No Bar License Required In Washington State, Guess Why

[Rightguide]

Passing bar exam no longer required for law license in Washington state because of 'race-equity concerns'​

CORTNEY WEIL
MARCH 18, 2024

The Supreme Court of Washington state has ruled that passing the bar exam will no longer be necessary for law licensure since such a requirement "disproportionately and unnecessarily blocks historically marginalized groups from entering the practice of law."

About three and a half years ago, the Washington Supreme Court created the Washington Bar Licensure Task Force, which it ordered to "assess the efficacy of the Washington state bar licensure requirements" and to suggest possible alternatives to them. Last fall, the task force settled on a list of recommendations, which were then released to the public for comment. On Friday, the court issued its decision on the matter, taking into account the opinions of the task force and the public.

In its ruling, the court said that offering law students a bar exam is still necessary but insisted that the current Uniform Bar Exam is racially biased. It is a test infused with "racism and classism," the ruling stated, prompting "race-equity concerns" in those wishing to "advance the cause of diversity equity and inclusion." The ruling even used a tortured metaphor that compared the legal profession in the state to a "dam" that has left "people of color" thirsty for more access to legal services.

To "reduce barriers to entry into the legal profession" without compromising the public's trust in the system, the court authorized two "experiential" ways for earning a law license without having to pass the bar. One way involves law school graduates and upper-level students apprenticing under a supervising attorney for six months; the other requires law school students to complete 500 hours of hands-on, practical work as well as 12 other skills credits.


More here on DEI subversion: https://www.theblaze.com/news/passi...hington-state-because-of-race-equity-concerns



So when in the name of DEI will doctors and surgeons no longer need accreditation in the failed state of Washington?

 

[ll74]

Multiple states already have alternate pathways to licensure.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/gover...her-states-mull-bar-exam-bypasses-2024-03-18/

But please, freak out over it as it's obvious you will.

 

[wizzard426]

Plenty of unlicensed lawyers here, maybe now some of them can get jobs!

 

[LLCox]

Whats five hundred lawyers under the ocean...

 

[vietato]

why a drivers license to drive, after all some segment of society cant produce ID to get a license

 

[Rotadom]

Passing bar exam no longer required for law license in Washington state because of 'race-equity concerns'​

CORTNEY WEIL
MARCH 18, 2024

The Supreme Court of Washington state has ruled that passing the bar exam will no longer be necessary for law licensure since such a requirement "disproportionately and unnecessarily blocks historically marginalized groups from entering the practice of law."

About three and a half years ago, the Washington Supreme Court created the Washington Bar Licensure Task Force, which it ordered to "assess the efficacy of the Washington state bar licensure requirements" and to suggest possible alternatives to them. Last fall, the task force settled on a list of recommendations, which were then released to the public for comment. On Friday, the court issued its decision on the matter, taking into account the opinions of the task force and the public.

In its ruling, the court said that offering law students a bar exam is still necessary but insisted that the current Uniform Bar Exam is racially biased. It is a test infused with "racism and classism," the ruling stated, prompting "race-equity concerns" in those wishing to "advance the cause of diversity equity and inclusion." The ruling even used a tortured metaphor that compared the legal profession in the state to a "dam" that has left "people of color" thirsty for more access to legal services.

To "reduce barriers to entry into the legal profession" without compromising the public's trust in the system, the court authorized two "experiential" ways for earning a law license without having to pass the bar. One way involves law school graduates and upper-level students apprenticing under a supervising attorney for six months; the other requires law school students to complete 500 hours of hands-on, practical work as well as 12 other skills credits.


More here on DEI subversion: https://www.theblaze.com/news/passi...hington-state-because-of-race-equity-concerns



So when in the name of DEI will doctors and surgeons no longer need accreditation in the failed state of Washington?

Plenty of unlicensed lawyers here, maybe now some of them can get jobs!

Our resident "lawyer" practices in a state with no bar requirements as well.

 

[wizzard426]

Our resident "lawyer" practices in a state with no bar requirements as well.

They are always practicing in case some day that have to come in off of the bench

 

[Rightguide]

Why do doctors need certification if color, gender, and the lack of IQ are the only requirements in Washington state?

 

[ll74]

Why do doctors need certification if color, gender, and the lack of IQ are the only requirements in Washington state?

This thread is about lawyers.

Oh wait.... I see..... It is just another Reichy whinefest.

Exciting.

 

[HisArpy]

Whats five hundred lawyers under the ocean...

A SCUBA** club.


**Self Contained Bar Association

 

[Ciceri]

Keep the bar exam, ditch the LSAT.

 

[Rotadom]

So when in the name of DEI will doctors and surgeons no longer need accreditation in the failed state of Washington?

Why do doctors need certification if color, gender, and the lack of IQ are the only requirements in Washington state?

Lol, Jesus.

 

[ll74]

On a "positive" note, Giuliani can practice law there now.

 

[Sean Renaud]

This looks like an improvement over the system. Why wouldn't an apprenticeship be better than passing the test. Should we just let AI do all the lawyer work cus I'm 100% certain AI can pass the bar.

 

[Rightguide]

A SCUBA** club.


**Self Contained Bar Association

Or maybe a Self Contained Underqualified Bar Association.

 

[Rightguide]

This looks like an improvement over the system. Why wouldn't an apprenticeship be better than passing the test. Should we just let AI do all the lawyer work cus I'm 100% certain AI can pass the bar.

So far AI has failed to pass the Bar in more than one state.

 

[dmallord]

Passing bar exam no longer required for law license in Washington state because of 'race-equity concerns'​

CORTNEY WEIL
MARCH 18, 2024

The Supreme Court of Washington state has ruled that passing the bar exam will no longer be necessary for law licensure since such a requirement "disproportionately and unnecessarily blocks historically marginalized groups from entering the practice of law."

About three and a half years ago, the Washington Supreme Court created the Washington Bar Licensure Task Force, which it ordered to "assess the efficacy of the Washington state bar licensure requirements" and to suggest possible alternatives to them. Last fall, the task force settled on a list of recommendations, which were then released to the public for comment. On Friday, the court issued its decision on the matter, taking into account the opinions of the task force and the public.

In its ruling, the court said that offering law students a bar exam is still necessary but insisted that the current Uniform Bar Exam is racially biased. It is a test infused with "racism and classism," the ruling stated, prompting "race-equity concerns" in those wishing to "advance the cause of diversity equity and inclusion." The ruling even used a tortured metaphor that compared the legal profession in the state to a "dam" that has left "people of color" thirsty for more access to legal services.

To "reduce barriers to entry into the legal profession" without compromising the public's trust in the system, the court authorized two "experiential" ways for earning a law license without having to pass the bar. One way involves law school graduates and upper-level students apprenticing under a supervising attorney for six months; the other requires law school students to complete 500 hours of hands-on, practical work as well as 12 other skills credits.


More here on DEI subversion: https://www.theblaze.com/news/passi...hington-state-because-of-race-equity-concerns



So when in the name of DEI will doctors and surgeons no longer need accreditation in the failed state of Washington?

It seems the state made the decision after careful exploration of alternative processes. It was studied and not just an arbitrary decision. It considered those not to compromise the public's trust in the system. The legal system is not akin to the role of doctors and surgeons. You have a jurisprudence degree, but you seem to rail against others as attorneys and judges as being incompetent or politically biased. So, what's a few more in Washington State that are going to hurt anyone? It's not your state, right?

Your conjecture about doctors and surgeons is a leap in logic. Have you anything to support that notion?

Lawyers and the judicial system seem to regularly convict a substantial number of individuals who should not have been incarcerated. Take Jake Tapper's father, a pediatrician, for instance. He just helped get a guy out of prison who spent something like thirteen years there. The lawyers involved, public defenders who passed a bar exam, probably failed miserably to render a defense, e.g., the man fleeing the scene of the crime was running at an all-out speed. The guy convicted had a crushed pelvic bone and could not even run due to that injury. The public defender didn't didn't even seek his medical records to show that.

As Jake's father demonstrated, passing a bar exam doesn't mean competency in legal matters.

So, getting a few presumably caring individuals into the legal system, though without a bar exam, may help out individuals like Tapper's father did - without a law degree at all.

And, out of curiosity, why are you quoting an article on legal stuff from Courtney Weil's blog, whose Ph.D. is in Shakespearean Literature?

 

[dmallord]

Our resident "lawyer" practices in a state with no bar requirements as well.

But ... to be fair. According to his statements, he has never lost a case in decades of practice. That's a point, he notes, that indicates he is well qualified to judge those who are not lawyers.

With decades under his belt, he might have started out with a bar exam and passed it even if his current state does not require it. Who knows?

But ... I see your point. How can a barrister rail against Washington State changing procedures if his own state is already there? It seems somewhat ... hypocritical, right?

In the military, I had many 'bar exams.' I could get through a lot of damn bottles, examining them for the last dregs before ordering another. Of course, since leaving the Army, I stopped drinking back in the sixties.

 

[dmallord]

On a "positive" note, Giuliani can practice law there now.

Shudder the thought!

 

[dmallord]

So far AI has failed to pass the Bar in more than one state.

March 2024, Court House News Services says:

"CHICAGO (CN) — This past winter, an AI system known as GPT-4 passed the Uniform Bar Exam - as the name suggests, a standardized version of the infamously difficult qualifying test for would-be lawyers. It often takes flesh-and-blood attorneys several attempts to pass the exam, and in a way, GPT-4 was no different."

"...GPT-4 passed with flying colors in every field and test segment, even outperforming the average human student. ...So what does it mean that sci-fi imaginings of machines interpreting our laws have been replaced by a reality where they already have?"

 

[Philthy_Phil]

So trump can find a lawyer?

 

[jomar]

Hmm. Those exams are meant make sure one has a basic level of knowledge in the field, though the exam does not guarantee competency. And in some fields different terminal degrees can get licensed at differing levels, then subsequent research has demonstrated that after some years everyone is similarly effective no matter the education level.

And the license is a stamp of approval for the professional to the public that they have met basic standards for the protection of the public (though guild issues play a role). So I hope that states looking into alternative routes to licensure are looking at data and not feels.

 

[HisArpy]

Hmm. Those exams are meant make sure one has a basic level of knowledge in the field, though the exam does not guarantee competency. And in some fields different terminal degrees can get licensed at differing levels, then subsequent research has demonstrated that after some years everyone is similarly effective no matter the education level.

And the license is a stamp of approval for the professional to the public that they have met basic standards for the protection of the public (though guild issues play a role). So I hope that states looking into alternative routes to licensure are looking at data and not feels.

Illinois grants admission to their State bar without an exam if the applicant has graduated from law school at an Illinois State university. They do this because they ensure that the school curriculum covers the essentials necessary to practice law.

I support this because it doesn't harm the profession. That also means I have no problems with Washington state not requiring the bar exam for some applicants who can demonstrate proficiency in some other way.


And of course I have no desire to be a member of the Washington State Bar because I refuse to be a member of a racist org. The result of this decision should be the collapse of the Washington State Bar Association. Those who remain members prove the content of their character.

 

[jomar]

Illinois grants admission to their State bar without an exam if the applicant has graduated from law school at an Illinois State university. They do this because they ensure that the school curriculum covers the essentials necessary to practice law.

I support this because it doesn't harm the profession. That also means I have no problems with Washington state not requiring the bar exam for some applicants who can demonstrate proficiency in some other way.

I think proficiency is the operational term and that can probably be checked off in a number of ways.

But that is interesting. All legitimate professional programs ensure the curriculum covers necessary essentials for the profession. So is graduating those programs with a 3.0 for example essentially the same thing as passing a licensing exam? If so, the exam folks are gonna have to find a new scam, maybe migrate into the CEU arena.

And of course I have no desire to be a member of the Washington State Bar because I refuse to be a member of a racist org. The result of this decision should be the collapse of the Washington State Bar Association. Those who remain members prove the content of their character.

I don’t know about that bar being racist, but I did wonder how a bar exam was racist, but I guess it could lean that way if it’s state by state and not national.

 

[icanhelp1]

Passing bar exam no longer required for law license in Washington state because of 'race-equity concerns'​

CORTNEY WEIL
MARCH 18, 2024

The Supreme Court of Washington state has ruled that passing the bar exam will no longer be necessary for law licensure since such a requirement "disproportionately and unnecessarily blocks historically marginalized groups from entering the practice of law."

About three and a half years ago, the Washington Supreme Court created the Washington Bar Licensure Task Force, which it ordered to "assess the efficacy of the Washington state bar licensure requirements" and to suggest possible alternatives to them. Last fall, the task force settled on a list of recommendations, which were then released to the public for comment. On Friday, the court issued its decision on the matter, taking into account the opinions of the task force and the public.

In its ruling, the court said that offering law students a bar exam is still necessary but insisted that the current Uniform Bar Exam is racially biased. It is a test infused with "racism and classism," the ruling stated, prompting "race-equity concerns" in those wishing to "advance the cause of diversity equity and inclusion." The ruling even used a tortured metaphor that compared the legal profession in the state to a "dam" that has left "people of color" thirsty for more access to legal services.

To "reduce barriers to entry into the legal profession" without compromising the public's trust in the system, the court authorized two "experiential" ways for earning a law license without having to pass the bar. One way involves law school graduates and upper-level students apprenticing under a supervising attorney for six months; the other requires law school students to complete 500 hours of hands-on, practical work as well as 12 other skills credits.


More here on DEI subversion: https://www.theblaze.com/news/passi...hington-state-because-of-race-equity-concerns



So when in the name of DEI will doctors and surgeons no longer need accreditation in the failed state of Washington?

Just what we need more Alvin Braggs in the world.