New Jersey Bar Association Advocates to Remove Mental Health Questions from Bar Applicant Questionnaire

New Jersey is the latest state to seek to abolish the mental health questions asked on the “character and fitness questionnaire” required of all Bar applicants. Late last month, the New Jersey State Bar officially requested that the NJ Supreme Court remove item 12B from the bar applicant questionnaire: Do you currently have any condition or impairment (including but not limited to substance abuse, alcohol abuse, or a mental, emotional, or nervous disorder or condition) that in any way affects your ability to practice law in a competent, ethical, and professional manner and in compliance with the Rules of Professional Conduct, the Rules of Court, and applicable case law? 

Jeralyn Lawrence, New Jersey State Bar Association President, speaking to the New Jersey Law Journal, explained the reasoning behind her advocacy for the change. “We are a profession in crisis. The pace of our practice is not sustainable. We need to remove barriers in place for people to get help, and 12b, we believe, is a barrier to the bar. We’re advocating strongly that the court remove that question so that it’s not a detriment to people getting help,” she said. 

Virginia and New York removed its mental health questions from the bar admission application in 2019 and 2020 following similar advocacy efforts by law students and interested groups. And, in January, Ohio abandoned questions related to diagnosis and only asks about mental health as it relates to disciplinary actions or guardianship/conservatorship. 

According to the ABA: 

• Fourteen states do not request a candidate’s mental health status in evaluating their fitness for the Bar: Arizona, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Washington, and Wisconsin. 

• Four states—Indiana, Idaho, New Hampshire, and Texas—ask about mental health only in the context of disciplinary action. 

• One state—Ohio—asks about mental health only in the context of disciplinary action and court appointed guardianship/conservatorship. 

• Two states—California and Connecticut—ask about mental health only in the context of court appointed guardianship/conservatorship. 

• Ten states—Louisiana, Montana, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming), and Washington D.C.—have adopted the three mental health questions drafted by the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) that are shown below: 

1. Diagnosis:  Do you currently have any condition or impairment (including, but not limited to, substance abuse, alcohol abuse, or a mental, emotional, or nervous disorder or condition) that in any way affects your ability to practice law in a competent, ethical, and professional manner? Note: “Currently” means recent enough that the condition or impairment could reasonably affect your ability to function as a lawyer. 

2. Treatment: Are the limitations caused by your condition or impairment reduced or ameliorated because you receive ongoing treatment or because you participate in a monitoring or support program? 

3. Defense/Disciplinary Action: Within the past five years, have you asserted any condition or impairment as a defense, in mitigation, or as an explanation for your conduct in the course of any inquiry, any investigation, or any administrative or judicial proceeding by an educational institution, government agency, professional organization, or licensing authority; or in 10 years, connection with an employment disciplinary or termination procedure?

• Eleven states that do not follow the NCBE test—Alabama, Arkansas (disciplinary action only), Colorado, Delaware, Indiana (disciplinary action only), Kentucky, Nevada, New Hampshire (disciplinary action only), Oregon, Rhode Island, and Texas (disciplinary action only)—ask at least one of the NCBE questions. 

• Fifteen other states ask questions of their own drafting.

Bar Pass Rates Dip for First-time Takers in 2022

Over three-quarters, 78 percent, of law graduates who took the bar exam for the first time in 2022 received a passing score according to new data released by the American Bar Association. This is a slight decline in the first-time pass rate recorded in 2021 (80 percent) and 2020 (84 percent), although covid-necessitated modifications to the exam in those years make direct comparison difficult. 

The “ultimate bar pass rate,” or the percentage of law school graduates who pass the bar within two years, has increased this year. For the class of 2020, 91.9 percent passed the licensing exam within two years, up slightly from 91.3 percent in 2019 and 90.1 percent in 2018. 

While many of the most prestigious law programs boasted their highest pass rates, the percentage who passed did decrease for most schools when compared to 2021. 

American Bar Association Rejects Test Optional Admissions

Yesterday, the American Bar Association’s (ABA) policy making body rejected a bid to remove the law school admissions test requirement from the law school accreditation standards. The vote marks the second defeat of the proposal in six years. 

Potentially allowing law schools to go “test optional” for admissions starting in 2025 created a unique controversy, as both proponents and opponents of the policy argued that it would be harmful to law school diversity. 

“As the debate showed, we all care deeply about diversity, we just have different views on the best way to pursue it. The LSAT is an important tool for advancing diversity. The incoming class of 2022 is by far the most diverse class in history, and more than 98 percent of those students used the LSAT. And this year’s applicants are even more diverse than last year, which bodes well for continued progress. The House vote will ensure that we have additional time for research into the actual impact of test-optional policies on students and diversity, so that any policy changes are based on evidence and data,” said Kellye Testy, the President of LSAC, in a statement after the vote.

Testy’s statement echoed a sentiment shared previously in an open letter penned by 60 law school deans urging the ABA to reject the proposal. The letter called out the potential harm that removing the test could do for diversity in admissions, as it would require schools to depend more heavily on other, potentially more biased, metrics like GPA, recommendations, and the reputation of an applicant’s undergraduate institution.

ABA Moves Forward with Motion to Drop Law School Admissions Test Mandate

On Friday November 18, as expected, the American Bar Association’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar voted to eliminate the standardized test mandate for law school admissions. The proposal will now move to the ABA’s House of Delegates for a final vote in February. If it is approved then, due to a last-minute revision, the removal of the test mandate will still not take effect until the fall of 2025. This revision was enacted to provide law schools with time to consider new ways to gauge student readiness.

This is not the first time that the test mandate’s fate has been brought before the ABA’s House of Delegates for a vote. In 2018, the measure was brought to the House, although it was withdrawn prior to the vote, as it appeared unlikely to pass after diversity advocates lobbied House members to reject the proposed change.

Now stakeholders who are, both for and against, overturning the test mandate have aligned their position with the same goal of improving diversity within the legal profession. “It’s very rare that I encounter a situation where the proponents on exact opposite sides of an issue are citing the same issue to support their arguments,” said Joseph West, Chair of the ABA’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar. 

Those who wish to see the testing mandate remain, including 60 Law School Deans, believe that the test provides a meaningful way for applicants to showcase their acumen and law school readiness. This allows law schools to take educated chances on students who may have lower GPAs. Without this score, the Deans argue, law schools will not have as much information to gauge a student’s likelihood of success in a challenging academic environment. 

Those who wish to see the mandate overturned argue that standardized tests “perpetuate racial gaps,” and cite research showing that white test-takers tend to perform better on the tests than those from underrepresented backgrounds. 

Related blogs:

New Survey Shows Most Law Schools will Continue Using Standardized Test Scores

Law School Deans Write Letter of Opposition to ABA’s Proposed Recommendation to Drop Standardized Test Requirement

ABA to Vote on Recommendation that Would Allow Law Schools to Drop Admissions Test Requirement

New Survey Shows Most Law Schools will Continue Using Standardized Test Scores

On Friday, the ABA will vote on a proposal that would eliminate the requirement for law schools to use standardized test scores as a component of admissions. But, according to a recent Reuters article, new survey results from Kaplan suggest that the vote’s outcome may not significantly impact current practices at many schools.

Kaplan recently surveyed 82 law school admission officers about how their school would proceed if the ABA opts to eliminate the testing mandate. Among the respondents, which included admissions officers from 12 of the top 25 law schools, half responded that they are “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to continue requiring standardized test scores. Almost half, 37 admissions officers, replied that they were unsure. Just four respondents said that they were “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to stop requiring a standardized test.   

Jeff Thomas, Kaplan’s Executive Director of Legal Programs, likened the situation to that of medical schools. He noted that while the medical school accrediting organization does not mandate an entrance exam, almost all schools still make use of one for admissions decisions. “Irrespective of how this vote goes on Friday, it doesn’t necessarily mean that anything in admissions is actually going to change,” he said.

Related:

Law School Deans Write Letter of Opposition to ABA’s Proposed Recommendation to Drop Standardized Test Requirement

ABA to Vote on Recommendation that Would Allow Law Schools to Drop Admissions Test Requirement

Law School Deans Write Letter of Opposition to ABA’s Proposed Recommendation to Drop Standardized Test Requirement

In response to the ABA’s proposed revision to eliminate the test requirement as a component of the law school admission process, 60 law school deans have submitted a letter expressing their opposition to the measure. They believe it will harm efforts to improve diversity in law school classes. “Without the LSAT as a factor, law schools may be less willing to take a chance on students who do not perform well on GPA or other metrics because they worked to put themselves through school, had to care for family, or for other reasons, but would enhance the diversity of our institutions and ultimately the profession,” the Dean’s letter states. “Students who struggle early in college, which sometimes happens with first-generation college students, may have lower initial grades and thus overall lower grade point averages. Test scores may help these students, both in determining which schools they should consider and in gaining admission.”

The Society of American Law Teachers also submitted a letter, written by Olympia Durhart and Allyson Gold, calling for a data review of the projected impact of abolishing the test requirement on groups historically underrepresented in law. They note that it is necessary, before taking action, to ensure that the measure won’t adversely affect the very groups which it purports to help. Further, they contend that law schools should “act as laboratories for admissions strategy experimentation to attack the larger structural barriers to the profession.”

In total, 51 individuals or groups submitted comments in favor of the proposal, while 49 submitted comments opposing the measure.

Related: ABA to Vote on Recommendation that Would Allow Law Schools to Drop Admissions Test Requirement

ABA to Vote on Recommendation that Would Allow Law Schools to Drop Admissions Test Requirement

Later this month, the American Bar Association will vote on a recommendation by its Strategic Review Committee to eliminate the requirement that all law schools must include standardized testing as a component of admissions. Should the recommendation be accepted, it would not take effect until next year (at the earliest) and would allow individual law schools the option to remove or retain current testing requirements. The current standard states that all law schools “shall require” applicants to submit scores from a “valid and reliable admission test,” which in November of 2021 was expanded to include the GRE, in addition to the LSAT. 

The revision language notes that, “While a law school may still choose to use one or more admissions tests as part of sound admission practices or policies, the revisions require a law school to identify all tests that it accepts in its admissions policies so that applicants to the law school know which admissions tests are accepted.” It goes on to describe that accepting the recommendation “eliminates some of the challenges inherent in determining which tests are in fact valid and reliable for law school admission,” although law schools that continue to use an admissions test would need to show that the test is in line with “sound admissions practices and procedures.” The Strategic Review Committee’s language also notes that, as of early 2022, the Council is the only remaining “accreditor among law, medical, dental, pharmacy, business, and architecture school accreditors that required an admissions test in its Standards.” This suggests that the change in language may not greatly impact the current practice of requesting test scores from applicants, particularly among highly-competitive programs. 

The Law School Admission Council (LSAC), which oversees the LSAT and is independent from the ABA, said in a statement, “Studies show test-optional policies often work against minoritized individuals, so we hope the ABA will consider these issues very carefully. We believe the LSAT will continue to be a vital tool for schools and applicants for years to come, as it is the most accurate predictor of law school success and a powerful tool for diversity when used properly as one factor in a holistic admission process.”

It will be necessary to follow news from the ABA over the next couple of weeks to see how the Council will proceed. Bill Adams, Managing Director of the ABA Accreditation and Legal Education, said in a statement that “Issues concerning admissions policies have been of concern to the Council for several years.” He went on to explain that the Council will discuss the recommendation on May 20, and determine if a vote is in order or if further circulation and comment will be required.

Law School Hiring Rebounds to Pre-Pandemic Levels

Entry-level hiring for graduating law school students returned to pre-pandemic levels after a dip in 2020. This is according to employment data released earlier this month by the American Bar Association (ABA). 

For the class of 2021, 76 percent obtained jobs requiring bar passage within ten months of graduation. This is an increase of four percentage points from the class of 2020. And 83 percent acquired full-time, long-term employment that either required bar passage or for which a J.D. was an advantage. This is an increase of six percentage points from 2020. 

Full-time employment that requires passing the bar

A Reuters analysis of the ABA employment data provides insight into those law schools with the largest percentages of graduates obtaining full-time employment that required bar passage. 

Columbia Law School landed at the top of the list with almost 96 percent of its 2021 graduating class. It was followed closely by the University of Chicago (93.9 percent), Duke (93.63 percent), and the University of Virginia (93.4 percent). 

While ten of the top 15 schools on this list were also ranked within the U.S. News & World Report top 14, there were also a few lower-cost and lower-ranked public law schools included. University of Georgia ranked fifth (92.57 percent), Texas Tech ranked twelfth (89.31 percent), and University of Montana (88.73 percent) held the fifteenth-highest percentage. 

See all of the top 15 law schools recognized for high rates of full-time employment requiring bar passage here. 

Federal clerkships

Reuters also provided an analysis of those law schools that place the most students into federal clerkships. Just three percent of 2021 graduates attained these highly-competitive placements. 

While Harvard Law School placed the highest number of students into federal clerkships (85), due to its large class, the proportion of its placements fell to just 15 percent. The University of Chicago—for the second year in a row—placed the largest percentage of its graduating class into federal clerkships at 27.7 percent. It was closely followed by Stanford (26.6 percent), Yale (19.72 percent), and the University of Virginia (15.72 percent). 

Reuter’s analysis noted that the large class sizes at the University of Virginia make its upward trajectory notable. 

See all of the top 15 law schools recognized for high rates of federal clerkship placements here.