Deans, law school associations oppose Texas proposal to end ABA accreditation
Deans from eight Texas law schools—along with leaders of the Association of American Law Schools, the Law School Admission Council, the AccessLex Institute and the National Association for Law Placement—oppose ending Texas’ requirement that bar exam takers graduate from an ABA-accredited law school, according to responses to the Texas Supreme Court obtained by the ABA Journal.
“Removing the ABA accreditation recognized by every other state will impair the ability of Texas law graduates to secure employment outside of Texas, lower Texas law schools’ overall employment rates and harm Texas law schools’ national reputations,” the letter submitted by the eight deans states. It adds that Texas law schools will struggle to attract high-caliber students, ultimately harming those law schools’ reputations.
Leaders at the University of Houston Law Center, Texas Southern University, Baylor University Law School, the University of North Texas at Dallas College of Law, the Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law, the Texas Tech University School of Law, the South Texas College of Law Houston and St. Mary’s University School of Law signed the letter.
With “limited exceptions,” the current rules governing admission to the state bar require graduation from a law school approved by the ABA, according to court documents.
In addition, a 10-page letter signed by Jennifer Rosato Perea, managing director for accreditation and legal education at the ABA’s council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, and David A. Brennen, the council chair, reiterates the need for a national accreditor to insure portability of law degrees and high-quality national standards for law schools and students.
“The council welcomes this opportunity to explain the scope and value of its work and the importance of retaining the council as the accreditor for Texas law schools to ensure a national accreditation system with portable law degrees that benefit all,” the letter concludes.
According to the National Association of Legal Placement’s 2023 data of Texas Entry-Level Law Graduate Employment, 88% of Texas law school graduates who reported their job location remained in Texas; 12% did not.
The ABA council, a separate and independent entity from the bar association, is recognized by the Department of Education as the sole accrediting body for U.S. law schools. It has served as Texas’ sole accreditor since 1983.
Overall, the total number of comments received were nearly split down the middle, with 65 responses in favor of keeping the council in place as the sole accreditor and 68 opposed and/or suggesting additional alternatives in the 392 pages of responses.
Those opposed to continuing current accreditation methods include Robert Chesney, dean of the University of Texas Austin School of Law, the state’s largest law school. He encouraged the court to consider other accreditors along with the ABA or to grant exceptions to the ABA, according to his letter.
“Perhaps it is time to re-open the door, at least a bit, to innovative alternatives,” he wrote.
Texas tests the third largest number of bar candidates, according to National Conference of Bar Examiner statistics.
Texas Supreme Court request for comments followed the Trump administration’s executive orders taking aim at higher education accreditors—specifically referencing the council— and mandating the dismantling of diversity, equity and inclusion efforts or risk federal funding cuts. The council suspended Standard 206, focused on DEI, until Aug. 31, 2026. In March, Florida formed a working group to consider if a JD from an ABA accredited law school would continue to be a bar exam requirement.
Most states require applicants to the state bar to be graduates of an ABA-accredited law school.
California is an exception, and its data is not promising. California’s July 2024 bar exam results show the state’s ABA-accredited law schools have a pass rate at 72.9%. At state—accredited schools that are not nationally accredited, it was 24% and 13% at unaccredited schools.
“Data demonstrates that non-ABA accredited schools consistently have lower bar pass rates, poorer employment outcomes and higher attrition than their accredited counterparts,” Patricia Roberts, St. Mary’s University School of Law dean, wrote to the ABA Journal.
Texas deans are also concerned that law schools would end up paying for the process of building an accreditation process from scratch and creating new programs.
“That cost would likely be shifted in part to the law schools requiring accreditation,” Roberts adds. “Texas law schools might also need to develop separate tracks for students planning to practice only in Texas versus those wanting national mobility.”
And creating a new accreditation system would take time, says Jeff Rensberger, interim dean at the South Texas College of Law Houston, whose term expired July 1. “They would have to get up to speed,” he says.
“I’m reminded a little bit of the experiment California had just done with creating their own bar exam,” which had disastrous logistical and technical issues, he adds.
He noted that national accreditation is tied to requirements for receiving federal student loan funding.
“No law school can just walk away from that,” Rensberger says, and some might aim for both the state and ABA accreditation. Dual regulations could create additional burdens and potentially conflicting standards, he adds, and “it makes it more costly to operate as a school.”
See also:
Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.
