[nonethewiser]

Agree strongly. Removing the bar just makes it more political. The objective, merit based standards are the solution.

[afavour]

Is the bar objective?

[klodolph]

Yes, it subjectively more objective.

(Like, I’m making a cute response here, but there’s not exactly an objective standard for objectivity, when you come down to it. Turtles all the way down and all that.)

[shicholas]

The bar is bullshit, I had to memorize stuff like "men couldn't file for rape under common law" WTF is that.

[klipt]

Sometimes to correct injustices you need to study them.

[shicholas]

agree, but not in the context of a gatekeeping exam.

[gnicholas]

Was that on the MBE or a particular state bar? I don't remember having to learn what was or wasn't common law.

[shicholas]

this was from my barbri class, hopefully you don't have to know that.

[gnicholas]

Just because you learned some random fact in your bar prep class doesn't mean "The bar is bullshit" as you claimed. It means your bar prep class included information that wasn't strictly necessary.

[donw]

Much more so than academic accreditation.

Anyone can come off the street and take a bar exam. Not everyone can afford the time and financial burden of attending law school.

[chiggsy]

Not everyone can pass it though, which is the point.

[nonethewiser]

Probably the most objective standard for becoming a lawyer that there is. More objective than the hiring process and law school and college admissions, especially when many of these are de-emphasizing standardized testing.