{"id":118892,"date":"2025-05-13T11:02:33","date_gmt":"2025-05-13T19:02:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/05\/13\/california-bar-thinks-provisional-licensing-could-soak-up-some-of-the-mess-from-their-rushed-test\/"},"modified":"2025-05-13T11:02:33","modified_gmt":"2025-05-13T19:02:33","slug":"california-bar-thinks-provisional-licensing-could-soak-up-some-of-the-mess-from-their-rushed-test","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/05\/13\/california-bar-thinks-provisional-licensing-could-soak-up-some-of-the-mess-from-their-rushed-test\/","title":{"rendered":"California Bar Thinks Provisional Licensing Could Soak Up Some Of The Mess From Their Rushed Test"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The California Bar is in a rough spot. Facing bankruptcy, the Bar broke from the NBCE to try their hand at a more cost effective way to test the minimum competency of applicants aspiring to be attorneys. Unfortunately, they bungled the supposed fix to their budget problem in grand, imminently foreseeable ways. Critics of the new bar worried that changes were being made too hastily \u2014 neglecting procedure actually got them in the hot seat with California\u2019s Supreme Court<\/a>. There were other issues: would this experimental test do a solid job of gauging minimum competency? Survey says no. It probably didn\u2019t help that they used AI to help craft some of the questions<\/a>. Someone should have told them to never half ass two things.<\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

The Cali Bar committed to global half-assery and aspiring attorneys are suffering the consequences. Small steps have been made to right wrongs: there was a wave of refunds<\/a> and an offer to take the next Bar on the house<\/a>. The next exam should<\/em> fare better. Now that the Bar walked back to the NCBE with their tail between their legs, test goers should only have to deal with the usual problems of the California bar, like its abnormally high score requirement to pass or being denied accommodations so you can take the damned thing<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Good for everyone taking the next exam, but what about everyone who slogged through the February disaster only to withdraw or fail? It\u2019s looking like they could get provisional licenses. Reuters<\/a> has coverage:<\/p>\n

\n

Aspiring lawyers who withdrew from or failed California\u2019s\u00a0disastrous<\/a>\u00a0February bar exam may still be eligible to work under the supervision of an experienced attorney until they can pass the attorney licensing exam.<\/p>\n

The State Bar of California\u2019s Board of Trustees on May 9 voted to extend an existing provisional licensure program, which it had enacted in 2020 when the bar exam was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, to give unsuccessful February bar examinees or those who withdrew a period of two years to pass that test while working under supervision.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

As important as it is to balance the equities, provisional licensing is far from perfect. The next step in the process would be to get California\u2019s Supreme Court to sign off on the proposed hotfix. A trustee, Sarah Good, made the point that it is silly to test for minimum competency if the folks who don\u2019t meet the standard get to practice anyway. If a significant amount of the Court agrees with her rationale, the solution is DOA. And even if the Supreme Court were to bless provisional licensing, there\u2019s no promise that it would do much for the license holders. A Redditor<\/a> shared their experience of getting fired by their employer despite having their provisional license.<\/p>\n

Best of luck to this round of applicants that got screwed by the bar. <\/p>\n

California Bar Backs Provisional Licensing After February Exam Mess<\/a> [Reuters]<\/p>\n

Earlier<\/strong>: California Needs To Focus On Procedurals Before Administering Bar Replacement<\/a><\/p>\n

The California Bar Was So Bad That The Exam Vendor Is Getting Sued Over It<\/a><\/p>\n

\n
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Chris Williams became a social media manager and assistant editor for Above the Law in June 2021. Prior to joining the staff, he moonlighted as a minor Memelord\u2122 in the Facebook group\u00a0Law School Memes for Edgy T14s<\/a>. \u00a0He endured Missouri long enough to graduate from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. He is a former boatbuilder who is learning to swim,\u00a0is interested in critical race theory, philosophy, and humor, and has a love for cycling that occasionally annoys his peers. You can reach him by email at\u00a0cwilliams@abovethelaw.com<\/a>\u00a0and by tweet at\u00a0@WritesForRent<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The post California Bar Thinks Provisional Licensing Could Soak Up Some Of The Mess From Their Rushed Test<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The California Bar is in a rough spot. Facing bankruptcy, the Bar broke from the NBCE to try their hand at a more cost effective way to test the minimum competency of applicants aspiring to be attorneys. Unfortunately, they bungled the supposed fix to their budget problem in grand, imminently foreseeable ways. Critics of the new bar worried that changes were being made too hastily \u2014 neglecting procedure actually got them in the hot seat with California\u2019s Supreme Court<\/a>. There were other issues: would this experimental test do a solid job of gauging minimum competency? Survey says no. It probably didn\u2019t help that they used AI to help craft some of the questions<\/a>. Someone should have told them to never half ass two things.<\/p>\n