Originally Posted by zjpj83
Firms could care less what classes you take. One gets an offer for summer employment (from which one gets an offer for permanent employment) in the fall after one's 1L year, during which few or no electives are even offered.
To my knowledge, there's really no such thing as a focus in legal history in law school. Even if there was, it'd be an elective course as a 2L or 3L.
If you get excellent grades as a 1L, you'll get a summer associate position at a big law firm, which should eventually lead to an offer. However, if you don't get a biglaw job your first or second summer (like the vast majority of your classmates), the types of courses you take as a 2L and 3L may impact your prospects for a job later. This is particularly true if you were to graduate law school without any offers in hand. One or two "fluffy" electives, such as history, won't make an iota of difference; but if you don't take ANY substantive classes, it might reflect poorly on you.
I only agree with the above quote in cases where you're in the top 10% of your class and you go to an excellent law school. However, if you're merely in the top half of your class, and your law school isn't in the top 10, little things like course selection and load DO make a difference, especially at medium/small firms. I participate pretty heavily in the recruiting process for my firm, so I speak from experience.
The classes you choose to take in your 2L and 3L years (and your grades in them) have nothing to do with your ability to get a job at a top rate law firm.
In all fairness, this quote is technically true. The hitch is few people really get offers at top rate firms. There are plenty of other firms out there that pay $100k+, where your courses make a difference.