Texas Severs Ties With Aba in Historic Snub to Legal Establishment

Texas has taken a historic step by ending its reliance on the American Bar Association (ABA) for law school accreditation, making it the first US state to break with the legal establishment on this matter. The Texas Supreme Court finalised a plan to remove the ABA from its law school oversight and instead create its own list of approved schools for lawyer admissions. This move marks a dramatic change in how lawyers may gain the qualification to practise in the state.

Under the new system, the Texas Supreme Court will assess law schools based on 'simple, objective, and ideologically neutral criteria' rather than the detailed standards previously set by the ABA. The court stated the change aims to give law schools more certainty and flexibility while ensuring the quality of legal education for students.

Why ABA Accreditation Has Been Important

For decades, the ABA has been the main body that approves law schools across the United States. Graduation from an ABA-accredited law school has typically been required for graduates to sit the bar exam, which they must pass to become practising lawyers. The ABA has set standards for curriculum, faculty, student support and other areas of legal education.

Texas relied on the ABA's oversight for more than 40 years. In 1983, the state Supreme Court gave the ABA authority to accredit law schools and decide which graduates could pursue licensure in Texas. That role has now been taken back by the highest court in the state.

Political Pressure and Broader Context

The decision comes amid wider criticism of the ABA, especially from political leaders who objected to some of its standards, including requirements related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. The Trump administration previously challenged the ABA's role, calling some of its rules unlawful and targeting them for review.

As a result of these disputes, the ABA temporarily suspended enforcement of its diversity standards. While the ABA says it still wants to promote high quality legal education, the conflict with political leaders has fuelled a broader debate about its influence and relevance.

Reactions From Legal Educators and Other States

The change has produced mixed reactions within the legal community. Some Texas law school deans have warned that dropping the ABA's accreditation requirement could harm the quality and reputation of legal education and make it harder for graduates to work in other states. Law degree portability — the ability of graduates to practise outside their home state — is a particular concern.

Despite these concerns, some leaders in legal education and policy have welcomed the shift, arguing that state control could increase competition, lower costs, and expand access to legal careers. Supporters say that removing the ABA's monopoly might benefit law students and future lawyers who face rising tuition fees.

Other states are watching closely. Florida, Ohio and Tennessee have also begun reviews of their reliance on ABA accreditation, suggesting that Texas could be the first of several states to reconsider long-standing national standards.

Possible Effects on Legal Education and Practice

As Texas prepares to implement its new accreditation system, legal educators and students face uncertainty about how the change will affect the legal profession. The Texas Supreme Court says it intends to retain the ability of Texas graduates to practice outside the state and to allow out-of-state graduates to practise in Texas. However, many states still require degrees from ABA-accredited schools for bar eligibility, and that could influence graduates' career choices.

Legal professionals and law students will be watching how the new system works in practice. The long-term impact on legal education quality, student costs and career mobility remains unclear, but the move has already reshaped the debate about who should set the standards for training future lawyers.