SC

CSOL-InfiLaw Deal Clears Key ABA Panel

NOW SOUTH CAROLINA’S GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO PERMIT SALE TO MOVE FORWARD … By FITSNEWS  ||  The pending sale of the Charleston School of Law (CSOL) to InfiLaw received a key blessing from an American Bar Association (ABA) committee this week – further evidence the state of South Carolina needs to stand…

NOW SOUTH CAROLINA’S GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO PERMIT SALE TO MOVE FORWARD …

By FITSNEWS  ||  The pending sale of the Charleston School of Law (CSOL) to InfiLaw received a key blessing from an American Bar Association (ABA) committee this week – further evidence the state of South Carolina needs to stand aside and permit this private transaction to move forward.

According to a letter posted to the CSOL website, the ABA’s accreditation committee has recommended the association’s legal education and bar admission council approve a request from the law school to transfer its licenses to InfiLaw.

“The Committee recommends that the Council grant acquiescence in the proposed purchase of the Law School’s assets by InfiLaw,” the letter reads.

Assuming the council approves the committee’s recommendation following a meeting on December 5, InfiLaw would be permitted to run the school as an ABA-accredited institution – one of the final hurdles in concluding the sale of the private institution.

If that happens, the only thing standing in the way of the sale would be the S.C. Commission on Higher Education (CHE) – which is statutorily authorized to license the deal from a business standpoint, not as it relates to accreditation.

The committee’s decision – which came after the ABA sent a team to Charleston, S.C. to investigate the request – is not surprising seeing as InfiLaw already operates three ABA-accredited schools.  Of course we’re sure it will spark shrill cries of recrimination from certain interests with a stake in seeing this deal undone.

These interests have been working for some time to sink the CSOL-Infilaw deal – ostensibly so a plan to subsidize the school with tax dollars can be revived.

We have consistently and steadfastly opposed such a plan … and will continue to do so moving forward.

Our state’s higher education system needs to be privatized, not expanded.  Meanwhile the private sector needs to be permitted to operate free from the meddling of government bureaucrats and self-serving trial lawyers.

***

Related posts

SC

North Charleston Councilman Accuses Cop Of Falsifying Police Report

Will Folks
SC

‘Carolina Crossroads’ Update: SCDOT Set To Unveil New Plan To The Public

Will Folks
SC

Federal Lawsuit Alleges Racial Discrimination in Horry County School

Callie Lyons

16 comments

Westbrook November 6, 2014 at 7:12 pm

Where’s Ed the talking horse? Seems like he has been put out to pasture or perhaps he had an unfortunate visit to the glue factory….

Reply
George got fired as magistrate November 6, 2014 at 7:41 pm

Don’t you know George Kosko is grinning from ear to ear right now! And he has a very expensive Scotch bottle in his hand too! George is finally going to be rich like he has been trying to do for years.

Reply
euwe max November 6, 2014 at 9:08 pm

I saw a camouflaged car today – the driver was wearing a camo hunting outfit, and a “if you can read this, you’re too close” bumper sticker… to make a point, I ran into him.

Reply
Dave Chappelle I'm Rick James November 7, 2014 at 8:32 am

The driver was wearing a bumper sticker? Odd.

Reply
euwe max November 7, 2014 at 11:40 am

I told you I ran into him to make a point.

Reply
Guest November 6, 2014 at 9:09 pm

This school is funded by federal student loans that its unfortunate students use to pay tuition, and would continue to be under Infilaw’s ownership. It is not a private sector, free market venture in any meaningful sense.

Reply
FastEddy23 November 6, 2014 at 9:56 pm

Wondering how many of the students do get fed subsidized loans? If all, then, yes, the entire school would appear to be.

But there are plenty of private schools that receive a majority of student subsidies from the fed loan system … Here in Taxifornia, fur instance, Stanford does.

But you are right. Being beholding to the fed g’ment for “cheap” loans and “work” study programs is questionable … and as everyone knows, the teachers are just as dependent on those fed handouts as the students … and thus may feel good about spewing the bureaucracies propaganda.

Reply
nitrat November 7, 2014 at 9:02 am

I haven’t heard anything about the job market for law school grads improving. I would hope that a for-profit law school would be covered by the same changes that the Obama administration is proposing which involve for-profits being required to keep records of how many of their graduates are employable in jobs that allow them to repay their federal loan. Then, if the schools numbers are bad, they are disqualified from eligibility for their students to receive federal loans.
Of course, the for-profit colleges oppose this…because they don’t care if the free market works as long as they can get money from the government.

Reply
Guero November 7, 2014 at 7:46 pm

It’s not a free market venture as Guest pointed out. It’s a classic plutocrat Repugnant Party form of welfare for the 1%: No private risk with the taxpayers ( as Leona put it, only the little people pay taxes) picking up the liabilty for the defaulted student loans. Billy Folks may be stupid enough to really think this is “capitalism” but he always was a little slow.

Reply
euwe max November 6, 2014 at 10:38 pm

That open floor plan is just plain spooky.. ridiculous looking chairs and knee-banging tables… the poor saps trying to use laptops demonstrates how poorly designed the furniture is. The only alternative to scooting to the edge of a sofa chair to reach past your knees, are uncomfortable looking wooden high-chairs crowded around a little round table, the tiny surface area split 3 ways. Reminds me of the scene in Men In Black with the best of the best of the best using their laps as a table.

Reply
tomstickler November 6, 2014 at 11:00 pm

If there truly was a “free-market” in law schools, CSOL would be shut down entirely.

For more on the for-profit law school scam: http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2014/11/usual-suspects

Reply
nitrat November 7, 2014 at 9:26 am

As long as the free-marketeers want to be able to bribe politicians with campaign contributions for special tax breaks, and other ways for taxpayer money to flow to them with no accountability – think Kochs and their Cato buddy Howie Rich in varieties of ways – there is no real free-market. Probably never has been.
I wonder if Libertarians don’t get that or if they are just lying for their rich masters?
It seems some people have to identify with their better(-off)s to feel good about themselves.

Reply
Kudos November 7, 2014 at 7:00 pm

Glad to see you use the “capital L” instead of the little one. Appropriate use by your comments too, kudos to you. I know many a capital L that can’t draw the free market distinction you just drew.

Most small L’s know that though…but they are “extreme” to most.

Reply
john dozier November 7, 2014 at 9:23 am

When you run a strip joint, being taken over by government beats being taken over by a whorehouse.

Reply
Philip Branton November 7, 2014 at 4:22 pm

Ya know……this article would have so much more “temptation” for ads if there was a “Where’s Liz Gunn” option for the photo attached..!!

Matter of fact, maybe there is more ad mileage in getting that coffee “shop” to have a FITSNEWS ad photoshopped on it..!

At least get a mug of Brian Hicks and John Monk photoshopped in this space somewhere to cause a stir..!

Reply
Jackie Chiles November 10, 2014 at 8:40 am

The ABA accreditation committee would accredit a ham sandwich.

Reply

Leave a Comment