framed and a legal theory has been asserted, identify any problems surrounding the theory’s application as well as arguments that each side can make in support of their position.

Also, if time allows, include just a sentence or two regarding the policy implications of your conclusions. Law is meant to provide order in society and, when imposing laws, you should always predict the impact that they will have.

Take a deep breath and try not to panic

If you find yourself panicking, not understanding the issues presented or not remembering the rules related to such issues, don’t panic. Instead, close your eyes and take a few deep breaths. Then, start working systematically through the information with these tips and do your best on your law school finals.

BARBRI 1L Mastery

The most complete and effective 1L resource available.

Using the IRAC method

Learn more about using the IRAC method in law school

Outlining 101

Tips for developing your law school note-taking and outlining system.

• Bar Review - Repeat Examinee
• Bar Review - Attorney's Test
• 1L Survival
• MBE, Multistate, & MPRE
• Fleming's Fundamentals of Law
• Nailing the Bar, Time Tyler
• Seigel Series

Turn Studying Into Success On Your Law School Essay Exams

To achieve a passing score on your law school essay exams, you must effectively brief your assigned cases, create carefully crafted substantive law study outlines, and practice essay exam writing on a regular basis. Do those things and you will achieve success in law school. 

To begin an effective study program, you must first brief all of your assigned cases, because you locate the rules from the cases and you learn the legal reasoning that is foundational to your legal analysis skill development. 

Next, you must attend all of your classes and take copious notes, which is paramount to incorporating the relevant material from class discussions into your study outline. By briefing your cases and engaging in classroom activity, you will enhance your ability to memorize and understand the issues and rules for each course. You will then use that expertise to maximize skill development in the law school process.

Finally, and most important to the study process, you must incorporate essay exam practice into your study program by practicing your essay analysis and writing skills under timed, simulated exam conditions . Practicing essay examsmanship will tell you what you know and what you need to improve so you can write on all the issues tested in each exam within exam timing parameters - usually sixty minutes for most essay exams.  

Law student study guides and class discussions assist with learning issues and rules, but only you can develop essay writing skills. You must learn to apply the law to law school exams, and the only way to become proficient in doing so is to practice exams under timed conditions so you learn how to perform to your full potential by the time of your midterm and final exams. 

Your Study Outline is Your Guide to Success

For the reasons given above, creating a substantive law study outline for each course is foundational to preparing for your law school essay exams. Your outline should include all of the issues and rules in the order you are learning them in your classes.  

In Torts, for example, you will generally commence with learning the intentional torts. As such, for your study outline, you would head-note the first intentional tort, e.g., Assault, and then provide the Assault rule. You should add anything notable regarding each issue that may be tested on the exam - such as transferred intent - when learning intentional torts. 

Commercial law school study outlines like those offered by Fleming’s Fundamentals of Law are a tremendous resource when creating your own study outlines. They provide a comprehensive presentation of the subject material and ensure you have all the correct issues and rule statements in your own study outlines. You can use these commercial study guides to cross-reference issues in your selected law school subject to make sure you have included all of the required issues and rules, especially for complicated subjects like Products Liability and Defamation. These study guides are also a great resource to ensure you have all of the correct elements in your rule statements because every rule element of every rule must be developed when the related issue is raised by the facts of an essay exam. 

By combining the use of commercial law school study outlines with your own study outlines, you will have the best of all study resources, which promotes excellence in the law school process. 

Case Briefing Is An Important Component To Studying For Exams

The purpose of briefing cases is not only to learn the history and development of law but to extract your rules and learn legal reasoning that then must be incorporated into your law school essay exams. 

It is imperative to brief your cases yourself. Students who use canned briefs cheat themselves because they miss an integral part of the legal education that cannot be developed by any other means. Students who use canned briefs may save time, but they sacrifice the process of developing foundational legal reasoning skills that only comes from briefing cases themselves. 

When briefing your cases, you learn where information is generally located within the cases. You learn where to look for the case rules, how to identify the case reasoning, and how to incorporate those essential case ingredients into your course study outline. You also learn how the Court holds due to its discussion of the parties’ arguments and counter-arguments. That information is crucial because it assists with developing your analysis skills.  

Commit To Attending All Class Lectures

The California State Bar requires 80% attendance in your classes. However, best practice is that you strive for 100% class attendance. The lectures and discussions will reinforce your case briefing and assist with your comprehension of the subject, which translates into stronger analysis skills. Your professors will also provide you with insight regarding how to write a law exam for their respective courses. Take notes and incorporate the relevant portion of your notes into your study outline. 

Memorize Your Issues And Rules

When it comes to memorizing your issues and rules, you need to understand whether you are a visual , auditory , or reading/writing learner. Because I am a writing learner, I would memorize my issues and rules by writing them over and over again. My son is an auditory learner, so he can learn from a lecture without ever taking notes. For visual learners, flashcards are an excellent resource for learning rule statements. Determining how you learn and incorporating that into your study process will add to your success. 

Follow The IRAC Format When Writing Your Answer

For first-year law students, part of your studies includes understanding how to write a law school exam in the IRAC (Issue / Rule / Analysis-Application / Conclusion) format. It is imperative that you always write on each issue in the order you spot it in the exam. 

For example, in a Torts exam, if you have an Assault, a Battery, a second Assault, and a Conversion, you must write them in that order. However, the Call of the Question will govern, so always follow the Call because defenses may be written under a separate Call. Failure to correctly write on the Call of the Question and according to the instructions contained in each Call can result in a failing grade. 

In crafting your exam answer, you must start your answer with the title of the lawsuit such as "Pete v. David", because you need to show the professor who the litigants are in the case. You then head-note the first issue, which should be in bold and underlined so the grader can quickly identify the issue. Next, write the rule statement, then your analysis, and finally a conclusion for that issue. Repeat the process for each subsequent issue your raise. 

Fleming's offers a number of study guides for law school and Bar exam tested subjects that provide sample essay questions and model answers to ensure you have the correct format for passing any law school essay exam. 

If you’d like to see an excellent example of what I’m talking about, just click here .

Practice, Practice, Practice Your Essay Writing

Once you have learned how to create an effective substantive law outline with complete rules, you must take timed practice exams. This is the only way to develop your timing and analysis skills. 

One of the most fatal errors in writing a law school essay exam is running out of time. I do not believe there is a faster sixty minutes than taking a law school essay exam, so you must prepare under timed conditions. 

So often law students believe they understand the rules...until they take timed practice exams. Suddenly, they realize they do not really understand a part of a rule or how to apply the facts to a rule. They also realize that if they do not finish in the allotted exam time, they cannot pass the exam no matter how well they understand the law. Thus, practicing examsmanship teaches you how to allocate time in order to finish - a crucial exam requirement. 

Your law school exam practice must also include developing your analysis, which demands that you write on each element of the rule, supporting or negating it with the facts in a persuasive manner. With practice, you will be able to discover and rectify any weaknesses in your exam skills prior to taking your midterms and finals, which always results in high exam scores. 

Have The Determination And Discipline To Achieve Success On Your Essay Exams

It is important to understand that effective study for essay exams incorporates all aspects of what you are learning in law school. If you are having a difficult time with one aspect of the process, you need to dig deep and work even harder until you understand it. The worst thing you can do in law school is to settle for less than your goal. Having the discipline and determination to follow this approach will turn your hard work into success when taking your laws school essay exams. 

By implementing the principles described above, you will turn your studying into success, both in law school and on your law school essay exams.

Leave a comment

Comments must be approved before appearing

* Required fields

Be in the know and join our mailing list.

Download Your Free Sample Bar Exam Essay Q&A

Added to your cart:.

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Law School Toolbox®

All the tools you need for law school success

Writing an Essay Exam – You’ve Got to Have a Plan!

April 9, 2018 By Rose Safarian Leave a Comment

But here’s the best part – the same plan works for every law school and bar exam essay . Once you internalize your plan, all you have to do is concentrate on the substance. The plan even works for those professors who claim they don’t focus on IRAC. The plan helps you get through the material in a methodical way, ensuring you don’t leave issues on the table. So, if you’re ready and willing, here it is:

• Read the essay question once without making any markings on the fact pattern. You need to wake up your brain about the exact topic being tested. Once you get through the fact pattern once, focus on the call of the question and the instructions on how much time to allot for this one question;
• With the call of the question in your head, read the question again. This time, take a pen and/or highlighter and start circling or highlighting facts that seem important. You should also recognize issues at this point. Write something in the margin about those issues near the relevant facts;
• Now start creating a rough outline of your answer. List all the issues in a logical order. This may depend on the call of the question . Is it one claim you are analyzing, or are there several claims against different parties? That question will help you determine the organization.
• Once you have the rough outline sketched out, start plugging in the facts you have highlighted or circled next to the relevant issues. Do not discount the importance of this step. By putting the facts into your rough outline, you will remember to use those facts in your analysis – which will maximize the points you get in grading;
• Now go back and read the question again. Okay, I know, other people are already typing their answers, and I’m telling you to wait and read the question again. But here’s the thing – they don’t have a plan . They are throwing everything in including the kitchen sink because they are panicked and want the professor or grader to see how well they know the subject. But you have a plan , and you know that you will have plenty of time to focus your essay on what is truly relevant – which will ultimately impress the person grading the exam. With your rough outline in place and your brain focused on what is really important, this final reread of the fact pattern will most likely cause you to see more facts, and maybe more sub-issues, that can be plugged into your outline.
• Now it’s time to write! Oh, by the way this whole outlining process should take you about 15 minutes for a typical one hour exam. But here’s the thing – you’ve already done all the thinking. The writing part is the easy part. You just have to get through your outline, step-by-step, checking off issues and facts as each is completed. The person next to you, who has already been typing for 10 minutes, has stopped repeatedly to reread the question. There is no flow or logic in the presentation because issues are added as they are seen rather that in the appropriate places. Just imagine seeing an important issue for the first time with only 10 minutes left on the exam. You might actually sense the panic with the sound of frantic typing. Meanwhile, you are just plugging away at your outline.
• And finally – don’t forget to keep your eyes on the clock! All that preparation is for naught if you don’t get through the outline. Remember, this is a timed essay exam. Perfection is not expected . Issue spotting and analysis are the most important parts. So move through your outline methodically with your side-eye on the clock.

That’s the plan! I know it’s scary to devote this much time to preparation, but, in the long run, it will reduce your stress level and help you write a more thorough essay that should impress the person reading your answer.

But don’t celebrate too much – because you have to get your head back in the game and start the plan all over again for the next one hour essay question that has to be answered. Good luck!

Looking for some help to do your best in law school? Find out about our law school tutoring options.

About Rose Safarian

Rose Safarian is a law school tutor and bar exam tutor for the Law School Toolbox and the Bar Exam Toolbox. Rose earned her J.D. from the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law, and her B.A. from the University of California, at Los Angeles. During law school, Rose served as the Legislation Editor for the Pacific Law Journal ("Greensheets"). After graduating and passing the California bar, Rose worked as a Research Attorney for Justice Pauline Davis Hanson, of the Fifth District Court of Appeal, in Fresno, California. From there, Rose practiced law in the areas of civil litigation and appeals, before becoming an Adjunct Professor, then full time Professor, at San Joaquin College of Law. There, she focused on teaching Legal Writing, in various forms, including a class providing academic support to students struggling during their first year.

Reader Interactions

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Want Better Law School Grades?

Sign Up for Our Exam Tips!

• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions

Copyright 2024 Law School Toolbox®™

• 0 Shopping Cart $ 0.00 -->

Unlock Your Bar Exam Potential—For Free! Explore our Free Bar Exam Resources Center , master the essentials with our guide on passing the bar exam on your first try , and enhance your skills in our comprehensive 4-day “How to Pass” free mastery class . Your journey to success begins here.

Jumpstart Your Law Career! Exclusively for incoming law students, JD Advising’s Scholars Program offers 10 hours of personalized tutoring, essential study aids, and networking with top law firms. Transform your potential— apply for free today !

🌟 Boost Your Bar Exam Prep with JD Advising! Looking for one-on-one attention in your bar prep? Our expert bar exam tutors are ready to help you pass! Sign up early before spots fill up!

What are law school final exams like?

You may wonder exactly what law school final exams are like. Law school final exams are different than exams you may have taken in college or prior. Knowing what to expect will help ease your anxiety and lower your stress so that you can approach the exams with confidence. So, here we tell you exactly what to expect!

1. Every professor will give a different exam

Most law schools divide students into different sections during their first year. So, there might be two or three different sections, and although every section takes the same classes, they usually have different professors. What does this mean? Practically speaking, your Torts exam may—and probably will—look very different from the torts exam that another professor gives. Some professors will ask students to complete multiple-choice questions, short answer questions and a long essay question. Other professors may forgo asking multiple-choice questions in lieu of two lengthier essay questions. If your professor has not yet discussed the overall format of the exam, ask him or her about it in class or during office hours. Or, better yet, look to see if you can find past exams on file. Be prepared for the type of test that your professor gives.

2. Law school exams are usually racehorse exams

Law school essay exams pack a lot of issues in one fact pattern. Generally, an essay fact pattern will be one to three pages long. The fact pattern is basically a story where a lot happens. For example, in a Torts essay fact pattern, you may read a story of how a man goes grocery shopping, slips on the floor and can’t get up, the store fails to help him in a timely manner, a friend helps him but then lets him fall again. Then another person might get mad and punch the friend in the face . . . you get the idea. There will be a lot going on!

Your goal is to identify as many of the relevant issues as possible (i.e., negligence, assault, battery, etc.), accurately state the law for those issues, apply the law to the facts, and reach a well-reasoned conclusion.

The best way to prepare for this kind of exam is to practice. Practicing ahead of time will give you a huge advantage over your classmates who are  not  likely making practice a priority. Check out this in-depth guide on how to answer law school exam questions .

3. Exams may be open-book or closed-book

Most students are happy to hear that an exam is open-note or open-book. While this does provide a sense of comfort, do not rely on your outline or notes too much. Students often think that if an exam is open-note they do not have to memorize the law. This could not be further from the truth! There is no time to look up each rule in your outline. Do your best to memorize your outline regardless of whether your exam is open-book or closed-book! Memorization is an important skill—use techniques that have worked for you in the past (e.g., writing out the rules, reciting the rules, etc.). We actually recommend you prepare in a very similar manner whether your exam is open-book or closed-book. The primary difference is that if your exam is open-book, you want to make sure you have a very organized outline in case you need to look something up. But, either way, you should have the law memorized so you do not need to look it up . An outline is a safety net and the more grasp you have of the law, the more efficiently you will be able to apply it.

Please see this post on how to prepare for an open-book law school exam .  Please see this post on how to prepare for a closed-book law school exam . Please see this post on how to learn your law school outlines .

4. The final exams are generally three to four hours long

When was the last time that you sat down and took an exam that was three or four hours long? To perform your best on exam day, try to be well-rested and well-nourished. Almost all professors allow students to bring some coffee, tea, water, juice, etc. to the exam, as well as snacks that are not too noisy (e.g., you do not want to be the person munching loudly on chips!). Choose your snacks wisely—pick something that is high in protein and not too sugary. You want to make sure that you have enough energy to complete the entire exam. Practicing exams ahead of time will also help you get used to sitting and taking an exam for this lengthy period of time!

To make sure you don’t forget anything critical on law school final exam day, please see our law school final exam day checklist here .

5. You will hear other people typing their answers

By now you probably have a fairly good idea of whether it bothers you when you hear other people typing. If you are sensitive to noise and find earplugs helpful (and you’ve used them before), bring some with you. If you have never used earplugs before and you are interested in doing so, try them out now when you do a practice exam! It is better to get used to working with earplugs sooner rather than later.

Takeaway: practicing exams is the best way to prepare

Law school final exams are different than exams you may have taken in college. They are longer. They often have a racehorse fact-pattern format. And, you have to be prepared for whatever exam your  professor gives.

For this reason, do not make the mistake of thinking that the final exam for any of your classes is going to be similar to what you have been doing on a daily basis (i.e., reading and briefing cases). During the semester you learn one issue at a time (e.g., what constitutes a valid offer?). However, on the final exam you will be asked to spot many issues all at once—e.g., offer, acceptance, consideration, Statute of Frauds violations, anticipatory repudiation, etc. Most students do not practice identifying and analyzing multiple issues at once.

The best thing to do to prepare for final exams is to take the time to do practice exams your professor wrote. This will give you the best idea of what you might encounter on exam day.

If your professor is kind enough to give you a model answer or grading rubric for his or her practice exams, pay close attention to each issue the professor spotted and the rule of law. Then, if you encounter the same issues on exam day, you will have a better idea of how to write your answer. If you have a new professor or a professor who has not released any practice exams, do practice exams that other professors in your school have released for the same subject. For more information on how to take law school practice exams, see this post .

Go to the next topic, How do I answer law school exam questions? (an in-depth guide) .

Seeking success in law school.

• Benefit from personalized one-on-one tutoring by our seasoned law school tutors.
• Explore our NEW and highly acclaimed law school study aids , available for a free trial.

Related posts

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use
• Public Interest

By using this site, you allow the use of cookies, and you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service .

Cookie and Privacy Settings

We may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.

Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.

These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.

Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refusing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website. But this will always prompt you to accept/refuse cookies when revisiting our site.

We fully respect if you want to refuse cookies but to avoid asking you again and again kindly allow us to store a cookie for that. You are free to opt out any time or opt in for other cookies to get a better experience. If you refuse cookies we will remove all set cookies in our domain.

We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.

We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.

Google Webfont Settings:

Google Map Settings:

Google reCaptcha Settings:

Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:

You can read about our cookies and privacy settings in detail on our Privacy Policy Page.

• Privacy Overview
• Strictly Necessary Cookies

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

LEEWS (Law Essay Exam Writing System)

The Law School (Bar) Exam Writing / Study / Preparation System (LEEWS) will help you prepare for and write A exams (B's guaranteed) and/or pass the bar. Wentworth Miller - attorney, Yale law graduate ('77), Rhodes scholar has developed polished for over 25 years comprehensive system of preparation exam taking, applicable to any essay-type in legal subject, that is remarkably effective.

Audio Program now online

(click on free trial segment below), reactions to leews ... ( click for near 1,000 others. ).

A friend told me that his friend at Georgetown took LEEWS and scored the highest in two of his classes. Great lecturer. (Mr. Wu took LEEWS as a first semester 1L. He went on to be named editor-in-chief of the Columbia Law Review for ’98-’99.)

There are lots of commercial programs and aids designed to assist law students in studying for and writing exams, but—trust us—Wentworth Miller's [“LEEWS”] is the best of the bunch. [LEEWS] is the secret behind the success of more law review members than you can shake a stick at. You really should check it out.

LEEWS takes the old IRAC approach and vastly improves on it. LEEWS is a Godsend ...It is truly disgraceful that a LEEWS-type program is not part-and-parcel of every law school's pedagogy.

Mr. Miller: I want to thank you for the help I received by way of the CD program I ordered. My GPA was about 2.49 after my first year. I saw more C's than I care to enumerate. I listened to the program, utilized the strategy, and my grades this last semester [fall 2008] were much better—A, A-, B+, B. B. Put simply, it worked. Thanks.

I’m a 3L and currently “Grand Chancellor,” class of 2011. (1st in my class w/a 4.13 GPA.) I believe in giving credit where credit is due. LEEWS factored significantly in my academic success. [Audio program, summer before starting.] (This despite a median—for my school—LSAT score.) It framed not just my approach to taking exams, but my approach to thinking about the law, and thus what I took away from my classes. Scored several highest grade awards. In one where the final was out of 50 points, I ended up with 37—and the median score was 12!

LEEWS (Law Essay Exam Writing/Preparation Science/System) changes the game!

—  Art Jarrett, Temple '91 (Who then raised every grade a full point and made dean's list.)

Get LEEWS Now!

Search our site, connect with us.

First-Year Law Students' Examination

The First-Year Law Students' Examination (FYLSX), or "baby bar," is a one-day test given in June and October. 

Not all law students have to take the baby bar. Law students completing their first year of law study in a juris doctor degree program at a State Bar-unaccredited registered law school, or through the Law Office Study Program, and those without two years of college work attending a California-accredited or an American Bar Association (ABA)-accredited law school must take the First-Year Law Students' Exam after completing their first year of law study.

Law students who have advanced to their second year of law study at an ABA or California-accredited law school and who have completed a minimum of 60 semester, or 90 quarter units of undergraduate work are generally exempt from the exam.

Credit for law study completed after passing the First-Year Law Students’ Exam is governed by the Business and Professions Code and by Rule 4.31 of the Admissions Rules .

• Register for the exam online
• How is the exam  graded ? 
• See past examination questions and selected answers

Payment policies

Credit and debit card payments: For credit or debit card payments, a processing fee of 2.5 percent will be added to all charges. If your credit or debit card transaction is denied, you will not be able to submit your application until you provide another Mastercard, Visa, American Express, or Discover card.

ACH (e-check) Payment: You may also make payments by ACH. There are no processing fees associated with ACH payments. You will need your Bank Routing Number and Bank Account Number. It takes seven days for ACH payments to be processed by our bank processor. If within those seven days a payment is returned for insufficient funds or declined for any reason, your application will be considered incomplete until a replacement payment is received. If full payment is not received within 14 days from notification by the State Bar, the application will be deemed abandoned.

All unsuccessful payments will be assessed an administrative fee equal to the amount charged by the State Bar’s banking institution or $20, whichever is greater. The application deadline will be enforced if the payment is not received within the published deadlines.

Refund of fees policy

First-Year Law Students’ Examination applications that do not have a successfully settled payment will be considered incomplete. An unsuccessful payment is, but is not limited to, returned checks, declined ACH payments, or credit card chargebacks requested by the credit card holder.

All unsuccessful payments will be assessed an administrative fee equal to the amount charged by the State Bar’s banking institution or $20, whichever is greater. 

If full payment is not received within 14 days from notification by the State Bar, the application will be deemed abandoned. If the application final filing deadline has not passed, an applicant may submit a new application. The application must be accompanied by the appropriate payment, including any applicable fees in effect at that time.

Related links

• Find upcoming dates and application deadlines
• Statistics on the First-Year Law Students’ Exam
• What is the State Bar's refund policy?

Home > VLR > Vol. 42 > Iss. 2 (1989)

Law School Examinations

Philip C. Kissam

This Essay explores the values, limits, and adverse effects of our system of law school examinations. Law school examinations encourage or require students to acquire certain knowledge while measuring a kind of knowledge as well. Importantly, this process occurs within a context of political relationships between law schools, law firms, the legal profession, and the state, as well as between law school administrators, faculty, and students. This system of "power/knowledge"relationships constitutes the law school's basic mechanism of self-regulation or, more generally, a mechanism of social control over legal education. In this era of substantial uncertainty about purposes and methods in legal education, an inquiry into law school examinations and their political contexts is both timely and potentially fruitful. Prior studies have developed important criticisms of law school examinations, but these studies have been partial or limited critiques.

These studies have uncritically accepted conventional beliefs about law school practices and have overlooked certain values and disadvantages of the current examination system. This Essay provides a "systemic analysis" and a "total critique" by assessing the structure, contextual relationships, values, and adverse effects of law school examinations.

This Essay seeks to improve our understanding of law school exams in three basic ways. First, Part II presents a new interpretation of what the modern law school examination requires and measures of student performance. This interpretation emphasizes the reading and grading methods that are used by most contemporary law professors, the implications of these methods for the thought and writing style of examination writers, and the personal attributes that are required for examination success. Second,

Parts III, IV, and V consider the law school examination in context in order to assess the values, limits, and disadvantages of the examination system. This analysis focuses initially on relationships of law school exams with student admissions and faculty recruitment policies, with state licensure exams, and with law firm hiring practices. The analysis also considers the apparent disjunctions between classroom and examination work, the reasons for these disjunctions, and how these disjunctions serve the examination system and social interests. This analysis also discusses the several ways that examination practices influence the lives and work of students and faculty. Third, Part VI describes changes to our examination practices that could improve the quality of legal education without jeopardizing the main values of the present system.

Recommended Citation

Philip C. Kissam, Law School Examinations, 42 Vanderbilt Law Review 433 (1989) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol42/iss2/3

Included in

Legal Education Commons

• Journal Home
• About This Journal
• Aims & Scope
• Editorial Board
• Most Popular Papers
• Receive Email Notices or RSS

Advanced Search

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

Attending an Unaccredited Law School: the Pros and Cons

Law schools not approved by the American Bar Association offer savings and convenience, but limited job prospects.

Pros, Cons of Unaccredited Law Schools

Getty Images

More than 30 law schools in the U.S. and a few more international law schools overseas provide a legal education without ABA accreditation.

When people talk about law school , they generally mean one of the nearly 200 law schools accredited by the American Bar Association, which is the national organization of the legal profession. Any graduate of one of these law schools who has met the eligibility requirements may sit for the bar examination in any state.

To be accredited, law schools must comply with ABA standards, which cover everything from curriculum and faculty to facilities and services. The ABA frequently reevaluates and updates these standards.

For example, the ABA is currently debating whether to standardize law school curricula, allow law schools to take more students without the LSAT or GRE , and expand options for online J.D. programs .

To stay accredited, law schools file annual reports that contain data useful to applicants about factors like selectivity, diversity, bar passage and career outcomes. New law schools must meet these standards to gain accreditation, and law schools that don’t are placed on provisional status or ultimately de-accredited.

It is possible for law schools to operate without ABA accreditation, however. More than 30 law schools in the U.S. and a few more international law schools overseas provide a legal education without ABA accreditation . Most are based in California, where graduates of nonaccredited law schools can take the bar exam and qualify as lawyers.

A few other states, such as Alabama, also permit graduates of certain unaccredited law schools to take the bar.

Why Attend an Unaccredited Law School?

Unaccredited law schools tends to be much easier to get into than ABA-approved schools, making them the best option for applicants whose low grades or LSAT scores bar them from admission elsewhere.

Unaccredited law schools also tend to be cheaper and more convenient than accredited schools. Many unaccredited law schools offer flexible, part-time and online options that appeal to older applicants working full time.

Applicants may also choose unaccredited schools because of their location or other distinctions like their high levels of diversity. Some unaccredited schools have a religious bent or unconventional pedagogy that may appeal to like-minded students. 

The Pitfalls of Unaccredited Law Schools

Even if graduates of unaccredited law schools save money in the short term, their postgraduate career prospects may suffer. Their overall rates of bar passage and postgraduate employment are significantly lower than for their peers from low-ranked but accredited law schools.

For example, a report by the State Bar of California found that 67% of graduates of ABA-accredited law schools passed the state bar in 2022, while state-accredited law schools had a bar passage rate of 21% and unaccredited law schools had a 9% bar passage rate. The report also found that students of unaccredited law schools are far more likely to drop out of law school.

Furthermore, there are few states that allow graduates of unaccredited law schools to take the bar and practice law. While California is a vast state with an outsize legal market, its bar exam is notoriously hard, with the lowest passage rate in the U.S. Its major legal markets are also highly competitive, attracting lawyers nationwide, putting graduates of unaccredited law schools at a disadvantage.

It is also worth noting that California is one of four states – along with Virginia, Vermont and Washington – that allow individuals to skip law school altogether and qualify for the bar exam after a traditional legal apprenticeship.

Weighing the Evidence

To be sure, graduates of unaccredited law schools who pass the bar exam can succeed in the legal field, and as practicing lawyers their legal education will fade from relevance. Many states even allow lawyers who passed the California bar and have practiced for a certain number of years – typically three to 10, depending on the state – to take their bar exam regardless of their education.

However, there are strong reasons to be wary that unaccredited law schools offer enough benefits to justify the time and tuition. Before matriculating to an unaccredited law school, ensure that it is on sound financial footing and that its graduates have a strong track record of success.

Rather than attend an unaccredited law school, consider gaining entry to an ABA-approved school by raising your LSAT score , gaining relevant work experience or improving your application essays. Even if you are denied the first time you apply, you can strengthen your candidacy as a reapplicant .

In the long run, investing in your application is a surer path to legal practice than accepting a seat at a law school that isn’t worth the cost of tuition .

Tips to Boost a Law School Application

Tags: law school , graduate schools , education , students

About Law Admissions Lowdown

Law Admissions Lowdown provides advice to prospective students about the law school application process, LSAT prep and potential career paths. Previously authored by contributors from Stratus Admissions Counseling, the blog is currently authored by Gabriel Kuris, founder of Top Law Coach , an admissions consultancy. Kuris is a graduate of Harvard Law School and has helped hundreds of applicants navigate the law school application process since 2003. Got a question? Email [email protected] .

Popular Stories

Paying for College

Medical School Admissions Doctor

Applying to College

Best Colleges

You May Also Like

Premeds and emerging medical research.

Zach Grimmett May 14, 2024

How to Get a Perfect Score on the LSAT

Gabriel Kuris May 13, 2024

Premeds Take 5 Public Health Courses

Rachel Rizal May 7, 2024

Fortune 500 CEOs With a Law Degree

Cole Claybourn May 7, 2024

Why It's Hard to Get Into Med School

A.R. Cabral May 6, 2024

An MBA and Management Consulting

Sammy Allen May 2, 2024

Med School Access for Minority Students

Cole Claybourn May 2, 2024

Different jobs with med degree

Jarek Rutz April 30, 2024

Completing Medical School in Five Years

Kate Rix April 30, 2024

Dealing With Medical School Rejection

Kathleen Franco, M.D., M.S. April 30, 2024

What is a Master of Studies in Law? Explore the George Washington University Law School MSL

You don’t have to be a lawyer to earn a living understanding and applying the law. Many professions require — or benefit significantly from — a thorough understanding of how the law impacts an industry or institution. The Master of Studies in Law (MSL), a graduate-level law degree designed for non-lawyers, can prepare you for a career interpreting and navigating legal situations.

You can earn an MSL 100% online from the George Washington University Law School (GW Law); you also have the option to take courses on-campus. The program offers specializations online in three areas: government procurement law, national security and cybersecurity law, and government procurement and cybersecurity law. The university’s location in the heart of Washington, D.C. enables students to benefit from access to the center of national legal and political activity — without ever having to leave their hometowns.

Gain Legal Expertise to Propel Your Career

Choose from three msl concentrations at gw law.

If you aspire to a career engaging with the law, you may be wondering whether a Master of Studies in Law is the right degree for you. How does the MSL differ from the Juris Doctor (JD), the law degree pursued by aspiring attorneys? What careers does each degree facilitate? This article explores those questions to help you decide which option better suits your career goals.

Master of Studies in Law vs. Juris Doctor: Decoding the Differences

A Master of Studies in Law is a master’s-level graduate degree in law and legal systems. A Juris Doctor is a terminal degree at the doctoral level that qualifies recipients to work in the courts as lawyers and judges. Admissions requirements, coursework, and career opportunities for the degrees differ substantially.

Applicants to GW’s MSL program must hold a bachelor’s degree and three to five years of professional experience relevant to the specialization they choose to pursue. Acceptance into a JD program requires a bachelor’s degree and an acceptable score on the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) . 

Coursework in the degree programs overlaps somewhat, but the JD is undoubtedly the more comprehensive and detailed of the two. GW’s MSL program requires 24 credit hours of coursework, which can be completed in as few as 12 months (for full-time students). A JD requires 80 credit hours and includes a rigorous first-year law student curriculum, with courses such as Torts, Property, and Contracts. Full-time JD students typically take three years to complete their degrees, after which they must pass their state’s bar exam.

Your professional goals will dictate which degree you choose. JD graduates are trained to practice law (after successfully passing a state or DC bar examination); they typically pursue careers as lawyers, judges and legal scholars. An MSL can be helpful in professions in such varied fields as government, business, finance, real estate, court administration, mediation, insurance, policy, and nongovernmental organizations. Practically every field intersects with the law, creating career opportunities for MSL degree holders.

What Will You Learn in MSL Programs?

Graduates of George Washington University’s Master of Studies in Law are prepared to communicate with lawyers and competently address industry compliance and regulatory issues. Students pursue the specialization most compatible with their current professional experience:

• Government Procurement Law examines how procurement systems operate and the laws and regulations that govern them in the U.S. and abroad. Classwork includes anti-corruption, intellectual property and procurement reform.
• National Security & Cybersecurity Law thoroughly examines legal and policy issues surrounding national security, cybersecurity, AI, big data and new technologies. Classes cover internet law, foreign access to U.S. technology, and artificial intelligence law.
• Government Procurement & Cybersecurity Law prepares professionals to address the rising demand for cybersecurity legal expertise in government procurement law. Topics include cybersecurity law and technology, consumer privacy and data protection, and government procurement of intellectual property.

In all fields, the MSL degree prepares graduates to address challenges from a legal perspective, communicate with lawyers and non-lawyers alike, and assess the legal ramifications of corporate and institutional issues.

Career Pathways with a Master of Studies in Law  

An MSL can be especially beneficial for people who work in highly regulated fields, such as government, healthcare, education, nonprofits, manufacturing and finance. Anyone who communicates frequently with lawyers can also benefit from an MSL. Graduates of GW’s MSL program have gone on to work for various employers, including:

• Department of Defense
• Department of Homeland Security
• General Dynamics
• General Services Administration (GSA)
• Lockheed Martin
• Northrop Grumman

Is an MSL the Right Fit for Your Professional Goals?

The GW Law online MSL serves non-lawyer professionals whose work requires a detailed knowledge of the law. An MSL can benefit compliance officers, consultants, government managers, intelligence community analysts, journalists, policy analysts, and procurement specialists, to name just a few.

George Washington University Law School’sMSL program provides the theoretical and practical knowledge necessary to apply the law to today’s organizational legal challenges. Located in our nation’s capital with flexible options to attend from any location, GW Law’s MSL degree delivers a strong law curriculum, respected faculty experts, academic peers from across the globe and over 33,000 living alumni for networking, advice and career development. 

If you are ready to explore the law and find your place within it, contact an admissions adviser to learn more about the MSL program or start your application .

Become a Source of Valued Legal Insight in Your Workplace

Learn to identify and address legal risks.

Tell us about yourself.

Sharing some details will help us customize your experience. A bachelor’s degree is required to attend.

• สมัคร / ล็อกอิน
• ความช่วยเหลือ

Air Force 1 x Tiffany & Co.

Air Force 1 เป็นที่รู้จักครั้งแรกในปี 1982 และสร้างนิยามใหม่ให้รองเท้าบาสเก็ตบอลตั้งแต่คอร์ทพื้นไม้ไปจนถึงพื้นคอนกรีต แถมยังเป็นสนีกเกอร์บาสเก็ตบอลคู่แรกที่ใช้ Nike Air แต่ความล้ำนวัตกรรมก็ยังต้องหลีกทางให้ความเป็นไอคอนในแนวสตรีทของรุ่นนี้

• Share full article

For more audio journalism and storytelling, download New York Times Audio , a new iOS app available for news subscribers.

Stormy Daniels Takes the Stand

The porn star testified for eight hours at donald trump’s hush-money trial. this is how it went..

This transcript was created using speech recognition software. While it has been reviewed by human transcribers, it may contain errors. Please review the episode audio before quoting from this transcript and email [email protected] with any questions.

It’s 6:41 AM. I’m feeling a little stressed because I’m running late. It’s the fourth week of Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial. It’s a white collar trial. Most of the witnesses we’ve heard from have been, I think, typical white collar witnesses in terms of their professions.

We’ve got a former publisher, a lawyer, accountants. The witness today, a little less typical, Stormy Daniels, porn star in a New York criminal courtroom in front of a jury more accustomed to the types of witnesses they’ve already seen. There’s a lot that could go wrong.

From “The New York Times,” I’m Michael Barbaro. This is “The Daily.”

Today, what happened when Stormy Daniels took the stand for eight hours in the first criminal trial of Donald J. Trump. As before, my colleague Jonah Bromwich was inside the courtroom.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

It’s Friday, May 10th.

So it’s now day 14 of this trial. And I think it’s worth having you briefly, and in broad strokes, catch listeners up on the biggest developments that have occurred since you were last on, which was the day that opening arguments were made by both the defense and the prosecution. So just give us that brief recap.

Sure. It’s all been the prosecution’s case so far. And prosecutors have a saying, which is that the evidence is coming in great. And I think for this prosecution, which is trying to show that Trump falsified business records to cover up a sex scandal, to ease his way into the White House in 2016, the evidence has been coming in pretty well. It’s come in well through David Pecker, former publisher of The National Enquirer, who testified that he entered into a secret plot with Trump and Michael Cohen, his fixer at the time, to suppress negative stories about Trump, the candidate.

It came in pretty well through Keith Davidson, who was a lawyer to Stormy Daniels in 2016 and negotiated the hush money payment. And we’ve seen all these little bits and pieces of evidence that tell the story that prosecutors want to tell. And the case makes sense so far. We can’t tell what the jury is thinking, as we always say.

But we can tell that there’s a narrative that’s coherent and that matches up with the prosecution’s opening statement. Then we come to Tuesday. And that day really marks the first time that the prosecution’s strategy seems a little bit risky because that’s the day that Stormy Daniels gets called to the witness stand.

OK, well, just explain why the prosecution putting Stormy Daniels on the stand would be so risky. And I guess it makes sense to answer that in the context of why the prosecution is calling her as a witness at all.

Well, you can see why it makes sense to have her. The hush money payment was to her. The cover-up of the hush money payment, in some ways, concerns her. And so she’s this character who’s very much at the center of this story. But according to prosecutors, she’s not at the center of the crime. The prosecution is telling a story, and they hope a compelling one. And arguably, that story starts with Stormy Daniels. It starts in 2006, when Stormy Daniels says that she and Trump had sex, which is something that Trump has always denied.

So if prosecutors were to not call Stormy Daniels to the stand, you would have this big hole in the case. It would be like, effect, effect, effect. But where is the cause? Where is the person who set off this chain reaction? But Stormy Daniels is a porn star. She’s there to testify about sex. Sex and pornography are things that the jurors were not asked about during jury selection. And those are subjects that bring up all kinds of different complex reactions in people.

And so, when the prosecutors bring Stormy Daniels to the courtroom, it’s very difficult to know how the jurors will take it, particularly given that she’s about to describe a sexual episode that she says she had with the former president. Will the jurors think that makes sense, as they sit here and try to decide a falsifying business records case, or will they ask themselves, why are we hearing this?

So the reason why this is the first time that the prosecution’s strategy is, for journalists like you, a little bit confusing, is because it’s the first time that the prosecution seems to be taking a genuine risk in what they’re putting before these jurors. Everything else has been kind of cut and dry and a little bit more mechanical. This is just a wild card.

This is like live ammunition, to some extent. Everything else is settled and controlled. And they know what’s going to happen. With Stormy Daniels, that’s not the case.

OK, so walk us through the testimony. When the prosecution brings her to the stand, what actually happens?

It starts, as every witness does, with what’s called direct examination, which is a fancy word for saying prosecutors question Stormy Daniels. And they have her tell her story. First, they have her tell the jury about her education and where she grew up and her professional experience. And because of Stormy Daniels’s biography, that quickly goes into stripping, and then goes into making adult films.

And I thought the prosecutor who questioned her, Susan Hoffinger, had this nice touch in talking about that, because not only did she ask Daniels about acting in adult films. But she asked her about writing and directing them, too, emphasizing the more professional aspects of that work and giving a little more credit to the witness, as if to say, well, you may think this or you may think that. But this is a person with dignity who took what she did seriously. Got it.

What’s your first impression of Daniels as a witness?

It’s very clear that she’s nervous. She’s speaking fast. She’s laughing to herself and making small jokes. But the tension in the room is so serious from the beginning, from the moment she enters, that those jokes aren’t landing. So it just feels, like, really heavy and still and almost oppressive in there. So Daniels talking quickly, seeming nervous, giving more answers than are being asked of her by the prosecution, even before we get to the sexual encounter that she’s about to describe, all of that presents a really discomfiting impression, I would say.

And how does this move towards the encounter that Daniels ultimately has?

It starts at a golf tournament in 2006, in Lake Tahoe, Nevada. Daniels meets Trump there. There are other celebrities there, too. They chatted very briefly. And then she received a dinner invitation from him. She thought it over, she says. And she goes to have dinner with Trump, not at a restaurant, by the way. But she’s invited to join him in the hotel suite.

So she gets to the hotel suite. And his bodyguard is there. And the hotel door is cracked open. And the bodyguard greets her and says she looks nice, this and that. And she goes in. And there’s Donald Trump, just as expected. But what’s not expected, she says, is that he’s not wearing what you would wear to a dinner with a stranger, but instead, she says, silk or satin pajamas. She asked him to change, she says. And he obliges.

He goes, and he puts on a dress shirt and dress pants. And they sit down at the hotel suite’s dining room table. And they have a kind of bizarre dinner. Trump is asking her very personal questions about pornography and safe sex. And she testifies that she teased him about vain and pompous he is. And then at some point, she goes to the bathroom. And she sees that he has got his toiletries in there, his Old Spice, his gold tweezers.

Very specific details.

Yeah, we’re getting a ton of detail in this scene. And the reason we’re getting those is because prosecutors are trying to elicit those details to establish that this is a credible person, that this thing did happen, despite what Donald Trump and his lawyers say. And the reason you can know it happened, prosecutors seem to be saying, is because, look at all these details she can still summon up.

She comes out of the bathroom. And she says that Donald Trump is on the hotel bed. And what stands out to me there is what she describes as a very intense physical reaction. She says that she blacked out. And she quickly clarifies, she doesn’t mean from drugs or alcohol. She means that, she says, that the intensity of this experience was such that, suddenly, she can’t remember every detail. The prosecution asks a question that cuts directly to the sex. Essentially, did you start having sex with him? And Daniels says that she did. And she continues to provide more details than even, I think, the prosecution wanted.

And I think we don’t want to go chapter and verse through this claimed sexual encounter. But I wonder what details stand out and which details feel important, given the prosecution’s strategy here.

All the details stand out because it’s a story about having had sex with a former president. And the more salacious and more private the details feel, the more you’re going to remember them. So we’ll remember that Stormy Daniels said what position they had sex in. We’ll remember that she said he didn’t use a condom. Whether that’s important to the prosecution’s case, now, that’s a much harder question to answer, as we’ve been saying.

But what I can tell you is, as she’s describing having had sex with Donald Trump, and Donald Trump is sitting right there, and Eric Trump, his son, is sitting behind him, seeming to turn a different color as he hears this embarrassment of his father being described to a courtroom full of reporters at this trial, it’s hard to even describe the energy in that room. It was like nothing I had ever experienced. And it was just Daniels’s testimony and, seemingly, the former President’s emotions. And you almost felt like you were trapped in there with both of them as this description was happening.

Well, I think it’s important to try to understand why the prosecution is getting these details, these salacious, carnal, pick your word, graphic details about sex with Donald Trump. What is the value, if other details are clearly making the point that she’s recollecting something?

Well, I think, at this point, we can only speculate. But one thing we can say is, this was uncomfortable. This felt bad. And remember, prosecutor’s story is not about the sex. It’s about trying to hide the sex. So if you’re trying to show a jury why it might be worthwhile to hide a story, it might be worth —

Providing lots of salacious details that a person would want to hide.

— exposing them to how bad that story feels and reminding them that if they had been voters and they had heard that story, and, in fact, they asked Daniels this very question, if you hadn’t accepted hush money, if you hadn’t signed that NDA, is this the story you would have told? And she said, yes. And so where I think they’re going with this, but we can’t really be sure yet, is that they’re going to tell the jurors, hey, that story, you can see why he wanted to cover that up, can’t you?

You mentioned the hush money payments. What testimony does Daniels offer about that? And how does it advance the prosecution’s case of business fraud related to the hush money payments?

So little evidence that it’s almost laughable. She says that she received the hush money. But we actually already heard another witness, her lawyer at the time, Keith Davidson, testify that he had received the hush money payment on her behalf. And she testified about feeling as if she had to sell this story because the election was fast approaching, almost as if her leverage was slipping away because she knew this would be bad for Trump.

That feels important. But just help me understand why it’s important.

Well, what the prosecution has been arguing is that Trump covered up this hush money payment in order to conceal a different crime. And that crime, they say, was to promote his election to the presidency by illegal means.

Right, we’ve talked about this in the past.

So when Daniels ties her side of the payment into the election, it just reminds the jurors maybe, oh, right, this is what they’re arguing.

So how does the prosecution end this very dramatic, and from everything you’re saying, very tense questioning of Stormy Daniels about this encounter?

Well, before they can even end, the defense lawyers go and they consult among themselves. And then, with the jury out of the room, one of them stands up. And he says that the defense is moving for a mistrial.

On what terms?

He says that the testimony offered by Daniels that morning is so prejudicial, so damning to Trump in the eyes of the jury, that the trial can no longer be fair. Like, how could these jurors have heard these details and still be fair when they render their verdict? And he says a memorable expression. He says, you can’t un-ring that bell, meaning they heard it. They can’t un-hear it. It’s over. Throw out this trial. It should be done.

Wow. And what is the response from the judge?

So the judge, Juan Merchan, he hears them out. And he really hears them out. But at the end of their arguments, he says, I do think she went a little too far. He says that. He said, there were things that were better left unsaid.

By Stormy Daniels?

By Stormy Daniels. And he acknowledges that she is a difficult witness. But, he says, the remedy for that is not a mistrial, is not stopping the whole thing right now. The remedy for that is cross-examination. If the defense feels that there are issues with her story, issues with her credibility, they can ask her whatever they want. They can try to win the jury back over. If they think this jury has been poisoned by this witness, well, this is their time to provide the antidote. The antidote is cross-examination. And soon enough, cross-examination starts. And it is exactly as intense and combative as we expected.

We’ll be right back.

So, Jonah, how would you characterize the defense’s overall strategy in this intense cross-examination of Stormy Daniels?

People know the word impeach from presidential impeachments. But it has a meaning in law, too. You impeach a witness, and, specifically, their credibility. And that’s what the defense is going for here. They are going to try to make Stormy Daniels look like a liar, a fraud, an extortionist, a money-grubbing opportunist who wanted to take advantage of Trump and sought to do so by any means necessary.

And what did that impeachment strategy look like in the courtroom?

The defense lawyer who questions Stormy Daniels is a woman named Susan Necheles. She’s defended Trump before. And she’s a bit of a cross-examination specialist. We even saw her during jury selection bring up these past details to confront jurors who had said nasty things about Trump on social media with. And she wants to do the same thing with Daniels. She wants to bring up old interviews and old tweets and things that Daniels has said in the past that don’t match what Daniels is saying from the stand.

What’s a specific example? And do they land?

Some of them land. And some of them don’t. One specific example is that Necheles confronts Daniels with this old tweet, where Daniels says that she’s going to dance down the street if Trump goes to jail. And what she’s trying to show there is that Daniels is out for revenge, that she hates Trump, and that she wants to see him go to jail. And that’s why she’s testifying against him.

And Daniels is very interesting during the cross-examination. It’s almost as if she’s a different person. She kind of squares her shoulders. And she sits up a little straighter. And she leans forward. Daniels is ready to fight. But it doesn’t quite land. The tweet actually says, I’ll dance down the street when he’s selected to go to jail.

And Daniels goes off on this digression about how she knows that people don’t get selected to go to jail. That’s not how it works. But she can’t really unseat this argument, that she’s a political enemy of Donald Trump. So that one kind of sticks, I would say. But there are other moves that Necheles tries to pull that don’t stick.

So unlike the prosecution, which typically used words like adult, adult film, Necheles seems to be taking every chance she can get to say porn, or pornography, or porn star, to make it sound base or dirty. And so when she starts to ask Daniels about actually being in pornography, writing, acting, and directing sex films, she tries to land a punch line, Necheles does. She says, so you have a lot of experience making phony stories about sex appear to be real, right?

As if to say, perhaps this story you have told about entering Trump’s suite in Lake Tahoe and having sex with him was made up.

Just another one of your fictional stories about sex. But Daniels comes back and says, the sex in the films, it’s very much real, just like what happened to me in that room. And so, when you have this kind of combat of a lawyer cross-examining very aggressively and the witness fighting back, you can feel the energy in the room shift as one lands a blow or the other does. But here, Daniels lands one back. And the other issue that I think Susan Necheles runs into is, she tries to draw out disparities from interviews that Daniels gave, particularly to N-TOUCH, very early on once the story was out.

It’s kind of like a tabloid magazine?

But some of the disparities don’t seem to be landing quite like Necheles would want. So she tries to do this complicated thing about where the bodyguard was in the room when Daniels walked into the room, as described in an interview in a magazine. But in that magazine interview, as it turns out, Daniels mentioned that Trump was wearing pajamas. And so, if I’m a juror, I don’t care where the bodyguard is. I’m thinking about, oh, yeah, I remember that Stormy Daniels said now in 2024 that Trump was wearing pajamas.

I’m curious if, as somebody in the room, you felt that the defense was effective in undermining Stormy Daniels’s credibility? Because what I took from the earlier part of our conversation was that Stormy Daniels is in this courtroom on behalf of the prosecution to tell a story that’s uncomfortable and has the kind of details that Donald Trump would be motivated to try to hide. And therefore, this defense strategy is to say, those details about what Trump might want to hide, you can’t trust them. So does this back and forth effectively hurt Stormy Daniels’s credibility, in your estimation?

I don’t think that Stormy Daniels came off as perfectly credible about everything she testified about. There are incidents that were unclear or confusing. There were things she talked about that I found hard to believe, when she, for instance, denied that she had attacked Trump in a tweet or talked about her motivations. But about what prosecutors need, that central story, the story of having had sex with him, we can’t know whether it happened.

But there weren’t that many disparities in these accounts over the years. In terms of things that would make me doubt the story that Daniels was telling, details that don’t add up, those weren’t present. And you don’t have to take my word for that, nor should you. But the judge is in the room. And he says something very, very similar.

What does he say? And why does he say it?

Well, he does it when the defense, again, at the end of the day on Thursday, calls for a mistrial.

With a similar argument as before?

Not only with a similar argument as before, but, like, almost the exact same argument. And I would say that I was astonished to see them do this. But I wasn’t because I’ve covered other trials where Trump is the client. And in those trials, the lawyers, again and again, called for a mistrial.

And what does Judge Marchan say in response to this second effort to seek a mistrial?

Let me say, to this one, he seems a little less patient. He says that after the first mistrial ruling, two days before, he went into his chambers. And he read every decision he had made about the case. He took this moment to reflect on the first decision. And he found that he had, in his own estimation, which is all he has, been fair and not allowed evidence that was prejudicial to Trump into this trial. It could continue. And so he said that again. And then he really almost turned on the defense. And he said that the things that the defense was objecting to were things that the defense had made happen.

He says that in their opening statement, the defense could have taken issue with many elements of the case, about whether there were falsified business records, about any of the other things that prosecutors are saying happened. But instead, he says, they focused their energy on denying that Trump ever had sex with Daniels.

And so that was essentially an invitation to the prosecution to call Stormy Daniels as a witness and have her say from the stand, yes, I had this sexual encounter. The upshot of it is that the judge not only takes the defense to task. But he also just says that he finds Stormy Daniels’s narrative credible. He doesn’t see it as having changed so much from year to year.

Interesting. So in thinking back to our original question here, Jonah, about the idea that putting Stormy Daniels on the stand was risky, I wonder if, by the end of this entire journey, you’re reevaluating that idea because it doesn’t sound like it ended up being super risky. It sounded like it ended up working reasonably well for the prosecution.

Well, let me just assert that it doesn’t really matter what I think. The jury is going to decide this. There’s 12 people. And we can’t know what they’re thinking. But my impression was that, while she was being questioned by the prosecution for the prosecution’s case, Stormy Daniels was a real liability. She was a difficult witness for them.

And the judge said as much. But when the defense cross-examined her, Stormy Daniels became a better witness, in part because their struggles to discredit her may have actually ended up making her story look more credible and stronger. And the reason that matters is because, remember, we said that prosecutors are trying to fill this hole in their case. Well, now, they have. The jury has met Stormy Daniels. They’ve heard her account. They’ve made of it what they will. And now, the sequence of events that prosecutors are trying to line up as they seek prison time for the former President really makes a lot of sense.

It starts with what Stormy Daniels says with sex in a hotel suite in 2006. It picks up years later, as Donald Trump is trying to win an election and, prosecutors say, suppressing negative stories, including Stormy Daniels’s very negative story. And the story that prosecutors are telling ends with Donald Trump orchestrating the falsification of business records to keep that story concealed.

Well, Jonah, thank you very much. We appreciate it.

Of course, thanks for having me.

The prosecution’s next major witness will be Michael Cohen, the former Trump fixer who arranged for the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels. Cohen is expected to take the stand on Monday.

Here’s what else you need to know today. On Thursday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a defiant response to warnings from the United States that it would stop supplying weapons to Israel if Israel invades the Southern Gaza City of Rafah. So far, Israel has carried out a limited incursion into the city where a million civilians are sheltering, but has threatened a full invasion. In a statement, Netanyahu said, quote, “if we need to stand alone, we will stand alone.”

Meanwhile, high level ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas have been put on hold in part because of anger over Israel’s incursion into Rafah.

A reminder, tomorrow, we’ll be sharing the latest episode of our colleague’s new show, “The Interview” This week on “The Interview,” Lulu Garcia-Navarro talks with radio host Charlamagne Tha God about his frustrations with how Americans talk about politics.

If me as a Black man, if I criticize Democrats, then I’m supporting MAGA. But if I criticize, you know, Donald Trump and Republicans, then I’m a Democratic shill. Why can’t I just be a person who deals in nuance?

Today’s episode was produced by Olivia Natt and Michael Simon Johnson. It was edited by Lexie Diao, with help from Paige Cowett, contains original music by Will Reid and Marion Lozano, and was engineered by Alyssa Moxley. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly.

That’s it for “The Daily.” I’m Michael Barbaro. See you on Monday.

• May 16, 2024   •   30:47 The Make-or-Break Testimony of Michael Cohen
• May 15, 2024   •   27:03 The Possible Collapse of the U.S. Home Insurance System
• May 14, 2024   •   35:20 Voters Want Change. In Our Poll, They See It in Trump.
• May 13, 2024   •   27:46 How Biden Adopted Trump’s Trade War With China
• May 10, 2024   •   27:42 Stormy Daniels Takes the Stand
• May 9, 2024   •   34:42 One Strongman, One Billion Voters, and the Future of India
• May 8, 2024   •   28:28 A Plan to Remake the Middle East
• May 7, 2024   •   27:43 How Changing Ocean Temperatures Could Upend Life on Earth
• May 6, 2024   •   29:23 R.F.K. Jr.’s Battle to Get on the Ballot
• May 3, 2024   •   25:33 The Protesters and the President
• May 2, 2024   •   29:13 Biden Loosens Up on Weed
• May 1, 2024   •   35:16 The New Abortion Fight Before the Supreme Court

Hosted by Michael Barbaro

Featuring Jonah E. Bromwich

Produced by Olivia Natt and Michael Simon Johnson

Edited by Lexie Diao

With Paige Cowett

Original music by Will Reid and Marion Lozano

Engineered by Alyssa Moxley

Listen and follow The Daily Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTube

This episode contains descriptions of an alleged sexual liaison.

What happened when Stormy Daniels took the stand for eight hours in the first criminal trial of former President Donald J. Trump?

Jonah Bromwich, one of the lead reporters covering the trial for The Times, was in the room.

On today’s episode

Jonah E. Bromwich , who covers criminal justice in New York for The New York Times.

Background reading

In a second day of cross-examination, Stormy Daniels resisted the implication she had tried to shake down Donald J. Trump by selling her story of a sexual liaison.

Here are six takeaways from Ms. Daniels’s earlier testimony.

There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.

We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.

The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Mike Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Corey Schreppel, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, John Ketchum, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Dan Farrell, Sophia Lanman, Shannon Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Summer Thomad, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez and Brendan Klinkenberg.

Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Sofia Milan, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Renan Borelli, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson and Nina Lassam.

Jonah E. Bromwich covers criminal justice in New York, with a focus on the Manhattan district attorney’s office and state criminal courts in Manhattan. More about Jonah E. Bromwich

Advertisement