The public doesn’t know what the bar exam is. They accept that it proves competency, b/c the powers that be say so. But it’s a dereliction of our duty as a self-regulating profession to send that message at all. To do so this year, though, is of particularly grave consequence.

The public should know what it is that many claim serves a gatekeeping function. In New York, it tests “the law of nowhere” - which is how born-again proponents of the online version described the bar only a few months ago, because guess what? It doesn’t test knowledge of NY law.

This year, the exam will test only 50% of the law of nowhere, under conditions inimical to good performance, with no viable or equitable plan whatsoever to equate, scale and subsequently grade it. If ever there was a year in which this test didn’t serve the public, it’s this one.

So I have to ask: if the exam doesn’t serve the public (and may in fact be a disservice to them), and if the exam doesn’t serve graduates (see generally my timeline), who or what does this exam serve? What objective does it achieve?

When the public hears about different models of #diplomaprivilege, they might have questions and even doubts. But I’m confident that we can answer and address those without deceiving them. Can the same be said of those justifying the October online bar exam?

I’ve heard the argument that passage of the bar exam = legitimacy. Do I need to photo copy pages of my bar prep books and cross reference them against sections of NY law to show the public that I’m learning irrelevant minutiae? This is the opposite of legitimacy.