If you want your law degree to be abit more "artsy" and intercontextual, then MQ fits the bill.
I doubt USYD students will learn the evolution of trusts as a protection of capital. I also doubt that USYD students will study Foucault in criminal law or Marx, Adam Smith, Coase, Friedman and Galbraith in corporate law and the evolution of the corporate entity.
However, other core subjects are mostly/pure black letter law (i.e. cases and legislation) - torts, remedies, litigation, constitutional law.
In terms of teaching and difficulty, MQ is probably less rigourous comapred to USYD, I have seen the exam papers, unit outlines, assignments for the corresponding years and subjects and I can tell you that a USYD Law Student will think we take it easy.
Also, the learning atmosphere is different. MQ has ilectures - lectures that are reccorded and can be downloaded anytime anywhere. The lectures are followed on by a tutorial in the following/same week where problems and exercises are done.
USYD however, does not have an ilecture arrangement. Their classes are seminars - students have to do the readings beforehand and the taecher asks questions. its like ms Wood's first class at Harvard in Legally Blonde - I think this is called the Socratic Method in teaching
In terms of reputation, USYD hands down. I have heard some surpirsing stories about the law faculty and some funny ones but I wont discuss it here
As for career options - any student that is part of the cream of the crop at either law schools will be successful.
At the end of the day, marks, extra curriculars, work experience and personality is what counts. These factors are mostly dependent on you and not the law school.
