Hello! I'm thinking of applying for both these great institutions for admission for the next year. Can those who have posted on this Board who applied for both give me a sense of the relative selectiveness of each school by stating:
(a) whether both their applications were successful,
(b) if not, which of the two applications failed;
(c) If you got accepted into both, which did you choose in the end.

a) Yes

b) -

c) Columbia

same as wolla.

I can only speak for my country (Austria) but I've learned about many NYU-admitted-CLS-rejected scenarios but hardly ever the other way around. The amount of fellow Austrians at NYU is substantially higher than the few chosen CLS Austrians. Consequently, and due to the generally higher prestige, CLS is picked in most cases.

Thank you for the information twelfthmonkey and for sharing your thoughts. Anyone else?

I'm not sure which is more selective, but as far as prestige is concerned, I just don't see putting Columbia ahead of NYU.

First, as far as J.D. programs are concerned, both Columbia and NYU are among the top 5 or 6 in the U.S. After Yale and Harvard, Columbia and NYU form the next tier of top law schools in the U.S., along with Stanford and Chicago.

Now, among LL.M. programs; the tax LL.M. is widely regarded as the most useful and prestigious in the business and practicing legal world. And NYU is indisputably numero uno among tax programs.

From my perspective, the commercial value of other LL.M.s is suspect. But this is coming from the perspective of an American J.D. recipient.

phantomlaw, thank you for your insights. While I appreciate you sharing your thoughts, I'd rather not start a discussion on the merits of each of the programs in a substantive way. As seen in many other threads on this Board, that inevitably ends up in a tit-for-tat battle from both Columbia and NYU students. From those threads, I already know the general pros and cons of the arguments, though I'm sure many will disagree with your view of the tax LLM as opposed to say the HLS or YLS LLM. But that is besides the point. That is why I asked for each person's own decision rather than ask them to elaborate though if anyone wants to elaborate you can send me a private message and I will be happy to discuss. Thanks very much though for providing your thoughts nonetheless - I truly appreciate!

OK. To put it in another perspective, perhaps closer to what you are asking for - I applied to NYU's tax program but did not apply to Columbia.

Let me make this absolutely clear - Columbia and NYU are both among the very, very elite law schools in the U.S. and I don't think you can make a mistake with either one.

Thank you for your response. I agree that like you some people might be applying for Columbia or NYU for particular programs or professors and hence should apply there only. My problem is more for a person who is on the fence which is why my initial question is phrased such that I wanted people who had applied to both programs to give their eventual decisions. Thanks though phantomlaw for your insights and thoughts. I appreciate it much.

Anyone else who applied to both and got accepted by one or accepted to both and had to choose between the two?

Hi,
I did
a) NO
b) NYU (rejected)
c) Columbia

If you are admitted by both schools it will be a tough decision. They are both outstanding schools. I cannot be objective due to family reasons (my wife is a Columbia alumna).
There is a larger alumni community in my country as a result better recognition of Columbia. Columbia is Ivy League (though it is not actually applicable to Law Schools, it's only for colleges). NYU LL.M class is ~ 450 (not sure about the exact number but something around) vs Columbia's 230.
In my opinion Columbia has a better campus, but worse neighbourhood.

In addition, I was accepted by Berkeley, Georgetown and a couple of others.

I had decided not to go to NYU when I received my rejection letter (the closest that I've ever been to California is Florida, so, nothing I can really comment on...)

IMHO, I support the comment that you should concentrate more on the program of study and Professors rather than ranking and prestige. One can hypothize about the selectiveness of top law schools as much as s/he desires, but in my opinion, there is a very thin line of who gets in and who doesn't. The last person on the list who gets in is no different than the first person on the waiting list who didn't get in. All top law schools are looking for diverse backgrounds and strong academic records. At the very end of the line it's your personal fit and luck.

Applied to NYU CLS and Harvard.
Rejected from Harvard, Waitlisted at CLS, Accepted at NYU both in the NYU&NUS and NYU LLM.

I won t wait for CLS response. I m heading to NYU.
Just a short note to be more precise as I think people do not consider it properly. NYU Program is larger than CLS but you have to consider that half of the students are US applicants. Only half of them is made of international students, so roughly 220 students are international and it shows the same selectiveness rate of CLS because we re not competing with the other half of domestic students.
As far as prestige maybe CLS, but I think that being 4 or 5 in a ranking that changes every year is not important at all. With both of these choices you cannot go wrong.

Selectiveness is not the result of size alone. If I'm not mistaken, Harvard has the 3rd largest LLM program in the US behind NYU and GULC. And all 3 are among the most prestigious LLM programs in the world.

Conversely, most rank 70+ law schools have a smaller LLM class size than Yale and Stanford, and often no LLM program at all.

Size does have an effect on admissions, but not necessarily on selectiveness: Many applicants may be rejected by law schools with smaller programs simply because a couple applicants from the same country have already been accepted. Yet had the program been larger or had he applied earlier, he would have been accepted given his equivalent -if not stronger- credentials.

So yes, you'll find many more applicants rejected at Columbia and admitted at NYU than the other way round. But that is not a direct indication/proof of selectiveness.

One objective way of measuring LLM selectiveness (to make up for the lack of LSAT/GPA figures) could be:

class size / applicants multiplied by admitted / enrolled

The lower the result, the more selective the LLM program would be.
In other words, the lower the admission rate, and the higher the percentage of admitted applicants who chose to enroll, the more selective the LLM.

In practice, this is more a measure of "desirability" (i.e how much students absolutely want to go to a given law school to the point they will reject every other offer) than of selectiveness.

That said, and here is the point of my whole message: there is no difference between these two concepts. Selectiveness is the direct result of our desire (yes we applicants).
Yale has the luxury to admit the best applicants in the world only because they know that every time they issue an offer, the odds of the latter being accepted are very high.

If year after year, most admitted students at Yale choose to reject their offer, Yale would slowly become the least selective law school simply because they'd have to lower their ambitions.

And our desire is the effect of selectiveness, or put it another way, our desire today is the result of the desires of last year's applicants, which in turn are the result of the desires of previous year applicants, ad eternam.

That's how thin the thread which holds selectiveness is. Selectiveness is the direct result of our collective response to the question "would you rather go to law school X or law school Y". Nothing else.

"NYU vs Columbia - selectiveness"? I don't know, whichever wins the Condorcet ranking as voted by law school applicants.

a) Yes
b) -
c) CLS

Hedek,
what about answering the a,b,c questions?

Thank you all for your responses. Like I say before, I understand this survey process is not perfect but I also see this as more useful than the constant back and forth in other threads that end up being hostile. So while I thank everyone who made the useful comments above, I will persist with this survey so that I have a better sense of what a person might choose in the circumstances. I want to thank everyone who respond to the survey so far. For those who have yet to respond, please do. The question again for those who just joined us: Can those who have posted on this Board who applied for both NYU and Columbia give me a sense of the relative selectiveness of each school by stating:
(a) whether both their applications were successful,
(b) if not, which of the two applications failed;
(c) If you got accepted into both, which did you choose in the end.

a yes
b /
c nyu

reason why: 1/taxation + 2/location ! :)

Thank you nicolas_a. Anyone else?

following today's chat sessions, I should probably add the fact that the nyu so-called "global llm community" seems a bit more attractive since it mixes both us and international students...
I've read this comment from a nyu prospective student so it might be a bit caricatural but he solved his NY dilemna as follows : "columbia = 200 international students while nyu = 250 international students + 150 domestic students"

a) Yes

b) -

c) Columbia

(a) Yes
(b)
(c) NYU

a) Yes
b)
c) Columbia.

Unless you are interested in Public International Law or Tax, go to Columbia. NYU recruits too many LLMs each year and you may not have so called 'truly international" experience when the student group is so large as NYU.

In my case, go to Columbia is a no-brainer, because the corporate program of NYU is second-tier compared with Columbia!