Ohio to review ABA accreditation for lawyers as political pressures mount

By Karen Sloan

July 18 (Reuters) - Ohio on Thursday became the third U.S. state to reconsider rules requiring attorneys to attend an American Bar Association-accredited law school to be admitted to practice, after the Trump administration threatened to revoke the ABA's status as the federal government's designated accreditor of law schools due to its diversity and inclusion efforts.

The Supreme Court of Ohio said it has convened an advisory committee to review its law school accreditation process, citing a need to ensure “excellence and innovation.” Texas and Florida have launched similar reviews.

Ohio’s Supreme Court did not say its review was prompted by the ABA's stance on diversity or any political factors. A spokesperson for the court did not immediately respond on Friday to a request for further comment on why the court was reviewing the ABA requirement.

Robert Horner, the court’s administrative director and chair of the accreditation committee, said in a statement that the “responsibility to uphold the integrity and efficacy of the profession means constant reflection, research, and openness to innovation.” Six of Ohio's seven elected justices are Republicans. The state has nine ABA-accredited law schools.

Jenn Rosato Perea, the ABA’s managing director of accreditation and legal education, said Friday that the arm of the ABA that oversees law schools "takes its responsibility as a national accreditor very seriously and wants to be able to dialog and engage with the courts to show the benefits of national accreditation and portable degrees."

The ABA has faced mounting pressure from Republican President Donald Trump's administration over its diversity and inclusion efforts and public statements the organization has made condemning attacks on judges and law firms. In addition to potentially revoking its federal accreditor designation, the U.S. Justice Department ended the ABA's role vetting judicial nominees and barred some attorneys from participating in ABA events.

States are also exerting pressure. In March, the Supreme Court of Florida launched a workgroup to study the state’s ABA requirement to sit for its bar exam. The court, which is comprised entirely of Republican-appointed justices, said its review was prompted by the ABA’s diversity mandate for law schools.

The current ABA rule requires law schools to provide “full opportunities” for “racial and ethnic minorities” and have a diverse student body “with respect to gender, race, and ethnicity." The requirement has been put on hold until 2026 and a proposed new version has also been postponed.

The Supreme Court of Texas in April asked the public to weigh in on whether it should end its requirement that lawyers admitted in the state must graduate from an ABA-accredited law school, but did not clarify why it was reviewing the rule.

All of the Texas court's elected judges are Republicans. A majority of the deans of Texas’ ABA-accredited law schools this month wrote to oppose dropping the requirement, saying such a move would impede lawyer mobility and increase costs.

Read more:

Texas high court considers dropping ABA accreditation as requirement to practice law

Florida weighs breaking with American Bar Association over DEI rule