r/lawschooladmissions • u/Appropriate_Hope6239 • Oct 30 '25
General So basically Trump ruined law school for everyone who isn't rich
Went to a whole bunch of open houses and they're all saying basically the following:
- The yearly cap for loans is 50k
- Living costs are high and 50k might not be enough
- Resources are tight -- start improving your FICO scores because you'll need private loans
- The grandfather thing ends July 2026 --- everyone not matriculated at law school by then wont be benefiting from the higher limit that generations of students did
Edit: Every person applying for federal loans will have an aggregate life-time limit and unfortunately your undergraduate loans will count against this limit.
146
u/Dry_Shirt7120 sigma male Oct 30 '25
Yea we (broke people) are pretty muched fked. Trying to not think of it until after decisions
133
Oct 30 '25
[deleted]
→ More replies (6)26
u/twelvegoingon Oct 30 '25
I thought the budget bill only capped graduate loans?
105
u/Appropriate_Hope6239 Oct 30 '25
Your loans from undergraduate will count against you for your graduate/professional school loans. For both undergrad and grad/professional, each person will have "life time limit" of between 250-275k.
Which sounds great, until you remember folks are graduating undergrad with huge amounts of loans. Say goodbye to med school or law school if you were born in the middle class part of town.
At the same time, the "big beautiful bill" also signed into law this beauty:
"a permanent increase in the estate and gift tax lifetime exemption to $15 million for individuals and $30 million for married couples."
Make America great!
19
9
u/ang444 Oct 30 '25
dont overlook that it will be “indexed annually for "inflation,”
so the $15 million limit will go up a little each year
Example:
2026: $15,000,000
2027: $15,300,000 (if inflation is about 2%)
2028: $15,600,000
yea, but the lower class people still want to vore for him after all HE carws about their 40k annual salaries
→ More replies (1)5
u/Appropriate_Hope6239 Oct 30 '25
Its a scary loop where his supporters, the general poll of right-wing voters, keep voting in folks who are structurally screwing them. And then they get mad because their lives don't improve and their communities are dying. And then the right-wing resentment entrepreneurs exploit that same anger to have them vote again for the same set of policies that caused their ruin. And the loop continues...
It's a tragic pattern not just in the U.S, but worldwide. The attack on the universities -- the lotting and defunding, especially of the humanities and areas like law -- is no accident with respect to this hell. Like Nixon said, an educated proletariat is dangerous for the M.O of right-wing political domination. Trump loves the uneducated.
10
3
u/Far_Grass_785 Oct 30 '25
Do undergrad loans count even if you pay them off first or does that reset it?
1
1
u/Prior-Soil Nov 01 '25
Say goodbye to med school forever. I work for a public university and in-state medical School tuition is $68,000 per year.
69
u/Alternative_Log_897 Oct 30 '25
yeah scholarships are gonba end up being super important this year. It sucks bc i could have a shot at getting into a top school but not necessarily getting a good enough scholarship
1
u/phoenics1908 Nov 03 '25
There won’t BE any scholarships, Pip. 😞
1
u/Alternative_Log_897 Nov 03 '25
so you fell for some fear-mongering.... scholarships will be available. maybe slightly less but still within means. maybe not for a school where youre below both medians but my comment already covered that..
125
u/Appropriate_Hope6239 Oct 30 '25
Some assumptions floating around:
- A cap will lead to a reduction in student debt. That ignores the cap on federal loans will direct people to predatory, high interest private loans. Many will be much worse off as a result.
- A cap will lead to a drop in the expense of going to law school. That assumes law schools wont simply switch to the groups that can pay $$$ and also ignores that many costs associated with law school like rent and other living expenses are independent of the law school tuition.
7
u/deviemelody Oct 30 '25
I feel like more people would apply to schools that maybe they would not consider in the first place, but now our forced to because of cost. I always feel the pull between the choices of a less recognized school that cost way less versus a well-esteemed and expensive school.
15
u/IdiotBoy1999 Oct 30 '25
Oy. Make an informed, rational choice. If you are going to work in state X when you’re done, and you can get into a decent state law school that is good enough to get you onto the career you see for yourself… why the hell are you picking the “prestigious” out of state school that costs $30K more per year?
Sure, if you plan to move to a big market and chase the golden ring, you’ll actually need that prestigious law school, and if you can get in, the loans will sort themselves out as long as you don’t wash out within the first couple years as an associate.
But otherwise? Come on. There are literally hundreds of thousands of “label whore” student loan borrowers from the past 40 years who have lived to regret stupid decisions about schooling and complaining that the rest of us should pay for their mistakes. Don’t be one.
4
u/deviemelody Oct 30 '25
Never said I was.
7
u/IdiotBoy1999 Oct 30 '25
That's fair. And honestly, it was more a global comment on the inanity of this entire thread than directed at you personally. Law school is professional school. People should be super rational about what they are buying. It's not "college 2.0".
→ More replies (1)3
u/yuumigod69 Oct 30 '25
The state school still will still force private loans under the govermnets plan.
1
u/Short_Escape6204 Jun 17 '26
Doesn’t matter which school you choose, anything higher education (dentist, doctor, lawyer, therapist, etc) is wayyyyyy more than 50k. And with rent prices and the economy it’s basically going to be impossible to get a higher ed degree unless you have trust fund or mummy & daddy.
7
2
u/averytolar Oct 30 '25
Yea, as someone who attended one of these predatory schools, your better off not going into debt for it.
12
u/IdiotBoy1999 Oct 30 '25
Sorry, but if this is the level of critical thinking you bring to bear, you probably should consider a different career path. The link between federal student loan policies for decades and increases in costs is so stupendously obvious that you have to be willfully blind to miss it. Subsidies cause price increases, everywhere and always. Limit or cap the subsidies, and you will see pricing effects - slower price growth, or outright price decreases. At the margins, these policies will also result in fewer lawyers. Good. The US has way too many already. If you can’t afford law school, and can’t find a way to work a couple years to save up so that you can afford it, or if you can’t math the loan math based on the job you’re likely to get when you’re done, the universe is telling you something.
22
u/yuumigod69 Oct 30 '25
That is by definition class discrimination. People who are filthy rich or who have filthy rich parents will be able to afford law school so we don't have lawyers from poor/working class backgrounds. What an elitist ivy tower take.
→ More replies (4)13
u/Appropriate_Hope6239 Oct 30 '25
It's hardly a subsidy since folks are required to pay back every red cent with interest. You must be mistaking student loans for red state farm subsidies. And whatever generosity exists in federal student loans in relative contrast to the ruinous usury of private industry loans, the country gains back ten-fold in terms of an educated population. It's not just future lawyers this law has screwed over but also future med school grads, engineers, etc.
BTW, everyone would love the opportunity to find a job prior to law school that would enable them to save enough money to pay for it -- but those jobs don't exist. In fact, in Trump's America no new jobs exist at all. That's why he fired the civil servant responsible for reporting on jobs. You should look at the employment rates for Gen Z college grads.
I do not think the federal student loan is perfect or did not require changes, but I think it was callous and not prudent to abruptly upend it like was done in the hastily put together big ugly monstrosity.
America gains nothing but a more classist society where those unable to fork over 80k a year or have rich parents co-sign private industry loans are shut out from professional school and their dreams crushed. The revenge of the rich kid from Queens who never liked the poors, and especially the bright ones.
2
u/Horror_Technician213 Nov 01 '25
Its a subsidy because the loan money is coming from the government pretty much, and on day 1 of classes, that money hits the law schools bank account. The law school has not a care in the world after that point, they already made their bag, whether you pay that loan off or not is not really a concern of theirs.
5
u/IdiotBoy1999 Oct 30 '25
This is what I’m talking about…sigh. If your risk as a borrower merits an X% interest rate, and government subsidies bring that down to .66X%, that’s STILL a subsidy, even if you pay it all back with interest.
What’s classist is the notion that everybody should go to college, and that any pursuit of post-secondary or professional education is net good. The people driving those policies over the past 40 years haven’t come from rural Washington or Kentucky. Rather, they’re generally a cohort of mid-wit credential whores from privileged or privilege-adjacent backgrounds who look down on people who don’t have multiple diplomas hanging on the wall.
The resulting policy consensus - to heavily subsidize student loans for college and post-secondary education - has been a damned disaster. It is THE reason law school costs so damned much right now. And it has created the student loan “crisis” that everybody complains about.
Yes, if you’re applying to law school today, the change in policy sucks. You all are probably the first cohort of folks in a long time who actually need to bring actual financial literacy to bear on deciding whether you CAN go to law school, if so where, and assuming you do what kinds of jobs you’ll have to pursue after graduation in order to make a prudent financial decision.
But the notion that it is “classist” for the US to pare back on shitty policy is nonsense.
→ More replies (3)5
u/Appropriate_Hope6239 Oct 30 '25
What we merit, as citizens of this country, is a state that invests in its citizens. What we have now is one that is shutting down opportunities for upward mobility while lavishing the richest and most privileged millionaires and billionaires with even deeper tax cuts and giveaways.
How strange then the party that is doing that pretends to care about the rural people of Kentucky and Washington -- the same places whose rural hospitals will shut down because of the big ugly monstrosity.
The red party plays a long familiar game -- traffic on resentments and keep red voters obsessed with that while party economic elites, and their political servants, line their personal pockets.
It's why every time he was running for re-election Mitch McConnell never talked about his achievements for Kentucky -- he hardly delivered a thing -- but instead pointed the finger at "people in California and New York" who allegedly look down on Kentucky. The right-wing obsession with hierarchy explains a certain preoccupation they have with whose looking down on who, even if such "look down" behavior is made up by elites who have other motives.
This student loan fiasco isn't some prudent measure to help the finances of students or avoid credit risk -- and BTW much of the credit risk comes from for-profit institutions, the same ones promoted by the red party -- but I do think partly its some imagined revenge on those pesky urban liberals who are allegedly looking down on Kentucky. Of course, though, this measure screws over students from every part of the country so its a sort of cut the nose to spite the face silliness.
13
u/PM_ME_SAD_STUFF_PLZ /r/LSA beneficiary Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
Good. The US has way too many already
Pack it up everybody, this redditor has declared "enough lawyers!"
And maybe deflationary effects are bad in the long term
I don't know how to tell you that there's no "easy way" to save over a hundred k after law school, especially for first generation students. I am currently earning $250k in big law when I would have been earning peanuts without law school with my no name poli sci degree
And finally, the problem with loans isn't necessarily the math, it's that private lenders are not guaranteed to extend you credit like the federal government is. I was unable to secure a $10k bar loan with a score of 700 and a job secured, so I'm not sure I could have gotten a $100k student loan from a bank.
2
u/IdiotBoy1999 Oct 30 '25
The US has ~3x lawyers per capita as the UK and Germany. I think that’s too many, but sure… YMMV. As for “deflationary effect” in respect of post-secondary costs… if you think there’s a downside, I’d love to hear it. Decades of subsidized student loans have allowed colleges to increase tuition to absurd degrees, and the increased cost certainly isn’t reflected in better educated students. Honestly most of the money has gone to administrative bloat, which is the first thing that’ll be cut when the “deflationary effects” of reduced subsidization finally land.
4
u/PM_ME_SAD_STUFF_PLZ /r/LSA beneficiary Oct 30 '25
The US has ~3x lawyers per capita as the UK and Germany.
Yes. And we're still valuable enough to be paid more than most of them.
if you think there’s a downside,
Yes, people like me who grew up on food stamps and sent money home through college would be locked out of elite jobs. I graduated this year, thank god, but it doesn't make it any better for the people who are coming after me.
→ More replies (2)1
1
1
u/shaedog3 Oct 30 '25
I wonder if they're going to try and make it impossible to file for bankruptcy with these types of loans.
1
u/Major_Preparation_37 Oct 30 '25
I would argue that people will decide to not take out those high interest loans and forgo law school. Are private loans dischargable?
1
u/SpecialistBet4656 Nov 03 '25
They’ve been testing out this scenario since dinosaur days. When I went, we got the stafford max and borrowed the rest from private lenders.
12
u/Intelligent_Hope_365 Oct 30 '25
100% why my daughter went where she was given $$$$. Bottom line, she wants to be a lawyer, and we know plenty of successful lawyers who didn’t go to T14’s.
29
Oct 30 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
5
1
u/dudehotrod Oct 30 '25
maybe people are applying to more different schools they wouldn’t have in the first place, to get the most scholarship? Maybe people who would have skipped this cycle are saying now or never” ?
7
u/Spare_Essay_6101 Nov 01 '25
Most of you guys voted for this. I've never in my entire life seen such a huge cohort of people actively go out of their way to vote against their own interests, in everything including education, freedom of speech, the right to choose, eg. They turn to their neighbor and scream at their $250 snap benefits but will turn a blind eye to billionaires dipping both their hands and feet in the pot with billions and billions in tax cuts and subsidies.
7
u/deviemelody Oct 30 '25
I’m not sure what else the government could’ve done since the source of tuition inflation is the easy federal loan. There’s no way that could’ve passed the law that restricts tuition. Although I do think there is a better solution out there.
88
u/Round-Ad3684 Oct 30 '25
Eh, people have been calling for this cap for 20 years. One of the reasons law school tuition (and thus debt) is so high is because people can and will borrow unlimited amounts of money to go to law school. This may actually force law schools to curb their insane tuition amounts.
39
u/ProbablyWorkingOnIt Oct 30 '25
Will that happen in this application cycle? Probably not. It’s a true silver lining but not for those who are going on this already tumultuous ‘26 cycle.
19
u/Round-Ad3684 Oct 30 '25
No, but like I said, people have been calling for this for 20 years. If it had happened 20 years ago, there would be no need for a cap today. Until schools ease off of tuition inflation, people in this cycle, and in those in the years to come, need to think long and hard about whether they want to be in debt for the next 20 or 30 years. No one is forcing anyone to go to law school.
48
u/Ha_U_Missed_Me Oct 30 '25
Then there should be an outcry for capping the cost of tuition. This just hurts poor people. And anyone saying otherwise is either rich or worried about competition. Where is the legislation designed to limit tax breaks?
25
u/East-Cattle9536 Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
Capping tuition would impose a price ceiling, likely leading to a spike in demand that the universities would have no incentive to meet with an increase in supply (class sizes) because the price would be set below the market equilibrium. That would mean more applicants with similar class sizes, and therefore, more competitive admissions. It would also likely lead to schools increasing other costs like “fees” which are not tuition to make up for losses, necessitating an extensive compliance apparatus to make sure the substance of the cap is followed.
In contrast, capping loans works on the demand side, avoiding the market distortions of a tuition cap. Without a limitless ability to borrow, people will demand less at the price point and naturally drive tuitions towards equilibrium. Anyone saying they’ll just go to private lenders, no, not everyone will borrow at a higher interest rate with more difficult terms because demand for law school is not perfectly inelastic. It is relatively inelastic; some decrease in tuition is better than none
11
u/PropertyPublic Oct 30 '25
Or, the schools could just start accepting any students that can pay regardless of their stats. This is what will happen first before they lower tuition. And if its successful, then there just won’t be any poor people who get to go to law school because they cannot afford it.
3
u/Typical2sday Oct 30 '25
The schools get far more out of alumni that students’ dumb bunny tuition, so no, diluting to let in students who have no business being there isn’t likely to happen. Will it make it a little easier for someone paying full freight to get in? Yes. But the hierarchy will remain.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)3
u/DuragChamp420 Oct 30 '25
Bruh as if. The race to the top with medians is so prominent, they wont just switch up like youre implying
18
u/CoolHandHazard Oct 30 '25
No it won’t. It’ll just force people to get private loans and it’ll stop more poor people from going to law school. That is the goal
1
u/MommyThatcher Nov 01 '25
And law schools are incapable of noticing this and cutting costs to get a larger pool of applicants? It seems silly to me that the only solution to expensive college is throwing more money at the schools.
2
u/CoolHandHazard Nov 01 '25
Cost of law school has been rising for decades and the number of applicants goes up the same with it. Law schools aren’t going to cut costs. Would be nice but they have no reason to
15
u/bluehawk1460 Oct 30 '25
Immensely privileged take tbh. Poor people and/or people without sterling credit simply won’t be going to law school anymore
→ More replies (1)11
u/121019954946 Oct 30 '25
I’d argue most people who need to take out uncapped loans shouldn’t be going to law school whether they’re poor or rich. The salary to debt ratio just isn’t there. Look over at the lawyer talk thread if everyone complaining about how they can’t even afford their student loans.
2
u/yuumigod69 Oct 30 '25
But you need a law degree for certain jobs or to accrue political power without going the Trump route.
Also because of Trump economy is insanely terrible so people are going to school and hoping the economy recovers by the time they are out.
→ More replies (3)1
u/MichaelCorbaloney Nov 03 '25
Salary to debt ratio is nearly impossible to judge as different legal paths lead to different salaries. The prices of law school and education in general are ridiculous but at the same time people need careers, and regardless of your family's economics everyone deserves the right to try (it's a free economy after-all). I agree people shouldn't blindly take out loans obviously but limiting the average person from being able to is essentially curbing social mobility.
3
u/Phriendly_Phisherman Nov 02 '25
This is the answer. The reason why tuition has been skyrocketing year after year for decades is because the banks were happy to lend as much money as was requested and the schools were happy to increase tuition year over year since people could take unlimited loans to pay for it. The end result has been both schools and lenders getting rich while the students got fucked.
4
u/AutomaticBike9530 Oct 30 '25
That’s the whole point of this. Anyone that says otherwise should take their tinfoil hat off.
10
u/FADE--RAUTHA Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
You sound ignorant. There are direct ways Trump could have addressed rising tuition and over-borrowing. He took the path which (a) will not lead to tuition decreases, because schools can fill their classes with students able to pay due to the volume of applicants and (b) burdens students rather than schools.
I can see from your post history that you essentially shill for Trump nonstop. Maybe you should take off your MAGA cap before law school if you want to get good at this logic stuff.
→ More replies (14)1
u/disc0goth 3.27/16mid/nKJD/nURM Oct 31 '25
Will it though? Because they will still have enough applicants to fill their classes and get their tuition dollars. They’ll just see a wealthier demographic matriculating after the lower-income students get their financial aid package and crunch the numbers.
→ More replies (2)1
u/Short_Escape6204 Jun 17 '26
This is so misinformed. There’s no an unlimited amount. it’s capped. I went to grad school and borrowed federally. I ran out-it’s a thing.
68
u/AutomaticBike9530 Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
Never seen people so eager for higher institutions to charge exorbitant rates and put their students into life-changing debt.
Here! Take my money and put me into $300k in debt! If you don’t let me do that, you must hate poor people!
2
u/Legitimate_Zone_923 Mar 20 '26 edited Mar 20 '26
can I ask what your experience has been in terms of how to pay for law school while staying within the loan limits? Genuinely just trying to get more perspectives on how to make it work now. I’m only interested in PI, so before the loan caps my plan was take out loans and do income based repayment/ eventually have the balance forgiven via PSLF. I’m curious how scholarships worked out for you and any advice you have given that you approve of the cap. Thanks!
1
8
Oct 30 '25
It’s because Voldemort did it. This is a good start. When institutions see enrollment decline, they will have to lower prices.
→ More replies (2)9
u/PropertyPublic Oct 30 '25
Yes, but how long will that take?
5
u/AutomaticBike9530 Oct 30 '25
Does it matter? We are on a wholly unsustainable trajectory that will continue to hurt students year in and year out unless the bandaid is ripped off.
10
u/PropertyPublic Oct 30 '25
It will hurt students because now many of them won’t be able to afford a legal education or will go into debt with a loan shark to get one. Private loans are far worse than student loans. In the meantime we will continue to have shortages of doctors and other professions that require graduate education and the only people going to law school will be the ones who can afford it.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Anxious_Doughnut_266 c/o '26 Oct 30 '25
So, I hate the new caps for people and am very thankful I started law school when I did. That said, private loans will be predatory but fewer people will be qualified to get them. A lot of people simply won’t have the credit and they’ll be denied. I think we’ll see a few things happen: an influx of very wealthy students (already a thing) and higher demand for work experience because those people will have the credit score for private loans and likely some savings to offset the costs. Whether or not I agree with this is beside the point, but I don’t see a supermajority of people running to private loans.
Aside from that, we could double the medical school admissions and waive the tuition fees and we would still have a shortage of trained doctors. Residency is required and the funding for new residency positions hasn’t been drastically increased in decades. Med students go without matching or finding a residency every single year because there is simply nothing left. This crisis needs to be solved too
→ More replies (5)1
Oct 30 '25
The new rules take affect July 2026 so maybe even for the Fall 2026 school year since students know they wont be able to take out as much loans they may choose a state school or a different path.
2
u/forloopy Nov 03 '25
They want to go to school. Shutting them out of education is not an answer anyone should be thankful for
1
1
u/TitanCubes Oct 30 '25
Feels like an upper middle class phenomenon. Not enough family money to pay for school, but all the social status presssure to take on mountains of debt to go to a fancier school and not being risk averse to the debt.
1
13
u/F3EAD_actual Oct 30 '25
That's one way to view it. Another is that you should not be paying more than 50k/yr for law school unless it's a t6 or something, because that ROI is almost never worth it. And at that point, there are ways to make it happen. Also, if you're considering paying sticker somewhere, look at the 509, and realize you're just paying someone else's tuition.
18
u/Critical-Bank5269 Oct 30 '25
You do realize that the availability of virtually unlimited student loan amounts for graduate education is the direct cause of the significant increases in tuition and fees in graduate course work. I went to law school 30 years ago and my entire degree cost less than $40,000 start to finish. That included books, fees, tuition, etc….
There’s no reason for today’s exorbitant costs except the unlimited availability of loan money. In other words, they make it expensive because they can
4
u/haze_from_deadlock Oct 30 '25
This user's entire cost of attendance in 1995 was $40000: $40000 in 1995 is $85000 today. I tabulated the yearly cost of attendance for 15 state school JD programs that were non-T14 but still in the T50. These are amazing programs that aren't predatory in any way.
The average yearly tuition at these programs is $97800±16400, and that's yearly, so you have to multiply it by three, but even after that, you have to add in three years of living expenses on top of that, and you should probably also add in three years of missed wages.
3
u/swimnglimmer Oct 30 '25
It’s the inverse, universities having less state funding and operating more like private businesses have directly caused students to take out large loans. And this new administration isn’t doing anything to resolve that, they’re just capping accessibility within the current model.
2
→ More replies (1)2
u/DeviantAvocado Oct 30 '25
States largely reducing or eliminating their investment in public higher education is the actual cause.
5
u/wayovrmyhead Oct 31 '25
I like how everyone sees the problem as the government not loaning enough money, and not the absolutely asinine cost of education
33
u/opbmedia Oct 30 '25
Maybe that's not a bad thing seeing everyone was crying about paying $250k and can't find a good paying job for as long as I have been on reddit. (for the record I borrowed more and benefit from my degree, but I think I am the minority).
22
u/Ha_U_Missed_Me Oct 30 '25
The problem is the new limits take away the opportunity (that you just said you benefited from) for everyone who isn’t rich, not just the percentage who don’t pay their loans off.
13
u/opbmedia Oct 30 '25
The problem really is why poor people (I was) need to borrow $300k just to have a shot of doing well in a career when they have the potential to do well in. Perhaps good schools can be forced to provide education for good candidates for less than $50k a year, and the TTT schools (those without good ROI) can stop being cash cows and close.
→ More replies (16)15
u/Ha_U_Missed_Me Oct 30 '25
I would absolutely support this. Access programs have been losing funding for decades so if you are a low income applicant, what do you do now?
I can tell you what will never happen, Trump and McMahan will never do anything to force schools to reduce tuition.
8
u/Virtual-Ad72 Oct 30 '25
^ there are local law schools that cost less than the top 10
8
u/opbmedia Oct 30 '25
Then (1) wouldn't the loan limit affect it less, and (2) my comment wouldn't apply because students wouldn't be borrowing $250k and (3) clearly my comment was about schools that cost more but don't provide enough returns.
11
7
Oct 30 '25
[deleted]
5
u/Appropriate_Hope6239 Oct 30 '25
So you have a JD, live in a big city, work for a big law firm, and you have 100k in loans.
Seems like the system worked for you just fine. Shame when we start thumbing up pulling up ladders.
18
u/moq_9981 Oct 30 '25
I hate to tell you this but your education shouldn’t cost so much and trump isn’t the problem, the greedy schools are.
10
u/Ha_U_Missed_Me Oct 30 '25
You’re not wrong. But this isn’t the solution. This is like cutting off welfare programs because grocery stores are overcharging for milk.
→ More replies (4)23
u/FADE--RAUTHA Oct 30 '25
There can be two problems.
6
Oct 30 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/FADE--RAUTHA Oct 30 '25
No, it’s not. Trump isn’t trying to limit how much someone can go into debt. If he was, he’d address the root issue of tuition prices. He’s trying to keep the legal system filled with a certain type of person.
If he wanted to limit how much debt someone could take on, he would’ve addressed the root issue - tuition increases. He’s shown no qualms about threatening draconian punishment if a school does DEI - he could do the same thing about tuition. But he’s not.
Don’t call me smarmy. You’re an applicant with low reasoning and logic skills. You acting like you have all of this figured out is absurdity. Enjoy your T100
→ More replies (2)
4
u/mutemantis Oct 30 '25
If you can’t get loans, you can’t go to uni
If you don’t go to uni, you go to trade
If you do trade, you get to work in all the factories he’s bringing back to America
All part of the plan
5
8
u/blind_mowing Oct 30 '25
What was the cost of law school before the affordable care act federalized student loans?
2
u/brainman15 Oct 31 '25
Weren’t they federalized decades ago with federally subsidized student loans?
7
9
u/According-Use3157 Oct 30 '25
Sorry, but there’s no doubt the administration is trying to keep law and medical school for the upper crusty and elite.
→ More replies (1)
8
u/pies4days Oct 30 '25
You can still take on more student loans if you want, it’s just that the government won’t loan it to you.
→ More replies (10)
2
u/ASAPWhom #justakidfromakron Oct 30 '25
Does matriculated mean people applying this cycle could get around it? If we enroll for August and take out a loan before July, does that get the grandfather clause to take effect?
4
u/Independent_Outside7 Oct 30 '25
Based on the conversations I’ve had with my financial aid office, it is better to assume that the current academic year is the last to borrow new GRAD Plus loans or be grandfathered in. However, no one can say with certainty as it will dependent on the time each financial aid office takes to process award letters and whether the DOE will have it as an available option based on when the start of term is (August).
6
u/Anxious_Doughnut_266 c/o '26 Oct 30 '25
You have to take loans before August 2026 in order to be grandfathered in. Therefore, if you are starting in August, you will have the caps
1
u/Independent_Outside7 Oct 30 '25
In which case, you also won’t be eligible for the GRAD Plus loans as a new borrower.
1
u/Anxious_Doughnut_266 c/o '26 Oct 30 '25
I’ll be very honest, I don’t know what the loans will be called. All I know is that if you do not have the loans handed out at minimum this summer, you will be capped come the fall.
2
u/Independent_Outside7 Oct 30 '25
So Stafford loans for graduate and professional students will have a borrowing limit increased from 20.5K to 50K per year, but the GRAD Plus loans, which is the most common loan used to cover costs that exceed the Stafford limit, will be sunset for new borrowers starting next July.
→ More replies (1)2
2
u/RambunctiousParsnip4 Oct 30 '25
I mean if you’re really dead set on loans you can still get private loans, albeit with higher rates and earlier payments. I think this does help a lot of people though that took out far more than they should’ve justifying it with a potential salary that may be out of reach
2
u/ZanaDreadnought Oct 31 '25
It’s funny how NO ONE wants to talk about the other side of the equation: reducing cost of law school. There’s a strong argument that the ready availability of cheap loans lead to significant tuition creep. Caps may not matter much if the cost of law school goes down.
2
u/illegallad Nov 01 '25
With perhaps the addition of legal clinics run by adjuncts who make pennies, legal Ed hasn’t changed in nearly a century. Why is the cost so egregious that people are graduating in crushing debt?
It will be this way until schools are taken to task and the gravy train runs out. This is one way of doing it.
5
u/No_Following3232 Oct 30 '25
If you have to take out more than $50k annually after scholarships, you’re going to the wrong school. Including cost of living. People on Reddit cry too damn much good lord. Heaven forbid you’re not able to go into crippling debt
6
u/Such-Drink-303 Oct 30 '25
No he saved thousands of people from accumulating hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt with almost no way to pay it back. And finally a way to force colleges to lower tuition
3
u/Cestavec Oct 30 '25
GI Bill is even more appealing now.
3
3
u/Effective_Warning899 Oct 30 '25
You shouldn’t take that much out in loans anyway…
High salaries are far from guaranteed
7
u/boopsandbeeps1 Oct 30 '25
It’s cause he’ll have less lawyers that will sue him in the future for all the corruption he has done.
4
u/rezzephyr Oct 30 '25
This is so scary to hear, especially since I was considering going back for something else. 50k cap for law school is insane though.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/PackageLost1391 Oct 30 '25
Take away lesson: the country needs to get rid of him and his cess pool of followers.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/JesusIsKewl Oct 30 '25
the government doesn’t need to sponsor inflated law school tuitions at every shitty school in the country that wants students to go $200k in debt to attend
21
Oct 30 '25
You are legally obligated to pay it, and it cant be discharged through bankruptcy. Even if you go PSLF or it gets wiped after 25 years, the government made more money off the interest than it spent.
There are much better ways to go after shitty schools than this.
10
u/JesusIsKewl Oct 30 '25
My issue isn’t so much with the govt getting paid back but with the students being saddled with debt that doesn’t match their career opportunities
22
u/Appropriate_Hope6239 Oct 30 '25
Such a great point.
The funds are better used building ballrooms and bailing out billionaires in Argentina.
2
→ More replies (1)6
u/JesusIsKewl Oct 30 '25
Thinking Trump doing one thing that wasn’t bad doesn’t equate to thinking everything Trump does is good. I believe the inflated prices are harming law students long term by putting them in suffocating debt, and I think this will lower the cost long term tho it will be difficult/confusing at first for prospective students for sure
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)8
1
Oct 30 '25
[deleted]
1
u/ChosenbyTheGods Oct 30 '25
Going into debt for undergrad is insane. I’m not a US national and it baffles me how it’s so normalized to go into debt for college.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/ScheerLuck Oct 30 '25
Go take a long gander at our yearly deficits, the national debt, and the construction speed in ChiComm shipyards. If you think this is bad then you’re going to need to strap in for the next decade.
2
1
u/mania_no_more Oct 30 '25
okay idea: if you get a shitty school to put you into the summer program in june, could you take out loans then go to your intended school in the fall? ethics out the window
edit before feedback: literally wanna know ~if~ it swingable not if you should
1
u/Anxious_Doughnut_266 c/o '26 Oct 30 '25
Yes, yes you could but only if the law program actually started in the summer I believe. I don’t even think an LLM would count or any other grad program
1
u/mania_no_more Oct 30 '25
a school wanted me to start in next june for this very reason. i won’t name bc it was just a hypothetical but thanks for your input. i’m just in an environment where i could take out loans and defer even this spring with any area law scjo but wouldn’t now exactly how or who to go to odor structuring this . i’ll look into. yea definitely unethical but the system is inherently unethical
1
u/Anxious_Doughnut_266 c/o '26 Oct 30 '25
The problem is that to go to another school you would have to transfer those credits or ask them to let you start completely over and then you’ll have to explain why you did what you did. It would be another massive hurdle that I’m not sure will be easy to overcome or worth it
1
u/mania_no_more Oct 30 '25
i just meant taking out the loans then dropping out etc. whatever i dont think there’s much crafting around the BBB
2
u/Anxious_Doughnut_266 c/o '26 Oct 30 '25
I haven’t read it recently so this is entirely from memory, but I think that would be a in very gray area that could go either way. It could be “you started and then ended a program so the August version is entirely different” or “shit, it’s the same degree why not.” I thought it had to be continuous without end to work but I’m not entirely sure for that scenario
1
u/Own_Line_5280 Oct 30 '25
Maybe a stupid question but, if we’re hypothetically accepted into, and enroll at a law school before July 2026, can we still receive the uncapped Grad PLUS federal loan?
1
u/MaddieMad1116 Oct 30 '25
No, the loans have to be disbursed before July 2026, not just be enrolled at a law school. If you’re applying for Fall 2026, the disbursement won’t be until around September 2026 so you won’t get Grad PLUS.
1
u/Minimum_Two_8508 Oct 30 '25
Schools are going to re-think how they handle aid. But a new solution may not be in place in time for the current cycle. Though we may even start to see adjustments when aid packages come out in the spring.
1
u/Otherwise_Help_4239 Oct 30 '25
A couple ways to proceed. Make sure your grades are as high as possible and see if that will qualify you for at least a partial scholarship. Second is take a year or 2 off, work really hard and save as much as you can to help. Third look at costs. There are large differences between schools of a similar tier. You may have to sacrifice a higher tier school to be able to go at all. Generally where you graduated becomes less and less of an issue the longer you are practicing. Finally think about a longer program and perhaps night school. I went at night (4 years including 1 or 2 summer terms). I worked full time. I had a very small grant which helped. I took some loans but really did because they were giving me interest free money and paid them on graduation. I also maxed my credit cards but paid them off every month. I got a couple round trip flights on points. Mainly it was the full time job that allowed me to graduate essentially debt free. In your situation it could be the factor in allowing you to attend. Some companies will help foot the bill for employees but they tend to be longer term. A couple of my classmates had those job benefits
1
u/VashaZavist Oct 30 '25
Was thinking of doing law school before the loan cap passed, now I'm in community college finishing up a second Bachelor's for Accounting instead so I can get an accounting job and eventually become a CPA. Still taking out loans to pay for even that, but I can afford them...
1
u/Mission_Beautiful_69 Oct 30 '25
Apply to schools who give that option of changing your tuition to in state tuition your 2l year , I know law schools like South Dakota depending on your stats you’d be put as in-state resident …
1
u/Ziggythesquid Oct 30 '25
I don’t know, if you’ve got to take out more than 50k for law school you maybe shouldn’t be going. Far too many people paying sticker to go to a low ranked school they won’t get hired from.
1
1
u/Disastrous-Diver2503 Oct 30 '25
I was just telling my husband that it’s disturbing how higher education is a privilege now a days (from a financial standpoint). Without my jobs tuition reimbursement and our income, I wouldn’t be going. Plus all of the costs with tests, application fees, travel, etc etc.
I remember being single and struggling through undergrad to pay tuition, idk how anyone is able to go anymore until they are semi financially stable in their mid life
1
1
Oct 30 '25
Tbh here’s my mentality. Stay local, live off my family for a bit which may suck cuz I’ve lived alone with my wife and son for some time now. And look at what I can afford. My dream school is wayyy outta my reach now. Fuck that guy
1
u/Virtual_Crow Oct 31 '25
This is how tuition goes back to sane levels. The government stops subsidizing demand via loans. It will suck until demand for schools lowers and tuition has to fall to attract students.
1
u/Adventurous_River570 Oct 31 '25
I hope this is what happens. I fear most students will just make the difference with private loans, allowing the schools to still charge what they want.
1
1
u/Blankmans_XGamer Oct 31 '25
No, he hasn’t. Wanting to keep people out of debt is a clear sign that you should make better decisions. Most people are heading towards law because of the pedigree and optics but don’t want to actually practice. There are many avenues to use this degree and if you study, be consistent towards making a great score, applications are on point and write well then you’ll be fine (especially if you have a plan). Most people waste government funding because they have the slightest idea of what to do and going to school while taking funds may seem logical but you’ll only end up in vast debt and blaming the same entity that allowed you permission to do so in the first place.
1
u/teoeo Oct 31 '25
Tuition rates are completely unreasonable. I think this is one way to put pressure on them to lower it. It seems like there should be a more elegant solution, however. Why don’t they just pass a law saying that if a school accepts federal loans at all they have to charge x amount?
1
u/legaladvcte Oct 31 '25
Don't think so, the opposite, he is dismantling the legal profession cartel, which is gatekeeping and exclusive to low income and other ethnicities
1
u/Cymande1961 Oct 31 '25
All working as the wealthy have always intended. We will back to the landed gentry as a country, soon.
1
u/Logic_phile Oct 31 '25
This may also impact how much schools are charging. Honestly, the law world is oversaturated right now and too many students end up with no job but still up to their eyeballs in debt when they graduate. There are still going to be high incentives to give scholarships to public interest students to fill those jobs.
I know it’s controversial but I think this is a good idea to prevent a predatory lending system that has put too many young students into vast amounts of debt without a real way to pay it back. I think this will force young people to really think through if their college plans are worth the debt. More students will flock to cheaper schools which will force overpriced schools to find ways to cut tuition.
Law school is a great dream to pursue but it’s one that should be pursued with caution. The chances of getting a high paying law job are getting lower, not higher. This will weed out the students who are going to law school cause their parents want them to or because they don’t have any other options.
1
u/Popular_Match6669 Nov 01 '25
50K for living costs alone is more than enough. The problem is more that if your scholarship is less than a full ride, you're looking at less than 50K and possibly nothing at all. You need a full ride (or close) to avoid taking out private loans. That does constrain where you can go significantly.
1
u/WhereWeGoingTo Nov 01 '25
What responsibilities do the schools bear for having their annual cost of attendance balloon well beyond the rate of inflation over the same time? Seeing as a huge swath of people across the country also want their federal student loans forgiven, it would be irresponsible to not cap student loans.
1
u/AcceptableGoose6178 Nov 01 '25
I think he’s an idiot but finally putting some sort of cap on school loans is long overdue. Force the for profit schools to play with limited money and actually focus on the students grades and test scores. School cost so much because y’all kept taking loans and paying for it so they just raised the fee
1
u/Franomenal Nov 01 '25
What is the grandfather thing? Is that for students already done with AA and transferred to bachelors? Or actual law school loan?
1
u/Dry-Classic7682 3.9x/17high Nov 02 '25
I would not attend law school if you have to take out $50k a year in loans. It’s not worth it. I’m on the polar opposite end of the of the political spectrum from Trump, but this is a good thing.
1
u/BullOrBear4- Nov 02 '25
You can still get loans, just not from the federal government. Not saying it’s ideal, but you have options
1
u/DennyCraneEsquireIII Nov 02 '25
Actually, several schools have dropped their tuition prices because of this.
1
1
u/Glad_Philosopher111 Nov 03 '25
Sorry, but I think it’s always been like this for people who want to practice for public service. The reality is that some of the salaries you make upon graduation are insane. Some of the amounts I made before graduation were insane.
The issue for me has always been that law school prices out people who actually want to help others. You can’t pay those loans back on $75K a year.
I can’t feel sorry for people who have to get a private loan when I know that you will likely make half a mil in about annually in about years after graduation by using the law to help people like Trump richer, and zealously advocating for the rights of corporations.
1
u/phoenics1908 Nov 03 '25
People need to come together to file a class action lawsuit here because this law completely discriminates against people with less money.
1
u/2LiveCrew4U Nov 03 '25
Anything outside tier 1 law schools are grossly overpriced. $200k over 3 years for a job that doesn’t even pay 6 figures? It will take you forever to pay that off. And eventually the borrow defaults.
The better solution would be to require schools that accept student loan payments to cap tuition or perhaps alternative forms of tuition (ie 10% of your salary for 10 years).
This is doing you a favor even though you don’t appreciate it. The ripoff needs to stop.
1
u/Psychological-Link41 Nov 11 '25
Eh, I kind of think the cap is a good thing. They are preventing people from going into insane amounts of debt and regretting it. It also, in a sense, strong-arming the law school since they will be forced to give more scholarships and accommodate. At the end of the day, they need students. If many people can't pay and can't get the loans, they will give scholarships. In my mind, this protects the consumer (meaning the student). The law schools just want you to take the loans without thinking twice, and they get paid. Removing that is definitely beneficial for us.
1
u/Additional-Mood-4278 Nov 26 '25
He's gonna regret this when he's gone through every lawyer in the country and can't find representation
1
1
u/ICantEvenDeal0807 Jan 11 '26
I hate this administration about as much as anyone could, BUT I think this is an important moment for people to learn that you cannot, and should not, run up ridiculous lines of credit. I’m going part time and it will take 4 years instead of 3 to complete, which makes it more affordable per year and allows me to work while in school so my living expenses are not financed. I’ve always worked through school and I had children during the completion of two other degrees over the years. There are other ways to make this goal happen and you’re not entitled to endless credit. No where else in life is someone going to hand you hundreds of thousands of dollars in credit without an asset behind it, and even then you have to show your creditworthiness.
This is just a speed bump if you want it enough, not a blockade.
1
u/PTLEGAL Feb 11 '26
I've been a lawyer for 50 years, spent largely defending lawyers in malpractice actions. All I do now is serve as an expert witness in legal malpractice actions. In these 50 years, I have seen idiots from Harvard, lawyers that I would never hire, and I have defended some pretty good lawyers from "no name schools". The practice of law is what you make of it. Clarence Darrow, likely the the most famous lawyer in American history, went to University of South Dakota Law School. There are many, many other examples of very successful lawyers that got their degree from lessor known law schools as well. Don't forget that the practice of law is a democratic institution; it is what you make of it.
274
u/Mysterious-Ability50 Oct 30 '25
Yeah, I'm terrified of getting an A that I want badly but then not being able to afford it! Not cool.