The Threat to ABA Accreditation of Legal Education and Its Impact on Licensing of Lawyers
5.19.2026
A long-standing system of accreditation for law schools has come under scrutiny under the Trump administration. What’s at stake is nothing less than a sea change in the process that decides who gets to be a lawyer. Having a national system of accreditation ensures a level of quality education that supports the acceptance of portability of law degrees from school to school across the country. However, in states like Florida, Texas, and Tennessee, where the individual state courts are poised to determine the quality of the legal education provided by the schools in their states, this could create portability chaos for the legal profession. And now, there could be even more chaos if the federal government wins its challenge to the American Bar Association’s accreditor status.
Standards for legal education were adopted by the American Bar Association in 1921,[1] and in 1952 the United States Department of Education recognized the ABA’s Council on Legal Accreditation as the accreditor for the juris doctorate degree.[2] In 1998, New York State recognized the ABA as the sole accreditor for legal education in the state.[3] However, the council’s status as the sole recognized national accreditor for legal education in the United States is being challenged by the federal government. The timing could pose significant problems as the ABA’s approval as an accreditor is up for review in 2026 by the U.S. Department of Education.[4]
Much of the criticism of the council as an accreditor is centered on the policy activities of the ABA’s House of Delegates and its standing committees,[5] yet critics fail to separate that part of the ABA from the accreditation activities conducted by the Council on Legal Accreditation. The council’s accreditation project has been acknowledged as separate and independent from the larger ABA as part of its recognition as an accrediting body for law schools.[6] This is because the larger ABA operates through its governing and policymaking bodies, neither of which appoints members of the council and neither have input into individual school accreditation decisions. With respect to the Standards for Approval of Law Schools,[7] the council has final decision-making authority on content,[8] and may take action contrary to the opinion of the House of Delegates.
The DOJ’s Antitrust Lawsuit
In 1995, the U.S. Department of Justice filed an antitrust lawsuit against the ABA in which it alleged that the ABA engaged in anticompetitive conduct with respect to law school accreditation.[9] The DOJ alleged that legal educators “dominate the law school accreditation standard-setting and enforcement process,” set faculty salary standards that “ratchet[] up law school salaries” and prevent competition from non-accredited schools.[10] In 1996, the ABA entered into a consent decree,[11] which was modified in 2001.[12] In 2006, the ABA acknowledged that it violated six provisions of the consent decree and paid a $185,000 fine.[13]
In December 2025, the Federal Trade Commission issued a letter characterizing the ABA as “ha[ving] a monopoly on the accreditation of American law schools” and the power over who may seek admission to the bar.[14] The FTC contends that the ABA’s monopoly is to blame for the high cost of legal education and also “harms competition and consumers by mandating that every law school follow an expensive, elitist model of legal education.” In addition to referencing the 1995 lawsuit, the FTC criticized accreditation requirements concerning diversity, equity, and inclusion, suggesting that they “raise competitive concerns” where there is no alternative accrediting option.[15]
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Standard Becomes a Lightning Rod
The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 took aim at accreditation agencies on multiple grounds, including calling for a “radical overhaul of the [Higher Education Act of 1964’s] accreditation requirements,” particularly those that “… force institutions to adopt policies that have nothing to do with academic quality and student outcomes,” namely, diversity, equity, and inclusion policies.[16] In an executive order signed on Jan. 21, 2025,[17] President Trump called for a withdrawal from DEI practices. Then in an April 2025 executive order, he stated:
“The American Bar Association’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar (Council), which is the sole federally recognized accreditor for Juris Doctor programs, has required law schools to: “demonstrate by concrete action a commitment to diversity and inclusion” including by “commit[ting] to having a student body [and faculty] that is diverse with respect to gender, race, and ethnicity.” As the Attorney General has concluded and informed the Council, the discriminatory requirement blatantly violates the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023).”[18]
A July 2025 Heritage Foundation legal memorandum accused the ABA of being politicized and no longer neutral, claiming, “… it has become an activist group pushing hard-left policies.”[19] It accused the council of using their view of diversity to discriminate against students on the basis of race and other characteristics.[20]
In February 2025, the council suspended the enforcement of Standard 206,[21] and in May 2025 the council extended the suspension until August 2026.[22] In February 2026, the council extended the suspension until August 2027 and voted to send a proposed repeal of Standard 206 for notice and comment.[23]
In November 2025, the Florida attorney general accused the ABA of violating the First Amendment and religiously discriminating against St. Thomas University College of Law when it determined that the school was noncompliant with Standard 205(c) on non-discrimination and equality of opportunity.[24] The Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar subsequently concluded that the school sufficiently demonstrated compliance.[25]
New Accreditation Pathways for Admission to the Bar
In January, supreme courts in Texas[26] and Florida[27] eliminated the requirement that lawyers admitted to the bar graduate from an ABA-accredited law school. The Supreme Court of Ohio recently announced an advisory committee to examine law school accreditation,[28] and the Supreme Court of Tennessee asked for public comments on “potential regulatory reforms to increase access to quality legal representation,” including potential reforms to licensure requirements.[29] The Iowa House Higher Education Committee advanced a bill that would require the state supreme court to adopt or amend its rules and no longer require that a person graduate from an ABA-accredited law school in order to sit for the bar.[30]
Reactions have varied.[31] Law school deans from Texas support the ABA accreditation, noting that while it is imperfect, it provides a proven standard of quality.[32] Others argue that rather than promoting quality, it has driven up the cost of legal education, making access to the profession more difficult.[33] The Association of American Law Schools noted that there are about 33 non-ABA accredited law schools in the United States, and that “most have extremely low bar exam pass rates, poor job outcomes, and high attrition rates,” and that these schools have “not solved access to justice gaps.”[34] The association’s leaders noted that state-run or regional systems would hurt the public, potentially leading to applicants leaving the state who might not want to limit themselves to practicing in one jurisdiction, and to higher costs of compliance.[35]
The chair of the ABA Council rejects the criticism that the accreditor places undue burdens and increased costs, or that it stifles innovation and competition.[36] Regarding cost, he suggests that “any move away from a single national accreditor could jeopardize these low prices,” as “[s]chools would need to seek approval from multiple accreditors, likely leading to an increase in accreditation fees and compliance costs.”[37] He also notes that the legal profession is not the only one with a national accreditor, and that “state licensing authorities have the final say on which candidates qualify for licensure “[b]ut these authorities rely on accrediting bodies to maintain consistency in education, improve the profession, and protect patients and clients.”[38]
Committee on Legal Education and Admissions Reform Weighs In
In July 2025, the Committee on Legal Education and Admissions Reform, established by the Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of State Court Administrators, released a report on the legal profession and made recommendations for state courts.[39] One of the recommendations is to “encourage law school accreditation that serves the public,” and further recommends that “state supreme courts should encourage an accreditation process that promotes innovation, experimentation, and cost-effective legal education geared toward lawyers meeting the legal needs of the public.”[40] While the report does not specifically address the recent criticisms of the ABA Section of Legal Education, it broadly suggests support for state courts taking a more active role in shaping legal education and, by extension, law school accreditation.
The ABA Council Takes Action
In August 2025, the council adopted “Core Principles and Values of Law School Accreditation,” in which it set out four core goals of accreditation, substantive values guiding the standards, and procedural values guiding its work.[41]
In December 2025, the council announced that a special advisory committee would review the Standards for the Approval of Law Schools, with representatives including state supreme court justices, law school deans, and professors.[42]
The council also passed two amendments to its bylaws to more clearly highlight its independence. One of the amendments revises the number of times that the ABA House of Delegates can review changes made to accreditation standards, interpretations, or rules, “and to clarify that the purpose is consultation to provide feedback to the Council before it makes its independent determination.”[43] The other amendment establishes an Accreditation Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar.[44]
Conclusion
Since 1952, the American Bar Association Council on Legal Education has been the sole arbiter of the standards for legal education in the U.S., with input from the legal community and the public. It has been the council’s recognition in all 50 states that has enabled students to pursue licensure in any state even after graduation. But this is changing as some states begin to set legal education standards that supersede the ABA or simply no longer require ABA accreditation as a prerequisite for bar admission. As this unfolds, law students will need to know before choosing a law school where they want to practice and would likely need to make decisions about which law schools to attend on that basis. Further, employers will be restricted on which schools they may want to recruit from based on portability considerations.
Patricia Salkin, J.D., Ph.D., is the senior vice president for academic affairs and provost of the Graduate and Professional Divisions of Touro University. She is the former dean of the Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center. She is a past chair of NYSBA’s Local and State Government Law Section and a founding member and chair of the Committee on Attorneys in Public Service.
Gabrielle Rosenblum is special assistant to the provost at Touro University. She earned her J.D. from Northeastern University School of Law.
Professor Irene McDermott, director of the Gould Law Library at the Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, Laura Ross, head of public services, and Erin Marine-Mancuso, reference librarian, contributed to this article.
Endnotes:
[1] American Bar Association, About Us, https://www.americanbar.org/about_the_aba/.
[2] Barry Currier, Should the Council Withdraw from the U.S. Department of Education Accreditation System?, Legal Education Matters (May 30, 2025), https://barrycurrier.substack.com/p/should-the-council-withdraw-from.
[3] NYCRR Digital Archive, Charles B. Sears L. Libr., Univ. at Buffalo Sch. of Law, https://library.buffalo.edu/law/nycrr.html?page=%252fPortal%252fmyFilesManagement2.aspx (last visited Feb. 6, 2026).
[4] Federal Register, Accrediting Agencies Currently Undergoing Review for the Purpose of Recognition by the Secretary of Education (Apr. 4, 2025), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/04/04/2025-05853/accrediting-agencies-currently-undergoing-review-for-the-purpose-of-recognition-by-the-us-secretary.
[5] See, e.g., Allen Mendenhall, End the American Bar Association’s Grip on Law Schools, The Heritage Foundation (Jan. 30, 2026).
[6] See, e.g., Daniel Thies, ABA Accreditation Protects Law Students, Leaves Politics Aside, Bloomberg Law (Dec. 18. 2025), https://news.bloomberglaw.com/legal-exchange-insights-and-commentary/aba-accreditation-protects-law-students-leaves-politics-aside. See also, CFR 602.14(b) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-VI/part-602/subpart-B/subject-group-ECFR0f2a6caa491d242/section-602.14.
[7] American Bar Association, Council on Legal Education, 2025-2026 Standards and Rules of Procedure for the Approval of Law Schools, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/accreditation/standards/standards-rules/.
[8] Id.
[9] U.S. v. American Bar Ass’n, 943 F. Supp. 436 (D.D.C. 1996). After it was denied provisional accreditation by the ABA, the Massachusetts School of Law also brought an antitrust action against the ABA as well as the Law School Admission Services, Law School Admission Council, the Association of American Law Schools, and others alleging anticompetitive practices. The district court granted the ABA’s motion for summary judgement. See also, Massachusetts Sch. of L. at Andover, Inc. v. Am. B. Ass’n, 937 F. Supp. 435 (E.D. Pa. 1996), aff’d, 107 F.3d 1026 (3d Cir. 1997).
[10] Complaint at 6, U.S. v. American Bar Ass’n, (D.D.C. 1996) (No. 1:95-cv-01211). https://www.justice.gov/atr/case-document/file/485696/dl.
[11] Henry J. Reske, One Antitrust Battle Over: Judge Approves Consent Decree Between ABA, DOJ, 82 ABA J. 44 (Aug. 1996), https://www.jstor.org/stable/27839643?seq=1.
[12] Modification of Final Judgment, U.S. v. American Bar Ass’n, (D.D.C. 1996) (No. 95-1211) https://www.justice.gov/atr/case-document/file/485616/dl.
[13] Stipulation For Entry of Order, U.S. v. American Bar Ass’n, (D.D.C. 1996) (No. 95-1211) https://www.justice.gov/atr/stipulation-entry-order-us-v-american-bar-association. See also, Press Release, Department of Justice, Justice Department Asks Court to Hold American Bar Association in Civil Contempt: ABA Acknowledges Consent Decree Violations and Agrees to Pay $185,000 (June 23,2006), https://www.justice.gov/archive/atr/public/press_releases/2006/216804.htm.
[14] Letter from Clark T. Edwards, Federal Trade Commission, Acting Director Office of Policy and Planning, and Danial Guarnera, Director Bureau of Competition to Supreme Court of Texas, regarding Proposed Amendment to Rule 1 of the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar of Texas, (Dec, 1, 2025) https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/ftc-staff-comment-tex-s.-ct.pdf.
[15] The ABA suspended Standard 206, the standard on “Diversity and Inclusion,” in February 2025 and later extended the suspension until August 2026. See, Council of the ABA Section of Legal Education Extends Standard 206 Suspension to 2026, American Bar Ass’n: News (May 9, 2025), https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/05/aba-council-extends-206-suspension/.
[16] Lindsay M. Burke, Department of Education, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise: Project 2025, Presidential Transition Project (2023), at 352, https://static.heritage.org/project2025/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf.
[17] Exec. Order No. 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025) https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/01/31/2025-02097/ending-illegal-discrimination-and-restoring-merit-based-opportunity.
[18] Exec. Order No. 14279, Reforming Accreditation To Strengthen Higher Education, 90 Fed.Reg.17529 (April 23, 2025) https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/04/28/2025-07376/reforming-accreditation-to-strengthen-higher-education.
[19] GianCarlo Canaparo & Zack Smith, How To Break the American Bar Association’s Accreditation Monopoly, (July 15, 2025), https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2025-07/LM378.pdf.
[20] Id.
[21] See https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_education_and_admissions_to_the_bar/standards/2024-2025/2024-2025-standards-chapter-2.pdf.
[22] Council of the ABA Section of Legal Education Extends Standard 206 Suspension to 2026, American Bar Ass’n: News (May 9, 2025), https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/05/aba-council-extends-206-suspension/.
[23] Legal Ed Council Moves Forward Proposals To End Diversity Standard, Allow Alternative Bar Pathways, ABA Journal (Feb. 23, 2026), https://www.abajournal.com/web/article/legal-ed-council-moves-forward-proposals-to-end-diversity-standard-allow-alternative-bar-pathways.
[24] Attorney General James Uthmeier(@AGJamesUthmeier), X, The American Bar Association recently suggested that St. Thomas University College of Law was not in compliance due to the school’s Christian values. The ABA may dislike Christian values, but it cannot withhold accreditation to coerce schools to adopt its repugnant policies (Nov. 6, 2025 at 11:50 ET), https://x.com/AGJamesUthmeier/status/1986476332914471407; See also, American Bar Association, Decision of the Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, Notice of Finding of Noncompliance with Standard 205 – St. Thomas University College of Law (Aug. 2025), https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_education_and_admissions_to_the_bar/PublicNoticeAnnouncements/2025/2025-august-st-thomas-florida-11a4-public-notice.pdf.
[25] American Bar Association, Decision of the Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, Notice of Law School Demonstrating Compliance with Standards 202 and 205 – St. Thomas University College of Law (Nov. 14, 2025), https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_education_and_admissions_to_the_bar/PublicNoticeAnnouncements/2025/2025-nov-st-thomas-u-fl-public-notice-compliance.pdf.
[26] Supreme Court of Texas, Final Approval of Amendments to Rule 1 of the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar of Texas (Jan. 6, 2026), https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1461882/269002.pdf.
[27] Supreme Court of Florida, In re: Amendments to Rules Regulating the Florida Bar and Rules of the Supreme Court Relating to Admissions to the Bar (Jan. 15, 2026), https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26484103-opinion-sc2025-2064/.
[28] Staff Report, Supreme Court of Ohio Establishes Advisory Committee To Review Law School Accreditation Process, Court News Ohio (Jul. 17, 2025), https://www.courtnewsohio.gov/happening/2025/LawSchoolAccreditation_071725.asp.
[29] Supreme Court of Tennessee, In re: Public Comments on Potential Regulatory Reforms to Increase Access to Quality Legal Representation (Sept. 16, 2025), https://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/ProposedRulesPdf/ORDER%20SOLICITING%20PUBLIC%20COMMENTS%20ON%20POTENTIAL%20REGULATORY%20REFORMS%20TO%20INCREASE%20ACCESS%20TO%20QUALITY%20LEGAL%20REPRESENTATION_0.pdf.
[30] H.F. 224, 91st Gen. Assembly 2026 Reg. Sess. (Iowa 2026); See also, A ‘Barrage of Bills’ Would Overhaul Higher Ed in Iowa – If They Actually Pass, Inside Higher Ed (Feb. 4, 2026), https://www.insidehighered.com/news/governance/state-oversight/2026/02/04/barrage-bills-would-upend-iowa-higher-ed-if-they-pass.
[31] See Jim Ash, Lawyers Weigh in on ABA Law School Accreditation Debate, Florida Bar News (Oct. 3, 2025), https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-news/lawyers-weigh-in-on-aba-law-school-accreditation-debate/.
[32] See Comments of the Undersigned Texas Law School Deans on the Texas Supreme Court’s Consideration of ABA Accreditation, available at https://taxprofblog.aals.org/2025/07/07/texas-deans-and-faculty-comments-to-texas-supreme-court-on-aba-accreditation-of-law-schools/ (noting “ABA accreditation provides a nationally recognized framework for quality assurance and transparency; portability of licensure through recognition of ABA accreditation by all 50 states, which is critical for graduates’ career flexibility; consumer protections and public accountability through disclosure standards; and a baseline of educational quality that correlates with higher bar passage rates and better employment outcomes.“).
[33] George Leef, The American Bar Association Needn’t Accredit Law Schools: A Pending Texas Supreme Court Action Could Shake Up the Legal System, The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal, (July 29, 2025). https://jamesgmartin.center/2025/07/the-american-bar-association-neednt-accredit-law-schools/. See also, Ilya Shapiro, The ABA Deserves To Lose Its Accreditation Monopoly, The University of Texas at Austin Civitas Institute, (June 10, 2025), https://www.civitasinstitute.org/research/the-aba-deserves-to-lose-its-accreditation-monopoly.
[34] For example, in California, there are currently 18 law schools accredited by the ABA (and are deemed accredited by the California State Bar’s Committee of Bar Examiners), 21 law schools accredited by the state bar’s Committee of Bar Examiners, three registered unaccredited correspondence law schools, five registered unaccredited distance learning law schools, and one registered unaccredited fixed facility law school. See, The State Bar of California, Law Schools Directory, https://www.calbar.ca.gov/Admissions/Law-School-Regulation/Law-Schools. Of the schools accredited by the State Bar of California’s Committee of Bar Examiners (CALS) and the registered but unaccredited programs, the bar exam pass rate for all test-takers in July 2024 was 24% for CALS graduates and 13% for graduates from unaccredited law schools. See, The State Bar of California, 2024 California Accredited and Unaccredited Law School Performance Report (Aug. 22, 2025), https://www.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/reports/2025/2024-California-Accredited-and-Unaccredited-Law-School-Performance-Report.pdf.
[35] Austen Parrish, Kellye Y. Testy & Association of American Law Schools, Don’t Break What Works: Why States Shouldn’t Abandon National Law School Accreditation, National L. Rev. (Jan. 8, 2026), https://natlawreview.com/article/dont-break-what-works-why-states-shouldnt-abandon-national-law-school-accreditation.
[36] Daniel Thies, ABA Accreditation Protects Law Students, Leaves Politics Aside, Bloomberg L. (Dec. 18, 2025), https://news.bloomberglaw.com/legal-exchange-insights-and-commentary/aba-accreditation-protects-law-students-leaves-politics-aside.
[37] Id.
[38] Id.
[39] Committee on Legal Education and Admissions Reform (CLEAR), Executive Summary, in Report and Recommendations (July 27, 2025), https://www.ncsc.org/sites/default/files/media/document/CLEAR_Report.pdf?dm_i=7L57%2CGJJP%2C9L92XW%2C2OA85%2C1&utm_campaign=771829_CLEAR%202025&utm_content=v-0&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter.
[40] Id.
[41] American Bar Association, Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, Core Principles and Values of Law School Accreditation (Aug. 2025), https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_education_and_admissions_to_the_bar/2025/council-meeting/25-aug-core-principles-accreditation.pdf. See also, Christine Charnosky, ABA Council Adopts ‘Core Principles’ Explaining Why National Accreditation is Essential, Law.com (Aug. 26, 2025), https://www.law.com/2025/08/26/aba-council-adopts-core-principles-explaining-why-national-accreditation-is-essential/.
[42] American Bar Association, Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar Names Special Advisory Committee, ABA News & Insights (Dec. 22, 2025), https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/12/legal-ed-council-names-special-adv-committee/.
[43] Memorandum from the Governance Committee to the Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, Re: Recommended Revisions for Notice and Comment – Rule 55, American Bar Association (Jan. 9, 2026), https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_education_and_admissions_to_the_bar/council_reports_and_resolutions/jan26/2026-january-rule-55-revisions-for-notice-comment.pdf.
[44] Id.
Copy Direct Link
Source
Copy Link
