Get access to
MEMBER LOGIN

ABA Standards

Deborah Post and Carol Chomsky at the Tribute Dinner to Chris Iijima

July 2008 UPDATE: On June 7th the Council of the Section received the reports of the three Special Committees appointed by the Council Chair Ruth McGregor, the Chief Justice of Arizona: Special Committee on Outcome Measures; Special Committee on Transparency; and Special Committee on Security of Position.

Copies of the ABA reports are downloadable. The Council, at the conclusion of the oral reports, took no action on the recommendations contained in any of the three reports and decided to put off consideration of next steps until the August 7-8 meeting of the Council. SALT, along with other organizations, has commented on the three reports.

SALT Comments on Outcome Measures
SALT Comments on Transparency
SALT Comments on Security of Position

June 2008 UPDATE: The recertification of the ABA Council has been removed from the June 2008 NACIQI agenda and postponed until December 2008.

APRIL 29, 2008 UPDATE: SALT has requested an opportunity to present oral testimony at the June 9-10, 2008 meeting of NACIQI to support the re-certification of the ABA Council of the Section of Legal Education & Admissions to the Bar.

APRIL 2, 2008 UPDATE: SALT submitted comments to the Department of Education supporting the re-certification of the ABA Council of the Section of Legal Education & Admissions to the Bar. Despite SALT's disagreement with Interpretation 301-6 and use of institutional bar pass rates as a primary way of evaluating the quality of legal education offered, the ABA Council remains uniquely qualified to continue in its accreditation role.

FEBRUARY 1, 2008 UPDATE: The Standards Review Committee submitted a revised Interpretation 301-6, along with Commentary, for a vote and presentation to the ABA House of Delegates at the upcoming ABA midterm meeting. SALT opposes the adoption of this Interpretation and on February 1, 2008, submitted a Supplemental Statement to the Council of the Section of Legal Education & Admissions to the Bar.

JANUARY 2008 UPDATE: The ABA distributed a revised Interpretation 301-6, and called for comments on the proposal due on January 1, 2008, with a hearing scheduled for January 3, 2008 at 3:15 pm during the AALS Conference in New York City.

Briefly, although the newly redesigned Interpretation 301-6 has responded to the rigorous criticism of the original and subsequent revisions, it still retains an unnecessary "bright-line" institutional bar pass rate that cannot be justified.

The Department of Education's own regulations do not require licensing exams to be more than one aspect of accreditation.
If consumer protection is the goal, then a far more informative and less patronizing solution would be mandatory posting of law school bar passage rates for prospective students to see and question.
Imposing a "bright-line" bar pass rate, although ameliorated, might have the devastating effect of reducing law school curricula to teaching for the exam, thus abandoning the deeper jurisprudential courses, clinics, and other courses that assist attorneys to better serve the needs of their clients.
This "bright-line" might prevent law schools, especially law schools whose missions include a goal to diversify the profession from admitting students who might not have the indicators that point to success on the bar exam.
Without understanding its impact, this standard should only be imposed gradually, with mandatory data collection, and a sunset provision to assure that it is not counterproductive to preparing a next generation of well-qualified and diverse lawyers and judges.

Click here for a copy of SALT's latest position.

Click here for a copy of Eileen Kaufman's remarks to the ABA Standards Review Committee, delivered at the January 3, 2008 hearing.

JULY 2007 UPDATE: The ABA has withdrawn its Proposed Bar Passage Interpretation 301-6 pending further study. According to Bill Rakes, the Chair of the ABA Council on Legal Education & Admissions to the Bar, this action reflected the fact that serious objections were raised by a number of organizations and individuals, warranting further consideration. SALT is proud to be among those organizations who vigorously opposed the rule. Click here for a copy of SALT's position.

The ABA will be presenting an amended Interpretation for approval at the February 2008 meeting. Much work remains to be done to prevent an Interpretation that:

imposes a brightline standard
overemphasizes a test that bears little relationship to the actual practice of law
threatens to undo decades of efforts to diversify the bench and bar
results in inequities due to wide variations from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

Bar Examination Resources

Supplemental Comments on Contested Standard 301(a) and Proposed Interpretation 301-6, dated February 1, 2008, submitted to the Council of the Section of Legal Education & Admission to the Bar.

Comments on Revised Proposed Interpretation 301-6, dated December 28, 2007, opposing a further revised "bright-line" bar passage rate for law school accreditation.

Comments on Revised Proposed Interpretation 301-6, dated July 11, 2007, opposes a "bright line" bar passage rate for law school accreditation.

Potential Alternatives to the Existing Bar Exam, proposes other measures of skills necessary for the practice of law.

SALT Statement on Bar Exams, July, 2002, also is available at 52 J.Leg.Ed. 446 (2002).

SALT Statement on the LSAT, December, 2003, argues that law schools place too much emphasis on the LSAT exam to the detriment of non-traditional students.