Because law is a post-baccalaureate course of study in the United States, there is a winnowing process that reduces the pool of applicants to those who already have had some degree of educational success. Nevertheless, changes in the economy and demographic shifts may result in serious problems for some schools or for changes in mission. The accreditation requirements of the ABA and the membership requirements of the AALS, despite some substantial changes in the past decade, tend to be more directed toward quantitative inputs than toward qualitative measures. The ABA also requires acquiescence in a range of programs before they can be instituted, and conducts expensive on site inspections on a regular basis. Like most regulatory schemes directed at inputs the result is to create a series of highly similar institutions and a situation in which the costs of substantial innovation can be high.
Faculties naturally tend to resist change in pedagogy and curriculum.
Law teachers have substantial investments in their current courses and are accustomed to doing things in certain ways. They have achieved professional success in following particular paths, and, having been rewarded, seek to replicate their successes for themselves and their students. In the past decade another force for conservatism has entered the picture the notorious rankings by US News and World Report and its copycats. The rankings reinforce the model established by the traditional elite schools and reward those which are selective enough to admit students with high LSATs, which place many students in large law firms, which have large resources, and which have high brand name recognition. Yale is perennially number one, and with some minor shuffling from year to year, Harvard, Chicago, Stanford, Columbia and NYU round out the top group.