Legal Ed council moves forward proposals to end diversity standard, allow alternative bar pathways
The council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar has voted to move forward and seek public comment on two hot-button topics—one proposal to repeal its diversity, equity and inclusion mandate and another to permit alternative pathways to licensure.
The council is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education as the sole accrediting body for U.S. law schools and is an independent arm of the ABA for that function. Most jurisdictions require applicants to the bar to be graduates of an ABA-accredited law school.
As written, Standard 206 requires law schools “demonstrate by concrete action a commitment to diversity and inclusion by providing full opportunities for the study of law and entry into the profession by members of underrepresented groups” and “having a faculty and staff that are diverse with respect to gender, race and ethnicity.”
But last year’s “Dear Colleague” letter from Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary at the Education Department, ordered the elimination of “racial preferences” in admissions and hiring, and a White House executive order cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2023 decision eliminating race-based admissions as motivation.
Since then, there has been heated debate over exactly what the Supreme Court’s decision means for diversity in law school admissions and hiring. In February 2025, the council voted to suspend Standard 206, and on Friday the council voted to continue the suspension through August 2027.
“Enacted and proposed laws at the state level have made it impossible for the council to have a meaningful Standard 206 that can apply to every accredited school across the country,” according to a statement released Friday from the council. “A repeal of this standard does not prevent a law school from incorporating the values underlying Standard 206 in its mission consistent with state and federal law: it simply will not be required for accreditation.”
Meanwhile, new and evolving licensure pathways cleared a hurdle, as the council voted to send out proposed wording for Standard 316 for notice and comment as well.
Currently, that standard mandates that 75% of a law school’s graduates must pass the bar exam within two years to meet the minimum for accreditation. The Standard Committee’s Feb. 13 proposal broadens that language to include licensure assessment outcomes and require a successful completion of a pathway, not just a bar exam.
This change comes as new pathways, such as those established in recent years in Oregon, Washington, South Dakota, Utah and Nevada, allow graduates from ABA-accredited law schools to earn licensure through supervised practice or a combination of academic and work experience.
Diploma privilege in Wisconsin and the Daniel Webster Scholar Honors Program in New Hampshire have been covered by the current standard, according to the memo.
If the proposal is ultimately approved, that would broaden the language of Standard 509 to include mandatory reporting of data around all types of licensure outcomes, not just bar passage, according to the memo.
Memos for notice and comment regarding Standards 206 and 316 will be posted this week, Jaci Devine, communications director for the council, told the ABA Journal.
The changes come as the council takes steps toward autonomy from the greater ABA.
Earlier this month at the ABA Midyear Meeting, the ABA Board of Governors approved a council proposal underscoring that it operates separately from the ABA by giving it “more autonomy over its self-governance” and giving it power to change its bylaws without needing approval from any other body.
Now that the request change was approved, it will be sent to the Section of Legal Education for approval at the August ABA section business meeting.
The request for more independence follows the Texas Supreme Court’s January vote to part ways with the council and the Florida Supreme Court’s moves to open the door to other law school accreditors and allow graduates from non-ABA-accredited law schools to sit for that state’s bar.
The Florida court’s workgroup has offered a dozen alternative methods to accredit law schools including forming a new accrediting council in conjunction with other state supreme courts, collaborating with the ABA’s council to revise its accreditation standards and requesting that the council be decoupled from the larger ABA.
Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.
