Tennessee is moving to reduce the American Bar Association’s influence over which law schools qualify their graduates for admission to the state bar, joining a growing group of Republican-led states challenging the organization’s traditional role in legal education.
The Tennessee Supreme Court said in a recent order that it will revise its attorney-admission rules to potentially recognize graduates of law schools that do not hold accreditation from the ABA. The ABA currently serves as the state’s sole approved accrediting body for law schools.
The move follows similar steps taken elsewhere.
Florida changed its rules earlier this year to curb the ABA’s role in determining eligibility for admission. Ohio has also moved toward a comparable system, while Texas has established its own roster of approved law schools. Alabama, meanwhile, has turned to recognition by other state supreme courts rather than relying directly on ABA accreditation.
The ABA said it respects Tennessee’s authority over admission to the state bar and indicated that it intends to work with the court as the new system takes shape.
The developments come at a particularly consequential moment for the ABA’s legal education arm. Its long-standing status as the federally recognized accreditor of U.S. law schools is under review by the Trump administration.
The U.S. Department of Education recommended in August that the ABA’s recognition be denied, setting the stage for a final decision in the coming months. President Donald Trump had earlier instructed the department to examine whether the ABA should retain its federal accreditation role, pointing in part to what his administration characterized as improper diversity, equity and inclusion requirements.
The dispute extends beyond law school accreditation. The administration and the ABA have also clashed over the organization’s involvement in judicial nominations and its response to government actions targeting major law firms.
Tennessee’s Supreme Court did not provide a detailed explanation for its latest order. All of the court’s justices were appointed by Republican governors.
The court had previously framed its review of the ABA requirement as an access-to-justice issue, arguing that reducing barriers to entering the legal profession could also help bring down the cost of legal services.
Tennessee’s latest decision therefore represents more than a change to an admissions rule. It adds another state to an expanding push to give state courts greater control over the standards governing who can enter the legal profession.
