Gatekeeping the Gavel: The LSAC lawsuit and structural barriers to diversity in the legal pipeline

By Jamie Patton ‘27

When most think of the proposition of going to law school, one of the first concerns is regarding tuition. Law school is very expensive, and this is a fact, but the first financial hurdles occur before submission. 

In recent years, the Law School Admissions Council, otherwise known as “LSAC,” has been under scrutiny regarding the legitimacy of its commitment to its mission statement: “LSAC is a not-for-profit organization whose mission is to advance law and justice by promoting access, equity, and fairness in law school admission and supporting the learning journey from prelaw through practice.”  However, as of August of this year, LSAC has found itself in another dispute. A class-action complaint has been filed against the Law School Admission Council, Inc. by Linvel James Risner. For the purpose of revealing LSAC’s violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, the inhibition of a competitive market denies the right of fairness for all applicants, allowing LSAC to set the price and collect all fees, as they are mandatory for every applicant. 

The Law School Admission Council has many functions. One of which is being the sole application portal for law school applicants. LSAC partners with over two hundred law schools in the US, Canada, and Australia. This portal is very similar to the familiar undergraduate application portal called The Common Application or Common App. The major difference is that the Common Application does not charge applicants a fee to use its application. The LSAC application has two parts: there is a $215 subscription fee to use the service for up to five years, as well as a $45 processing fee called the Credential Assembly Service, otherwise known as CAS. The latter collects transcripts, letters of recommendation, and other essential documents into an application report to be sent to a member of a law school. The $45 fee is for each application submitted and does not include each law school's application fee. Every year, LSAC has over 60,000 applicants. Despite this, LSAC defines itself as a not-for-profit organization and filed over $250 million in assets in the 501(c)(3) nonprofit filings for the fiscal year of 2023. 12% of that generally comes from each applicant, as LSAC collects roughly $30 million annually. However, this doesn’t inherently violate antitrust law; the act of prohibiting a free market lies within the organizational structure of the application system. The complaint alleges that LSAC incentivizes member law schools by providing substantial benefits to agreeing to their fixed price through the LSAC application portal. The benefits that were provided were monetary grants, with over 27 law schools receiving more than $100,000 during that period.  The incentives also provide an opportunity for member law schools to access “the LSAC Unite platform at no cost.” LSAC Unite is the portion of the application portal that is accessible by the member law schools. It allows each school to see and open every application. Like the Common Application, as previously stated, LSAC encourages students to bear the burden of fees and allows the member law schools to access the portal with no burden. This trade-off allows most law schools to require applications to be submitted through the Law School Admissions Council website. This choice is solely made by the member law schools themselves. 

This partnership between LSAC and the member law schools is designed for all burdens to be borne by the applicant. It’s easy to misunderstand the weight of this burden, as all applicants must take the law school admissions test, otherwise known as the LSAT, before any application can be started. The test itself is run through LSAC and costs $248 just to take it, and $45 to send it to every school they wish to apply to. According to the American Bar Association, on average, “an applicant will apply to 6.8 to seven schools.” The median application fee per law school is roughly $80. Applying to law school can easily add up to $1000 without any factors of test preparation, cost of travel for interviews, and test retakes. This system was designed by the very same institutions that are relied upon to admit to the legal field. 

Alternatively, LSAC advertises its fee waivers, both for the LSAT and CAS, depending on the applicant's tax filing status, as well as their parental income. They use a two-tiered program that allows applicants to be eligible for different packages. The fee waiver program highlights both independent filers and dependent filers. Applying for a few waivers allows each applicant to have three benefits: access to LawHub Advantage, a specific number of LSAT tests, and the CAS and CAS reports. LawHub advantage is a paid subscription service that is run through LSAC. It provides multiple study packages to prepare applicants for the LSAT. LawHub advantage starts at $120 a year. If an applicant qualifies in either tier of LSAC’s fee waiver program, they receive a one-year subscription to LawHub Advantage. If an applicant is in substantial financial need and qualifies for the tier one package, they receive two LSAT fee waivers; in the second tier, an applicant can receive one. For the five-year credential assembly service and CAS reports, the first tier allows an applicant to submit their application without the $215 fee and can send the report to six member law schools. In the second tier, an applicant receives the five-year credential assembly service as well and can send reports to three schools. What is the qualification for these tiers? 

As previously stated, if an applicant is using their income, as well as their parents' income, the eligibility must be up to 200% of the federal poverty guidelines for the first tier, and in the second tier, it’s 200 to 300% of the federal poverty guidelines if filing dependently. If the applicant only uses their own income, it must be up to 150% of the federal poverty guidelines per tier one, as well as 200% of the federal poverty guidelines for tier two. If filing independently, tier one must be up to 235% of the federal poverty guidelines, and for tier two, it can be up to 260%. LSAC reserves the right to conclude that other factors may be considered, even if income falls within the range. Other eligibility requirements include US citizen or a US resident, as well as being a Canadian resident. According to LSAC’s official website, for the incoming 2023 class 10% received the LSAC fee waiver. Stating that “3,451 students receive an LSAC fee waiver,” it seems as though LSAC attempts to lessen the burden with their fee waiver package, since it includes: test prep free, several  LSAT tests, score previews, and reports to a certain number of schools, depending on income. One would say that if an applicant is in substantial financial need, these resources can lessen the burden or remove it completely for applicants attempting to apply to law schools. However, the imbalance between the 3,500 students who applied for fee waivers and the 60,000 students who apply roughly every year shows an important margin that isn’t quite clear for an explanation. LSAC does not record substantial data on applicants’ income or family contributions, so there is no way of identifying the reasoning for the other 50,000 students who are subjected to these fees. Is the LSAC waiver program a good enough basis to deny the misuse of fees? Or are they backtracking on their verdict and goal to “help expand access to legal education by reducing financial barriers,” as stated again on the LSAC page? Or is the use of fee waivers a way to overshadow the system they’ve built against applicants? By forcing a non-competitive market and requiring their application to be the only way of acceptance through member law schools, are they truly providing access? Or is it creating more of a barrier to the career? The fee waivers are lucrative and support their mission, but this benefit mostly falls on deaf ears. The paywall to law is constituted by the institution that applicants rely on for acceptance. This is one of the ways the legal profession gatekeeps the gavel.

Jamie Patton is a freshman majoring in political science and philosophy.

Sources

American Bar Association. (n.d. 2025). Profile of the legal profession: Legal education. https://www.americanbar.org/news/profile-legal-profession/legal-education/

Law School Admission Council. Inc. (n.d. 2025–a). About the Law School Admission Council (LSAC). https://www.lsac.org/about LSAC+1

Law School Admission Council. Inc. (n.d. 2025.–b). LSAT & CAS fees. https://www.lsac.org/lsat/register-lsat/lsat-cas-fees LSAC

Law School Admission Council. Inc. (n.d. 2025–c). Apply for a fee waiver. https://www.lsac.org/lsat/register-lsat/lsat-cas-fees/fee-waiver LSAC+1

Law School Admission Council. Inc. (n.d. 2025–d). LawHub Advantage. https://www.lsac.org/lawhub LSAC

Law School Admission Council. Inc. (n.d. 2025-e). Evolving LSAC’s fee waiver program for even greater impact. https://www.lsac.org/blog/evolving-lsacs-fee-waiver-program-even-greater-impact LSAC

Law School Admission Council. Inc. (n.d. 2025-f). Discover law: Access and community – law-school. https://www.lsac.org/discover-law/access-and-community-law-school#:~:text=Access%20to%20justice%20is%20essential,to%20the%20greater%20legal%20community.

Risner v. Law School Admissions Council, Inc., No. 2:25-cv-04461 (E.D. Pa. filed Aug. 4, 2025). https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/RISNERvLAWSCHOOLADMISSIONCOUNCILINCDocketNo225cv04461EDPaAug04202?doc_id=X141C6T9KBI9OJ8FFE6511J9I8