A powerful chorus of state chief justices is urging a bold reimagining of how America admits lawyers to practice, challenging the long-standing monopoly of the bar exam and pushing for innovative legal education reforms.
In a newly released report from the Committee on Legal Education and Admissions Reform—a collaboration between the Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of State Court Administrators—top judicial leaders are calling on state supreme courts to lead the charge in modernizing how attorneys are trained, assessed, and licensed.
Their core message: The legal system is buckling under unmet legal needs, shrinking public trust, and systemic roadblocks to public-interest law. And clinging to tradition won’t fix it.
The report lays out a roadmap for change—urging courts to explore licensing routes beyond the traditional bar exam, expand experiential learning for law students, simplify the character and fitness gauntlet, and support rural and public service lawyering through more flexible pathways.
Already, six states have introduced alternate routes to becoming a lawyer, bypassing or supplementing the bar exam. Seven more are weighing the move. According to the report, these alternatives not only ease the financial and psychological toll on law graduates, but also fast-track legal help to the communities that need it most.
The justices are also pressing for a legal education system that breaks out of its rigid mold. They recommend shaking up accreditation standards to allow for experimentation, creativity, and more affordable pathways to a JD. The call comes amid growing debate over the dominance of the American Bar Association in setting educational standards—a role even some states and federal leaders are questioning.
Florida, Texas, and Ohio are already reviewing whether ABA accreditation should remain a hard requirement for bar eligibility. Meanwhile, a past administration even floated revoking the ABA’s role as the federal accreditor, citing concerns over the group’s diversity policies.
The judicial leaders behind the report are clear: If courts want a stronger, more equitable, more accessible justice system, it’s time to stop defending the status quo—and start building something better.
