February 2026 / Episode 8 / Under 20 minutes
Welcome to Keeping Up to DataSM, a space in which we discuss, analyze, and contextualize trends and perspectives in the current law school admission cycle.
SUSAN KRINSKY: Welcome back to Keeping Up to Data. I’m Susan Krinsky, executive vice president for operations at LSAC®, with an update on the 2026 application cycle and a discussion with Megan Glinski, LSAC’s manager of financial aid Education.
As I record this podcast, we are 10 days into the month of February and slightly more than two-thirds of the way through the cycle, based on volumes. By this time last year, we had seen 67% of the applicants who eventually applied, and we had received 70% of the applications that were eventually submitted. As of today, the number of individuals applying to law school — that is, applicants — is 17.3% higher than last year at this time and 41.1% higher than two years ago. As of today, 60,102 individuals have applied to at least one law school.
When we look at the application metric, we have so far seen 20.4% more applications than last year at this time and 48.6% more than two years ago. There are over 440,000 applications that have been submitted as of today.
As we expected, the increases over previous years are continuing to moderate slightly. As of this week, 47.9% of individuals who have submitted at least one application for 2026 admission identify as persons of color, 57.6% identify as female, 39.6% as male, 1.9% did not indicate a gender, and just under 1% identify as gender-diverse. Applicants who describe themselves as being first-generation college attendees or graduates represent 25.9% of the 60,000-plus applicants. This is up from a month ago and also up from last year at this time. As was the case last month, applicants from all regions of the U.S. are up, some more than others, and applications to schools in all regions of the U.S. are up, too. Canadian applicants are up 13.5% over last year, and applications to Canadian law schools are up 14.9% over last year.
We have now completed administering six of the eight LSAT® administrations this cycle, and test takers over those six administrations are up 16.4% over the first six administrations of the previous year. The next LSAT administration begins on April 9, and we still have about two weeks until the registration deadline for that test. Registrations are up about 5% over the previous April test, but it’s still early to come to any conclusions about what April will look like, let alone June.
That’s our report on the February data. I would also note that we have just announced the dates for the 2026-27 LSAT administrations — that is, August 2026 through June of 2027 — and along with that news, we also announced that starting with the August 2026 LSAT, we will be moving toward in-center testing for almost all U.S. and international test takers, with limited exceptions for certain medical accommodations or extreme hardship in getting to a testing center.
In addition, we announced that we will be moving to a new testing platform in August 2026, which will have some minor user interface changes from our existing platform. People planning to take the April or June tests this year will continue to use the existing interface; people planning to take the LSAT in August 2026 or later will be able to practice using the new interface. We expect to have an interactive model of the new user interface in LawHub® by the end of March, and versions of all our practice tests in the new user interface by May, so people testing in August and beyond will have several months to practice. For more details, you can go to our website, LSAC.org, and search for the Law:Fully blog post for February 11.
Remember that you can stay on top of our volume data by going to our website, LSAC.org, where you’ll find a link on the homepage to the latest volume data, which is updated every night.
When President Trump signed the Budget Reconciliation Act, also known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, into law last July, it marked the start of sweeping changes to federal student aid that will have substantial implications for law schools and their students. For all graduate and professional degree programs, including Juris Doctor degrees, the legislation eliminates the Grad PLUS Loan program, which allowed borrowing up to the cost of attendance and provided a significant financial resource to law students. The legislation also imposes new borrowing caps on federal student loans: Starting July 1, 2026, professional degree students will be limited to an annual federal loan amount of $50,000 per year and a $200,000 lifetime cap for federal student loans. This means law students will have less access to federal borrowing and must, in many cases, find other sources of funds to cover the cost of attendance at their law school. The bill also introduces a universal lifetime federal student loan cap of $257,500 across undergraduate, graduate, and professional levels.
That lifetime federal student loan cap excludes Parent PLUS borrowing for undergraduate school. For law students, this means total federal borrowing opportunities are more strictly bounded, impacting budget modeling and possibly increasing reliance on private loans or institutional funding. For law schools, the legislation has institutional accountability and indirect impacts. The bill introduces new metrics linking program eligibility for federal aid to graduates’ earnings. That is, schools may lose access to Title IV funds for programs whose graduates earn less than comparable graduates without credentials For law schools, this means more scrutiny on graduate outcomes, bar passage, employment salaries, and possibly greater pressure to improve affordability or value.
Joining me today is Megan Glinski, a seasoned financial aid veteran who is now LSAC’s manager of financial aid education. Megan, welcome to the Keeping Up to Data podcast.
MEGAN GLINSKI: Thank you so much. I’m so happy to be here.
SUSAN: Megan, I think it’s safe to say that the Budget Reconciliation Act has changed the financial aid landscape. Could you walk us through some of these changes and the implications they may have for schools? In other words, what can law schools do to help students facing these new borrowing limits?
MEGAN: Yeah, so I think “changed the landscape” is spot-on. The most significant shift for law students is going to be the elimination of the Federal Direct Graduate PLUS loan and the introduction of fixed borrowing limits. So, historically, the Grad PLUS loan has allowed students to borrow up to the full cost of attendance after all other aid was exhausted. So, this really represents a fundamental change in how law school is financed. Full-time students will now only be able to borrow a maximum of $50,000, in what’s called the Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan, each year. For students in part-time programs or who don’t enroll full time in a given semester, their loans will now be subject to proration based on their enrollment level. So, this means that their maximum federal borrowing limit will be limited even further.
So, for schools, this means a few things. First, there’s going to be a much greater pressure on institutional aid, — so, scholarships, grants, emergency funding — because federal loans alone may no longer be able to cover the full cost of attendance for many students. Second, schools will have to be very intentional about communication with incoming students about cost and ways to fund their legal education. They really do not want a scenario where students don’t have a plan beyond the institutional and federal aid, then the bill comes due for the semester and the student realizes they cannot afford to attend and be left with no other option than to withdraw. So, communication will really be key.
Law schools can help by expanding need-based and merit-based aid where possible — and I do want to acknowledge that’s a lot easier said than done — and really strengthening financial aid counseling and outreach. This is an opportunity for schools to really proactively communicate with students, not just about limits or the changes that are coming, but about planning, budgeting, and what options exist before students find themselves in the worst-case scenario.
SUSAN: Megan, I know that when the act first passed last July, many of us had a lot of questions about various pieces of the act and how it was all going to play out, and we were waiting for rulemaking to take place. Are there still things we just don’t have the answers to yet?
MEGAN: Yeah. So, whenever sweeping policy changes are announced like this, there are always things that are not explicitly addressed and where further guidance needs to be issued by the Department of Education. Thankfully, financial aid administrators do a great job of diving deep into the new regulations and identifying those issues that need clarification. I also want to say that the national financial aid organizations — with the most prominent one being NASFA, which is the National Association of Financial Administrators — do a really great job of taking those findings from financial aid admins and communicating them with the Department of Education with the intention of getting that further guidance.
I do think uncertainty should not prevent schools from preparing for what’s ahead. I think it’s really important to understand the intent behind the changes and plan accordingly, but, of course, adjust things as needed when further guidance is issued. Trust me when I tell you that financial aid administrators are experts at pivoting based on policy changes, because if there’s one thing that you can count on in financial aid, it’s that change is constant.
SUSAN: Got it. Let’s turn to the students now. What implications do these changes have for them while they’re in school?
MEGAN: So, for students that will be enrolling after these changes go into effect, the biggest implication is that borrowing decisions matter now more than ever. Students may not be able to rely on federal loans to cover every expense, so budgeting and financial planning during law school becomes critical. Students may need to make more intentional choices about things like housing, living expenses, and even where they end up deciding to enroll. For those students who are not able to cover expenses with just institutional aid, federal aid, and other resources alone, they may need to be turning to private student loans, and that’s just going to make understanding loan terms, interest rates, and borrower protections especially important.
I do think that students shouldn’t be navigating this alone. Whether that means turning to trusted organizations like LSAC for resources, or law school financial aid offices for guidance and advising, clear communication, financial literacy programming, and early counseling can help students and be a crucial factor in whether they’re able to even pursue a legal education.
SUSAN: What about graduation from law school? Have repayment options changed as well?
MEGAN: Yeah, so, repayment plans for federal student loans are going to see significant change, with the available options going down to two from the seven that are in use now. Thankfully, there will still be an income-driven repayment option. It’s going to be called the Repayment Assistance Plan; that bases a borrower’s payment on their income, rather than how much they borrowed. The other option, referred to as the New Standard Plan, will have a monthly payment amount and then repayment terms based on the total amount that’s been borrowed. So, it’s balance-driven. For students who borrow any federal loans after July 1, 2026, these two plans will be their only options.
Something to keep in mind is that students will be relying on private student loans more than in recent history, so that is also going to factor into the changing repayment landscape. So, students who borrow both federal and private loans are going to have to make two separate payments to two different servicers. Private loans also, for the most part, do not offer income-based repayment options. Programs like the Public Service Loan Forgiveness are still available, but students may be hesitant to plan their repayment strategies around it now, given that private loans are not eligible to be forgiven under this program. So, I know I keep repeating myself and I apologize, but early communication, financial literacy programming, and financial aid counseling are going to be really crucial.
SUSAN: You’ve mentioned private loans a couple of times, and given that Grad PLUS loans have been eliminated from the picture, do you think that the shortfall will be filled by private lenders?
MEGAN: I do. So, it is expected that private lending will expand to fill some of that funding gap. So, as I mentioned earlier, the new cap on federal student loans is going to be $50,000 per academic year, and I think last time I checked, I believe there are less than 10 law schools across the country with a cost of attendance that are equal to or less than that. So, nearly all law schools are going to feel that impact of the funding gap. But something to keep in mind is that private loans are credit-based, unlike the Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan, which is what students will have access to now, that is not credit-based. So, they often have higher interest rates. They don’t offer the same protections as federal loans, and that could disproportionately affect first-generation students, students from lower-income backgrounds, and those without strong credit or co-signers.
So, while private student loans are available and will be a significant portion of that financial aid package moving forward, they will not be a realistic option for all students. So, this is really why institutional aid and strong financial aid advising and consistent communication with incoming students will matter more than ever, in my opinion. The goal should really be ensuring that access to legal education doesn’t become more limited just because the funding options have narrowed. I believe financial aid advisors will be more important than ever in this new landscape.
SUSAN: I would certainly agree with that. One of the, perhaps, murkier pieces of this is this new language implementing institutional accountability measures that look at the earnings of program graduates compared to the earnings of those with just a bachelor’s degree. How’s that going to work? If you can give us some sense, has there been any guidance to schools and what they’ll need to do and when they will need to do it?
MEGAN: Yeah, so, these are new institutional accountability measures implemented through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. So, broadly speaking, these measures are intended to assess whether graduate programs provide earnings outcomes that justify the cost of attendance. In order to do that, they compare, or they’re going to compare, the graduates’ earnings to those of individuals with only a bachelor’s degree. So, right now, the plan is to use information from the U.S. Census Bureau to determine earnings. If a program fails this new earnings metric two out of three consecutive years, it will lose direct loan eligibility. This means that they will not be able to offer federal student loans to students for that particular program. This, much like most of the provisions introduced in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, goes into effect on July 1, 2026. So, the first time a program could potentially become ineligible is July 1, 2028. I do want to mention that the final ruling has not been released or published by the Department of Education just yet, so we’ve got to stay tuned for more information coming later this year.
SUSAN: Now, I know LSAC has been holding webinars both for schools and prospective students, and we’ve been doing that since the fall. Do you anticipate that these webinars and informational opportunities will continue?
MEGAN: Absolutely. So, we know now more than ever that students are going to be looking for guidance and information on all of the changes that are coming and how they’re going to finance their legal education. So, our next webinar for prospective students is going to be, actually, in February, about how to pay for law school, and then we have another one coming up in April about how to craft your law school budget, and we are going to continue to add more as needed throughout the summer. If you are not able to catch the webinars live, we also have the LawHub® Learning Library, where you can view any of our webinars for free. You do need an account, but it is free to sign up, and then those webinars are available to view on demand at any time in the LawHub Learning Library.
SUSAN: Megan, thank you so much. We are so fortunate to have you on our team at LSAC.
MEGAN: Thank you so much for having me. It was a pleasure.
SUSAN: As we can see, these changes certainly signal a rocky, or at least an interesting, road ahead. To learn more about these changes, please visit LSAC.org.
Keeping Up to DataSM is a production of LSAC. If you want to learn more about the current law school admission cycle and the latest trends and news, visit us at LSAC.org.