quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
The Bar Licensure Task Force found that the traditional exam “disproportionally and unnecessarily blocks” marginalized groups from becoming practicing attorneys...

I'm expert on this. But it seems to me that the real barrier to entry isn't the Bar exam, but the cost of law school.

quote:

Originally posted by Broadside:

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
The Bar Licensure Task Force found that the traditional exam “disproportionally and unnecessarily blocks” marginalized groups from becoming practicing attorneys...

I'm expert on this. But it seems to me that the real barrier to entry isn't the Bar exam, but the cost of law school.

Yes, I'm failing to see how a test everybody has to take blocks marginalized groups from becoming lawyers. The cost of law school, most definitely. I'd be interested to know how they arrived at this conclusion. Now, it's possible lower income groups have a difficult time studying for the Bar owing to family commitments, inability to pay for Bar prep courses, what have you. However, I'm not sure the whole system needs stood on its head over this issue.

I suspect the goal is to remove the objective measuring sticks for licensure so that eventually, unofficial subjective criteria (like racial quotas or party affiliation) are the deciding factors in Bar admissions decisions. Claiming that minorities can't or won't pass licensing exams is an insulting trope by prejudiced leftists.

I am now an attorney in Washington state.

A number of states have dropped the bar exam and just substitued a law degree in its stead. I doubt that it makes much difference. The portion of the population seeking personal injury settlements does not care.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
A number of states have dropped the bar exam and just substitued a law degree in its stead.

Which other states?

According to the article in the OP, Washington is only the second, with Oregon being the first a couple months ago.

2 out of 50 doesn't really equate to "a (large or significant) number" in the typical colloquial meaning of the phrase...

I just tried my first case.

Didn't work.

I'll try again tomorrow.

Alaska doesn't enforce professional licensing, effectively nullifying any such requirements already. The claim is that they don't have an enforcement department for business/corporate/professional licensing and any such things would require the department of law to pursue and fund the cases anyway. Something the department of law declares that they do not have funding nor a mandate to do. Basically, they're too busy fighting everything conservative politicians do here to actually enforce existing laws that protect the public.

Lawyers here have told me we're still the wild west.

Looks like trends are going nationwide. We don't have enough people willing to replace the aged out professionals in nearly anything that requires decades of schooling, hard work, and advanced education/internships. So we'll just dumb it down and not enforce licensure. What could go wrong? I heard Anchorage is dispatching "mental health experts" with their cops to calls.

quote:

Originally posted by AKSuperDually:

Lawyers here have told me we're still the wild west.

The evolution of pre-statehood Alaskan governance, law enforcement, infrastructure is fascinating, especially since it wasn't all that long ago.