The New York Court of Appeals has amended the state's bar admission rules to allow law students who are completing their final semester - and participating in the state's new pro bono practice program - to sit for the bar in their final term. Given that most smaller firms and public interest agencies prefer to hire members of the bar - and often wait for bar results to hire - this program offers a significant advantage to participants. The new rule is here.
I won't be surprised if this move spreads to additional states - and without some of the complexities of, say, Arizona's early bar exam program.
This is a great idea and likely to spread. The program should also serve as a reminder to law schools of just how much power their states' judiciaries can wield over their curricula if those courts so choose. It's not surprising that every law school in New York signed on. Any school that didn't would be at a huge recruiting disadvantage in pretty short order.
Posted by: Former Editor | July 11, 2014 at 05:06 PM
"Given that most smaller firms and public interest agencies prefer to hire members of the bar - and often wait for bar results to hire - this program offers a significant advantage to ..."
Is it solely the participants' interests motivating this move? If so, why has this gambit only now come to pass here and elsewhere?
Posted by: anon | July 12, 2014 at 01:59 PM
"Is it solely the participants' interests motivating this move? "
It's not solely the student's interests. The program was an initiative of NYS CJ Lippman. The idea is that if you get students to spend their last semester of law school doing pro bono work then (a) you help solve the lack of representation for low income folks, and (b) you maybe encourage longer-term pro bono work by getting the students hooked on helping.
Posted by: Former Editor | July 13, 2014 at 09:08 AM
FE
I was thinking more about the 9 month post grad measurement that would seem to be effectively goosed by this:
"Given that most smaller firms and public interest agencies prefer to hire members of the bar - and often wait for bar results to hire - this program offers a significant advantage to ...."
The noble motives may be there in an individual, but, the fact is that, in the aggregate, a substantial number of law students do pro bono work in clinics without this incentive. The comment quoted above seemed to suggest that grads might take jobs in "smaller firms" ... and not just in the field of "public interest."
Posted by: anon | July 13, 2014 at 05:21 PM
anon
That's a good point. I had not thought about how it might affect the 9 month reporting deadline. Honestly, though, I'm not worried about it goosing the numbers. If the complaint on the part of law schools that their students aren't getting hired by the 9 month mark because bar results are not released yet is valid, then wide acceptance of this program should help solve that problem. I doubt it will really change much, though. In NY, most graduations are in mid-May and bar results are out by early November.
On the pro bono side, NY law students are actually required to do some pro bono work during law school. However, law school clinics and internships do not provide the amount of representation that, if this program becomes widely used, could reach those in need. Bear in mind that rather than spending 10-12 hours a week on clinic work, these students will be spending 35-40 on pro bono in the last semester of law school.
Posted by: Former Editor | July 13, 2014 at 05:36 PM
FE
I have no objection to the program as you describe it.
My reaction was more to this comment by Dan ...
"Given that most smaller firms and public interest agencies prefer to hire members of the bar - and often wait for bar results to hire - this program offers a significant advantage to ...."
He seemed to focus more on the employment prospects for student participants than the "bono" aspects of the program for the program clients, as you do.
Posted by: anon | July 13, 2014 at 05:57 PM
What a stupid idea...Let's see, there's a glut of lawyers in the market so NY comes up with a solution, graduate lawyers earlier and increase the number of candidates in the job market to compete against those who finish in three years.
This will "solution" will exacerbate the problem
Posted by: AnonProf | July 14, 2014 at 10:08 AM
AnonProf,
The program does not graduate students any earlier. It permits students to take the bar exam during February of their 3L year, in exchange for working full-time in a Pro Bono capacity for academic credits. Thus, the program shouldn't have any effect on the total number of law graduates competing for jobs at graduation. The earlier taking of the exam does translate into accelerated bar admission after graduation, because the entire bar exam/admission process has started earlier for those students. Earlier admission does give a competitive leg up to those who choose to spend their final law school semester in the program rather than in classes, but it shouldn't increase the total number of graduates. Since only NY schools are presently involved in the program, it may give those schools an advantage for placing graduates into the NY market.
Posted by: Former Editor | July 14, 2014 at 10:47 AM
I don't see the problem with this; the students are in the final half of a three year course of professional study. If they are not able to pass the bar, then perhaps the school should consider repurposing their facilities and faculty.
Posted by: Barry | July 18, 2014 at 09:58 AM