I am an American student who has just finished my BA in psychology and have decided to go to law school. My long term goal is to be able to practice in California and I have been accepted into several second tier schools such as Loyola Marymount, Hastings, and Pepperdine. Each have given me a 100k+ scholarship.

Recently, however, I have also been accepted to the law program at King's College London. This is a very exciting opportunity for me as it is by far the most prestigious law program that I have received an acceptance from (#17 in the World for law). That being said I do have some questions and concerns about the possible advantages versus disadvantages to getting a partially foreign law education.

At the moment my main interest is in international law which is why I applied to some schools in England as I thought it might help me to have a more international perspective. That being said, I do want to be able to practice and be based in California in the future. The program at King's College would be 3 years and I would get an LLB, after which I would come back to California to take an LLM program in order to take the California bar. I also plan on applying for internships in California during the summers. My main question is whether you have any knowledge on how having an LLB from King's College as well as an LLM from a school in California versus having a JD from a less prestigious law school in California, such and Loyola Marymount or Hastings, would look to employers. Would a background and education in English law give me an advantage or actually make me a less favorable candidate among others in the California law job market who have JDs?

Thank you for taking the time to answer these hypothetical questions to the best of your knowledge!

If you want to practice in California, get a JD. A UK-LLB will get you nowhere, even if it's from a reputed school like King's College.

Have you applied to better ranked schools like Berkeley, UCLA, Stanford?