The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Texas SCOTUS says the ABA is no longer the accreditor of law schools in TX
| bloomington | 09/26/25 |
| excellent subthread | 09/26/25 |
| Keezy | 09/26/25 |
| NiggerFaggot | 09/27/25 |
| UhOh | 09/26/25 |
| sealclubber | 09/27/25 |
| UhOh | 09/27/25 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: September 26th, 2025 9:53 PM Author: bloomington (🦬) https://x.com/derektmuller/status/1971699487434477626 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5780407&forum_id=2"#49306595) |
Date: September 26th, 2025 10:11 PM Author: excellent subthread 30 years overdue (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5780407&forum_id=2"#49306642) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2025 10:28 PM Author: Keezy Here's some comments from a Texas attorneys FB page:
Plenty of reasonable criticisms can be leveled at the ABA, but something tells me this decision is entirely unrelated to any of those reasons.
Next up: PragerU School of Law. (*only accredited it Texas*)
ABA said they were not going to do away with DEI. That’s how we got here.
The Chief Justice already presides over the attorney grievance committee and we all know that the state struggles with enforcement of state bar rules... Now we expect our Supreme Court to effectively monitor situations at our state law schools? This is a recipe for disaster
This is actually crazy.
The Supreme Court? I know it says “the,” but which one?
I guess you will soon be able to sit for the bar exam if you get your Google Law Degree? This is absurd!
Honestly... they're are a lot of terrible lawyers and I guess most all went to law schools accredited by the ABA. So it's not like things are perfect now, I'm not going to criticize without knowing more what brought this about.
Supreme Court or Supreme Leader? (Just joking)
I wonder who was asking for this. Are there some aspects of ABA accreditation that the backers of this proposal don’t want Texas schools to have to follow? Do they want to move to a system like California that has ABA schools and non-ABA schools that are only accredited by California and have to pass a separate first year law exam to continue in the non ABA schools (and then will only be eligible to take the California Bar)? And more importantly, who was asking for this? Any backers wanted to start a new law school? I can imagine that the University of Austin might want to eventually start a “conservative” law school to add to their undergraduate program.
Open the floodgates to fraudsters who want to open a law school. Smells like rotten seafood to me.
So the Venn diagram between ABA and SCOTX-approved schools will be a circle?
I'm pretty sure this is going to create problems with reciprocity in states that still require ABA accreditation. |
 |
Date: September 27th, 2025 10:07 AM Author: NiggerFaggot (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5780407&forum_id=2"#49307224) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2025 10:32 PM Author: UhOh pretty obviously this:
Are there some aspects of ABA accreditation that the backers of this proposal don’t want Texas schools to have to follow?
texas wants to end DEI, critical theory, affirmative action, etc. this seems like a great way to do it. tx scotus is small and conservative as fuck, it's a lot more efficient than the legislature and university boards. the law schools will have to kneel immediately. if they're not accredited their grads can't get a license in tx (which the court also controls) and they're done. |
|
Date: September 27th, 2025 10:56 AM Author: sealclubber the aba, in theory, provides some standard of legitimacy such that attorneys can relocate to different states without having to worry about their degree's worth how does it work for other professionals? i assume they all have something similar to the aba? |
|
Date: September 27th, 2025 11:04 AM Author: UhOh interesting question. other professions have national accrediting organizations, too. i guess this new law doesn't prevent texas schools from obtaining ABA accreditation in addition to SCOTUS accreditation, it's just that they must have the latter for their grads to practice in texas. maybe the two standards will be so incompatible that the schools have to choose one or the other, in which case they obviously choose SCOTUS. but then there's your issue, that almost all other states require an ABA accredited school for licensure, so going to a texas school under this regime means you're going to be stuck practicing in texas. which is fine for 90% of texas law school grads but would pretty much kill UT's national reputation over night. and even those 90% might think twice about paying $150k for a degree that restricts you to texas. even if you think you'll practice there forever that's an insane limitation to put on yourself. i could easily see this turning into a red state blue state thing, where other red states accept TX SCOTUS accredited schools, but blue states insist on ABA clown world accredited.
will also be interesting to see which out of state schools TX SCOTUS refuses to recognize. there's no way they're going to turn away HYS grads over a few woke classes, right? but they're going to have to adopt some kind of standard, and if they're using this to bully SMU and texas southern college of law out of woke policies then the same standards will apply to the t14s, and they're not going to budge. as long as 99% of law schools adhere to ABA policies tx is going to have to take a somewhat compatible stance or risk losing out on all of the out of state talent.
but maybe texas is pushing for a full-on conservative lawyer ghetto? it sounds possible, there are plenty of lawyers in texas schools, and UT would still crank out top notch ones. over time this would eventually crush the state's shitlib lawyer element. you'd have a very restricted talent pool, but how many talented lawyers do you really need? smart shitlib lawyers are a menace to society. |