Skip to main content

The Bar Exam: Some History & Comparison

It's that time of year again...time for two to three days of squeezing out all the material that hopeful lawyers have been pounding into their heads over several months - the bar exam. To mark the occasion, here is a brief history of the exam itself, as well as a taste of what is required to become an attorney elsewhere.

Prior to the mid-1800s, there were no written bar exams. Instead, the path to becoming a lawyer led hopefuls through "apprenticeships, self-directed reading, and oral examinations." The next phase made use of a diploma privilege, which remained until the ABA began requiring exams in the 1920s. (A diploma privilege does still exist in Wisconsin, however.) The first state to employ a written version of the bar exam was Massachusetts, in 1855. (See Riebe, A Bar Review for Law Schools: Getting Students on Board to Pass Their Bar Exams, 45 Brandeis L. J. 269 (2007) for quoted material and historical information.)

Bar exams consisted only of essays until the Multistate Bar Examination (MBE) was developed by the National Conference of Bar Examiners. The MBE resulted from "a universal concern among bar examiners regarding the mounting burden of preparing and grading papers in the light of the...increase in law school enrollment" during the 1960s. (Eckler, The Multistate Bar Examination: Its Origins and Objectives, reprinted in the February 1996 issue of The Bar Examiner, at page 15.) It was added to the bar exam in February 1972 as a way to both increase efficiency of grading and aid in ensuring as much fairness as possible. The Multistate Performance Test (MPT), which requires analysis of a "closed-world" legal problem, was added in 1997.

In Texas, the bar exam spans three days, with Texas material tested on days 1 and 3 (through Procedure & Evidence questions on day 1, and essays on day 3), and the MBE on day 2. There are some variations in the composition of the bar exam between states, but regardless of where a person takes it, it is universally considered to be a very difficult test.

But take heart, everyone! It's not the hardest route you could travel to reach Attorneyville. As a point of comparison, I asked Visiting Foreign & International Law Librarian Saskia Mehlhorn about what is required to become a lawyer in Germany. The German process has three steps. Step one is the First State Exam (8 written exams taken throughout law school, a thesis that is a minimum of 40-50 pages long, and then defending the thesis in front of a commission). If you pass, then you move on to step two, which is a two year apprenticeship. Finally, step three is the Second State Exam (8 written exams spread over 2 weeks that are 5 hours each, then another 2-3 weeks developing a judicial opinion or brief from a 60-80 page case file, a presentation of your opinion or brief to a commission, and then an oral exam consisting of 4 sessions in 1 day). You only become an attorney if you pass the Second State Exam, and if you fail either the First or Second State Exam, you only have one chance to retake the exam.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le

C-SPAN Video Archive Now Online

Legislative researchers and politics fans take note. C-SPAN recently completed a digitization project placing the entirety of its video collection online. The archives record all three C-SPAN networks seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. The videos are available at no cost for historical, educational, research, and archival uses. The database includes over 160,000 hours of video recorded since 1987 and the programs are indexed by subject, speaker names, titles, affiliations, sponsors, committees, categories, formats, policy groups, keywords, and locations. The most recent, most watched, and most shared videos are highlighted on the main page. To start watching, visit the C-SPAN Video Library and use the search function at the top of the page.

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requires