Becoming a lawyer in America may get cheaper and faster; big changes are coming
The path to becoming a lawyer in America may become cheaper and faster than before. It is expected that the Trump administration will decide by the end of December whether it will cancel the federal recognition of the American Bar Association's (ABA) branch that accredits law schools.
Even if this decision is taken, the ABA's law school accreditation will not end on its own, and the rules for sitting state bar examinations will not change either. But according to legal education experts, it may further accelerate the states' efforts to create alternative paths.
According to two legal education experts, even if the ABA's accreditation branch loses federal recognition, most law students are at little risk of losing access to federal loans. Rather, the decision may accelerate a broader shift away from the organization's long-standing influence on legal education, in which states are increasingly looking for alternative accreditation routes.
Adam Biggs, general counsel of the University of Austin, said everyone should know that the ABA's federal recognition is only the first step. In his words, if the organization loses its position, discussions in state supreme courts about creating alternative routes, not just the ABA, will grow stronger.
Ahead of this possible decision, in September a federal panel named the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI) was deadlocked on the question of recommending the renewal of the ABA's federal recognition. Education Department staff have already recommended not renewing it. Now the decision is in the hands of Nicholas Kent, the Under Secretary of the Department of Education. This branch of the ABA has held federal recognition since 1952.
The ABA has long been in the role of the main controller of legal education in America. In most states, one has to graduate from an ABA-accredited law school to sit the bar examination. Even if federal recognition is lost, this system will not end on its own, but critics say the effort to obtain recognition for alternative approval arrangements in some states may go further. This could give institutions the opportunity to experiment with cheaper and shorter-term programs outside the ABA's conventional model.
One such alternative is being built in Texas. There, Biggs is helping to create a new law school at the University of Austin (UATX) that will run without ABA accreditation. The university is considering a two-year law program or a model combining undergraduate and legal education. Under the plan, tuition will be free and federal funding will be avoided entirely.
The proposed school may also move away from the conventional model of appointing teachers. According to Biggs, instead of the extensive full-time faculty structure that ABA accreditation standards require, practicing lawyers and federal judges may be used more as part-time teachers.
Biggs alleges that the ABA's long-standing influence on legal education has discouraged such experimentation, because the organization imposes a single type of elite education model on everyone. In his view, this increases costs and limits the scope to take alternative paths in training future lawyers. He said the current model makes it impossible to reduce costs and keeps the product expensive.
His further argument is that if the cost of legal education falls, it may help address the shortage of lawyers in rural and disadvantaged areas. For students who graduate with huge student loans, it becomes difficult to do lower-paid legal work. If schools can be run at a lower cost, new lawyers will have greater freedom to serve these areas, and legal services may become more affordable.
The Department of Justice has also raised questions about the ABA's rules concerning teachers. An antitrust investigation has been threatened over restrictions on part-time teachers teaching the core law curriculum, on allegations of limiting competition and raising tuition. In a letter dated October 7, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward gave the ABA 15 days to amend the rules or provide reasons, according to the Wall Street Journal.
If alternative paths come, opportunities will grow, but complications may also arise. In practicing law in another state outside the state from whose school one graduated, graduates may face additional obstacles. That is because state supreme courts generally determine eligibility to sit the bar examination, and in many states graduating from an ABA-accredited school is still mandatory.
Several states have already begun to loosen the ABA's monopoly position. In January, Texas became the first state to end reliance only on ABA accreditation for bar eligibility, and the state supreme court took the power to approve qualified law schools. Nine days later, Florida also followed a similar path of its own. Ohio's Supreme Court in May proposed a state-run approval process, and steps have also been taken in Tennessee, Alabama and Washington to reduce reliance on the ABA. Experts believe the impact in the case of federal student loans may be limited, because most law schools are part of large universities that have their own institutional accreditation. However, it is thought that about 15 independent law schools dependent only on ABA accreditation may fall into complications over federal funding.
