FTC supports Ohio proposal to move away from legal ed council
The Federal Trade Commission supports the Ohio Supreme Court’s proposal to end the ABA council of the Section for Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar’s status as the sole accreditor for the state’s law schools.
On Friday, the FTC responded to the state court’s call for comments on a proposal to “create opportunities for graduates of non-ABA-accredited law schools” to take the state’s bar exam and take formal steps to establish an accreditation process administered by the state. Comments closed July 10.
“The ABA’s standards for accreditation go beyond what is reasonably necessary to assure adequate preparation to practice law in Ohio and throughout the country,” the 16-page letter states. “This barrier unjustifiably increases the costs of legal education for many students and leads to the Ohio bar admitting fewer qualified lawyers who could provide needed legal services to the public.”
Signed by Brendan Chestnut, director of the Office of Policy Planning, and Daniel Guarnera, director of the Bureau of Competition, the letter stated that: “the ABA, unfortunately, has a long history of using its law school accreditation monopoly to harm competition.”
The council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar is a separate and independent entity from the ABA, and is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education as the sole accrediting body for law schools. A degree from an ABA-accredited school is necessary to sit for the bar exam in most states.
“We believe it is in the best interests of Ohio law students and the public for the court to collaborate with the council to promote quality legal education so Ohio law students can competently and ethically serve their clients and the public,” Daniel Thies, council chair, said in a statement to the ABA Journal. “Degree portability provided by a national accreditor is essential for meeting the needs of law students, states, the public, and the profession, and the council has been recognized as this accreditor for over 100 years.”
The Ohio Supreme Court has been reevaluating ABA accreditation since July 2025, when it created an advisory committee to review the process. The committee includes representatives from the Ohio State Bar Association, deans of the state’s law schools, as well as state and federal legislators. Ohio has nine ABA-accredited law schools.
Since the beginning of the year, several states have moved toward more independence in determining rules for admissions to the bar.
With the support of the FTC, the Florida Supreme Court and the Texas Supreme Court both killed their reliance on accreditation of law schools by the ABA council early this year. Both states created their own lists of approved law schools—lists that are currently identical to the ABA council’s list.
In May, the Alabama Supreme Court took a different approach. It downgraded the involvement of the council and allows graduates of its three ABA-accredited law schools and two that are not, as well as out-of-state law graduates to take the bar as long as they qualify to do so in their home jurisdictions.
That same month, Washington announced that it will begin allowing grads of non-ABA-accredited law schools to take the bar exam Sept. 1. Tennessee is also considering options.
These moves follow the Trump administration’s April 2025 executive order aimed at higher education accreditors—specifically referencing the council—that mandates the dismantling of diversity, equity and inclusion efforts or risk federal funding cuts.
After that, the council first suspended Standard 206, which focused on diversity and inclusion, then later repealed it.
State-specific accreditation is not new, as evidenced by California’s long-standing process.
Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.
