California State Bar leaders showed deep divisions Thursday on the future of the bar exam, as the clock ticks for them to decide whether, after their first attempt failed, they\u2019ll try again to develop a test unique to the Golden State.<\/p>\n
The bar has three options, staff said: Using questions developed by the vendor that wrote the bulk of questions on the February test temporarily, as a \u201cbridge\u201d to creating a new exam; adopting the National Conference of Bar Examiners\u2019 NextGen test; or creating a new, permanent exam that could be streamlined like Nevada\u2019s<\/a> shorter 100-question multiple choice test that is in development.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n A couple of procedural questions. About those vendor questions, did someone remember to jot down which questions were written by a competent evaluator rather than a large language model prone to hallucinating legal solutions? Because they didn\u2019t do the best job of regulating that the last time they went the vendor route<\/a>. The second question applies to both NCBE adoption and the R&D route of making a new test from new cloth: didn\u2019t all of this start because the California Bar\u2019s budget was gunning for the red? It looks like adopting the NCBE would cut losses and put them back on track to bankruptcy. A new test has some promise, but even if you were to look past the associated costs of developing a new test, it isn\u2019t like the Cali Bar has the best track record with starting over from scratch.<\/p>\n While the Committee of Bar Examiners have some time to weigh their options moving forward, they still have obstacles to face. One solution, to increase the bar fee by $150 per head to help with the budget, was shot down. Whatever they ultimately plan to do, that plan has to then be approved by the California Supreme Court. Seems like a rubber-stamping situation at first glance, but their Supreme Court has already sent them back to the drawing board in recent history<\/a>.<\/p>\n Best of luck to the folks in charge of the Cali Bar. Godspeed to the future test takers that have to deal with the consequences. <\/p>\n California Bar Splinters on Bar Exam\u2019s Future as Deadline Looms<\/a> [Bloomberg Law]<\/p>\n Earlier<\/strong>: California Bar Reveals It Used AI For Exam Questions, Because Of Course It Did<\/a><\/p>\n California Needs To Focus On Procedurals Before Administering Bar Replacement<\/a><\/p>\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 . \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>and by tweet at\u00a0@WritesForRent<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n The post The California Bar Is At A Crossroads<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n Some strong \u201cwill they, won\u2019t they\u201d tension may make for great rom-com foundation, but the dynamic is far from what you\u2019d expect of a licensing organization. After a disastrous experimental February rollout led the California Bar back to an orthodox NBCE test administration, future test takers and rubbernecking out-of-state voyeurs want to know how the Cali Bar will handle the next bar exam. Bloomberg Law has coverage:<\/p>\n California State Bar leaders showed deep divisions Thursday on the future of the bar exam, as the clock ticks for them to decide whether, after their first attempt failed, they\u2019ll try again to develop a test unique to the Golden State.<\/p>\n The bar has three options, staff said: Using questions developed by the vendor that wrote the bulk of questions on the February test temporarily, as a \u201cbridge\u201d to creating a new exam; adopting the National Conference of Bar Examiners\u2019 NextGen test; or creating a new, permanent exam that could be streamlined like Nevada\u2019s<\/a> shorter 100-question multiple choice test that is in development.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n A couple of procedural questions. About those vendor questions, did someone remember to jot down which questions were written by a competent evaluator rather than a large language model prone to hallucinating legal solutions? Because they didn\u2019t do the best job of regulating that the last time they went the vendor route<\/a>. The second question applies to both NCBE adoption and the R&D route of making a new test from new cloth: didn\u2019t all of this start because the California Bar\u2019s budget was gunning for the red? It looks like adopting the NCBE would cut losses and put them back on track to bankruptcy. A new test has some promise, but even if you were to look past the associated costs of developing a new test, it isn\u2019t like the Cali Bar has the best track record with starting over from scratch.<\/p>\n While the Committee of Bar Examiners have some time to weigh their options moving forward, they still have obstacles to face. One solution, to increase the bar fee by $150 per head to help with the budget, was shot down. Whatever they ultimately plan to do, that plan has to then be approved by the California Supreme Court. Seems like a rubber-stamping situation at first glance, but their Supreme Court has already sent them back to the drawing board in recent history<\/a>.<\/p>\n Best of luck to the folks in charge of the Cali Bar. Godspeed to the future test takers that have to deal with the consequences. <\/p>\n California Bar Splinters on Bar Exam\u2019s Future as Deadline Looms<\/a> [Bloomberg Law]<\/p>\n Earlier<\/strong>: California Bar Reveals It Used AI For Exam Questions, Because Of Course It Did<\/a><\/p>\n California Needs To Focus On Procedurals Before Administering Bar Replacement<\/a><\/p>\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 . \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>and by tweet at\u00a0@WritesForRent<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n The post The California Bar Is At A Crossroads<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Some strong \u201cwill they, won\u2019t they\u201d tension may make for great rom-com foundation, but the dynamic is far from what you\u2019d expect of a licensing organization. After a disastrous experimental February rollout led the California Bar back to an orthodox NBCE test administration, future test takers and rubbernecking out-of-state voyeurs want to know how the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":130778,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-130777","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Chris-Williams-2025-6ckA6D.jpg?fit=512%2C288&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/130777","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=130777"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/130777\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/130778"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=130777"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=130777"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=130777"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2025\/06\/Chris-Williams-2025.jpg?resize=512%2C288&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")
\n
\n