Vol. 71, Issue 7
O c to b e r 1 4 - O c to b e r 2 1 , 2 0 2 5
Est. 1981
THE PAISANO
Independent Student Newspaper for the University of Texas at San Antonio Community
@ThePaisano
@paisanomedia
@paisanosports
@paisanosports
/paisano-online.com
utsa sets program record in dominant win over rice
Pg.5
sarah the g reflects on Pg.8 evolution of artistry Texas law schools to face change in accreditation Law school deans concerned about state’s ability to stay competitive in legal field
By Henry Holmes Staff Writer
T
he Texas Supreme Court has indicated its plans to eliminate the American Bar Association’s ability to accredit law schools. For the past 42 years, the ABA has provided the standard that Texas law schools are held to and determined which law schools can have their students take the Bar Exam. Texas will soon be the only state fully independent of the ABA, and the Court alone will determine who can practice law within its borders. In response, numerous law schools in the state have raised concerns about Texas’ ability to stay competitive and remain transparent for law students. Today, the ABA provides the standard that law schools in every U.S. state must meet for their students to be eligible for the Bar exam. Most states will not allow students to take the Bar if they have not graduated from an ABA-accredited law school. For accreditation, the ABA conducts a rigorous, 3-year process and continuous standard check-ups. The ABA also provides transparency to students looking to attend law school by releasing statistics, including but not limited to cost, Bar passage rate, the Law School Admission
Test scores and grade point average of admitted students that year, class size and admission rates. On Sept. 26, the Texas Supreme Court released a notice indicating its position. “[The] Court is of the tentative opinion that the ABA should no longer have the final say on whether a law school’s graduates are eligible to sit for the Texas bar exam and become licensed to practice law in Texas.” The notice explained that the court will make a final decision in December to take effect on Jan. 1, 2026. The Court is currently open to comments on the issue, noting that it does not anticipate the change will negatively impact the state’s law schools and hopes to preserve the current stability. No reasoning for the expected change was given. Following the Court’s statement, St. Mary’s Law School provided The Paisano with a joint letter to the Texas Supreme Court, signed by the deans of eight of the 10 Texas law schools. The University of Texas School of Law and Texas A&M Law were the only schools not to sign. In the letter, the deans raised concerns over Texas’ ability to stay competitive in the legal field. “Removing the ABA accreditation recognized by every other state will impair the ability of Texas law graduates to secure employment outside of Texas, lower Texas law
schools’ overall employment rates, and harm Texas law schools’ national reputations,” they wrote. “The Court recognized the importance of portability when it approved transitioning to the [Universal Bar Exam]; removing ABA accreditation will impair that portability and geographic mobility for new and already licensed lawyers.” The deans also addressed the recent scrutiny the ABA has faced from the federal government for its diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. They noted how the ABA has suspended its DEI practices until August 2026, for revision and how the education council that accredits law schools is independent of the ABA by law. They further urged the Court and the Texas legal community to take other reform measures rather than severing the ABA entirely. To the deans, this would mean directly collaborating with the ABA, identifying regulatory concerns and supporting continued innovation. To understand how law students and faculty are reacting to the expected change, The Paisano interviewed David Sokolow, a Distinguished Senior Lecturer at the University of Texas Law School. When asked about how the change might impact Texas Law, Sokolow indicated that while serious differences may not be felt within the state, individual students may bear the cost. “I don’t think there’s going to be a big impact within the schools or within the state,” Sokolow stated. “The big question is what’s going to happen to a University of Texas or a Texas Law degree if students from Texas are not going to be able to get jobs in other states; that’s going to be a huge problem.” During the interview, Sokolow was shown the letter from the deans and largely agreed with their stance. “You can’t sugarcoat this,” Sokolow explained. “This will be incredibly detrimental to the University of Texas School of Law.” Sokolow also addressed prospective law students, urging them to pay attention to the court’s final decision. “[Currently], our degree is totally portable [between states], not if this [decision] is adopted,” Sokolow said. In addition, he does not believe the Texas Supreme Court has the resources to fill the gap the ABA will leave. Until the final ruling and the Court gives other notice, currently approved law schools will retain their accreditation. Readers can submit comments to the Court before Dec. 1 Diego Cisneros/The Paisano to rulescomments@txcourts.gov.