Many law courses spend time on Roman law, and on archaic English law.

Roman law and old English law were actually used in real legal systems, and they are studied because they are the basis for the legal system we use today

I disagree with your second statement. I think they're studied because they are simple working legal systems which are easier to reason about than modern ones.

Arguably these legal systems are the conceptual basis for our modern law system because they are used pedagogically in this way.

In the US (and other countries) Roman and English Law are the "common law" and or "natural rights" that are referred to but generally not stipulated.

"New" governments had a habit of writing up founding documents that focus on the "new stuff" and waving in "all the old stuff" that doesn' conflict with the "new stuff" via a few throwaway phrasings.

As an aside, a class about fictional legal systems sounds quite fun. Then again, I like conlangs too

In school I learned about MIPS architecture, which is fairly straightforward although not in use as much as the more complex x86-64 architecture.

I have worked as a programmer for years and at work have had absolutely zero times I have needed to know x86-64 commands like ADD, JMP, MOV etc.

Actually it is good I learned about other processors since once on a personal project, I compiled C code but it ran different on little endian and big endian chips. If I hadn't learned about other architectures I would have been more perplexed.

As someone else said, law schools teach about Roman law and other forms of law not immediately vocationally valuable. Also - I learned something about non-standard computer architecture as an undergrad, and many people go on to become programmers with a BSCS, lawyers typically go on to get a JD after doing undergrad.

> legal class

I'm sorry, I thought we were talking about computer architecture?

I went to law school. One of the mandatory courses was on roman law. Another was on philosophy of law. Both had zero practical direct value for a working lawyer.

This describes every American law school of which I am aware, where students learn a generalized version of the law through Restatements and study of salient appeals courts decisions, both state and federal.

Barring concerted effort, a U.S. law student will not leave school with detailed knowledge of any particular jurisdiction.

Then graduates take the bar, where they are more or less quizzed on 18th century English common law, because most states use a bar exam that is not specific to each state’s law.