3 reasons to abolish state-specific bar exams

Listen to this article

At the beginning of the year, I wrote a post on why I decided to take the Florida bar exam without any plans of moving to Florida. After weeks of dread and anxious anticipation, I finally received the results last week.

I passed.

I’m glad I passed because I wasn’t going to try again. Studying for my second bar exam was brutal – not because the Florida bar exam was much harder than Maryland’s, but because I was much busier while studying. I didn’t work while studying for the Maryland bar exam: passing that exam was my only job. I studied for the Florida bar exam, by contrast, while maintaining my practice full-time and teaching one course for the law school and two for the community college.

My mindset was a lot different for my second bar exam. First, I didn’t feel as much pressure while studying. If I failed, I wouldn’t be stuck without a license for another year and I wouldn’t be saddled with the stigma of having failed my first time. But I also felt a lot of frustration in learning these common law and state-specific rules of law that I would never have to memorize in everyday practice.

I’ve heard the bar exam often described as a hazing ritual for new lawyers. As an adjunct professor of legal analysis, research, and writing, I appreciate the importance of issue-spotting and crafting solid arguments. But these skills are not state-specific. In my opinion, there are three reasons why we should abolish state-specific bar exams.

Lawyers don’t need to memorize these subjects cold. In real life, there’s almost always time to research an issue. Twenty subjects are tested on the Florida bar exam. I’m almost certain I’ll never have to know anything about “Commercial Paper” and “Secured Transactions.” But if I do, I know where to go to learn more about it — and it’s not my bar-prep book on Florida bar points.

Bar exams test each subject too generally. In order to practice a specific area of law, you certainly need to know more than what was required for a bar exam. Unlike Maryland, Florida tests wills and trusts, one of my firm’s practice areas. I have treatises on estate planning in my office. Trust me — there’s much more to it than what can be covered in 21 pages of a bar-prep book.

Some states (like Florida) require all applicants to take their bar exam. There is no process to waive in. This requirement is unduly burdensome to people that move to different states frequently. For example, a military spouse would have to pay for, study for and take the Florida bar exam in order to practice in Florida no matter what type of law he or she practices. If there were one uniform, multi-state bar exam that tested issue spotting, legal analysis, and legal writing, there would be no need for anyone to take more than one exam.

Bar exams in general are inadequate as a measure of good lawyering skills. They don’t test your ability to communicate with clients. They don’t test your ability to negotiate with opposing counsel. They don’t test your ability to deliver a persuasive closing argument. I could go on and on. It’s time we remove the state bar exam as a barrier to practice and focus on what qualities really make a good lawyer.