Moving Away from ABA Accreditation?

The Council of the ABA's Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar has long been the only federally recognized accreditor for law schools. In that role, it is able to direct what law schools teach and determine what constitutes sufficient coursework for law students. Over the past several years, the ABA has faced several challenges to proposed directives for law schools, including a recent proposal to increase the requirement of clinical hours (which has since been withdrawn) and various policies that have been labeled DEI initiatives. Some have lauded those efforts, while others have expressed concern that they mistake the purpose of law schools. In light of skepticism about the ABA, some state bars, particularly Florida and Texas, have opted to no longer require students to have attended an ABA-accredited law school in order to sit for their bar exams. In light of these and other efforts, voices from across the political spectrum have debated not just the value of the particular ABA policy directives, but the appropriate role of the ABA as an accreditor. Our panel will dive into those arguments around the ABA. Featuring: Prof. Derek T. Muller, Professor of Law, Notre Dame Law SchoolProf. Daniel B. Rodriguez, Harold Washington Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of LawDaniel R. Thies, Shareholder, Webber & Thies PC(Moderator) Prof. Michael S. McGinniss, Professor of Law and J. Philip Johnson Faculty Fellow, University of North Dakota School of Law