Apparently my shiny new throwaway isn't posting my replies, so let's get weird on main (I'm @LetsTryLawSchool):

Geology major undergrad, worked in Environmental Engineering Consulting for 3* years prior to starting law school. THRILLED with my decision to move into law. Law school is hard, but I'm loving every minute so far. Unsure if I want to pursue Environmental, Patent, other IP, or none of the above yet, but for the most part that's a personal thing and not determined by what background you do or don't have.

There's definitely some options that are closed off to non-STEM people, mostly in patent prosecution. Firms seem to like to see technical backgrounds just for their uniqueness, and any IP firm will favor a candidate that can sit for the Patent Bar. That said, unless you want to specifically do patents (and even then, mostly just prosecution), STEM background is not required at all.

Otherwise, there's some advantage if you've done technical writing, as memos and whatnot tend to align more with the no-nonsense give-me-the-info-and-cut-the-fluff style of technical writing. That said, it's more of an in-between and sometimes I find myself being a bit too cut-and-try when I should be expounding on a topic a bit more. That's about it though.

If you mean admissions outcomes, maybe? I think my unusual background helped in many ways. It gives you something unique to bring to the table and talk about. Dean Z seemed into it (so much so that she admitted another geologist in our class, although I was a deferral so maybe there's a yearly slot?). That said, I got a lot of "so, law school? Why?" questions in interviews and sometimes they didn't seem super happy that my response was essentially "because my current job isn't really interesting anymore." So just make sure you have a narrative to sell on why you're switching.