BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1281|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 1281
Author: Block (D)
Amended: 6/13/16
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 4/26/16
AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning,
Wieckowski
SENATE FLOOR: 36-0, 5/5/16 (Consent)
AYES: Allen, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, De
León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall, Hancock,
Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno,
Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Morrell,
Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Stone, Wieckowski, Wolk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson, Moorlach, Runner, Vidak
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 6/16/16 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Law schools: unaccredited law school disclosures
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill, to ensure that prospective law students can
make informed decisions about which law schools to attend,
requires law schools not accredited by the American Bar
Association (ABA) to post information on their Internet Web
sites, including bar passage data, tuition, fees, financial aid,
employment outcomes for graduates, conditional scholarships,
enrollment data, faculty information, average class size for
required courses, and the number of clinical offerings.
Assembly Amendments add a definition of "enrollment data" and
SB 1281
Page 2
"transfer of articulation agreement." The amendments add a
requirement that non-ABA accredited law schools post the terms
of any articulation agreements the law school has entered into
with other institutions. The amendments also require the
non-ABA accredited law schools to disclose they have not entered
into a transfer or articulation agreement with any other college
or university if they have not.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Provides that the State Bar's highest priority is protection
of the public, and, whenever the protection of the public is
inconsistent with other interests sought to be promoted, the
protection of the public shall be paramount.
2)Requires that attorneys who wish to practice law in California
generally must be admitted and licensed in this state and must
be a member of the State Bar.
3)Sets forth requirements for an individual to be certified by
the Supreme Court for admission and a license to practice law,
including but not limited to, having to pass the general bar
examination, passing an examination in professional
responsibility, and having to complete certain legal education
in a law school, law office, or judge's chambers.
4)Requires that law schools not accredited by the State Bar
shall provide a disclosure statement after the prospective
student pays application fees, but prior to the payment of
registration fees, and requires the prospective student to
acknowledge and sign the disclosure.
5)Requires that the disclosures provided by unaccredited law
schools shall include:
a) The passage rates of students who have taken the
first-year law student's examination;
b) The passage rates of students who took the final bar
examination in the previous five years;
SB 1281
Page 3
c) The ratio of faculty to students;
d) A statement that the education provided by the school
may not satisfy the requirements of other states for the
practice of law; and
e) Other disclosures as specified.
This bill:
1)Requires that any law school in California not approved by the
ABA publicly disclose on its Internet Web site, with a link
from the Internet home page under "admissions," information
pertaining to all of the following:
a) Admissions data;
b) Tuition, fees, and financial aid;
c) Conditional scholarships;
d) Enrollment data;
e) Number of full-time and part-time faculty, technically
trained librarians, and administrators;
f) Employment outcomes for graduates; and
g) Bar passage data.
2)Requires the above disclosures to be published in a
standardized information report, allows the State Bar to
create a standardized information report template, and
requires the law schools to include the standardized
information report as part of their annual compliance report
to the State Bar.
3)Requires a non-ABA approved law school to additionally
publicly disclose the following information on its Internet
Web site, as specified:
a) Refund policies;
b) Curricular offerings, academic calendar, and academic
requirements; and
c) Policies regarding the acceptance of credit earned for
coursework completed at another institution of higher
education.
4)Requires that all information that a law school reports,
publicizes, or distributes pursuant to the above requirements
SB 1281
Page 4
shall be complete, accurate, and not misleading to a
reasonable law school student or applicant.
5)Requires that a law school shall use due diligence in
obtaining and verifying such information.
6)Provides definitions for the required disclosures.
Background
The ABA accredits law schools throughout the United States,
including California law schools. The State Bar of California
accredits law schools in California as well. There are also
unaccredited law schools in California. These unaccredited law
schools lack accreditation from the ABA or the California State
Bar.
Graduates from any of these law schools can become licensed to
practice law in the state of California if they pass the bar
examination and also meet other criteria. Graduates of non-ABA
accredited law schools have a significantly lower likelihood of
passing the California Bar examination than graduates of ABA
accredited law schools. February 2015 California State Bar
examination results showed that a graduate of an ABA accredited
law school taking the Bar for the first time had a 53.9% chance
of passing. By comparison, a graduate of a California Bar
accredited law school had a 30.3% chance of passing the bar.
And, a graduate of an unaccredited law school had a 35.4% chance
of passing the bar on the first try.
ABA accredited law schools are required to make standard
disclosures on their Web sites that enable prospective students
to make informed decisions about applying and attending the law
schools. The information ABA law schools are required to post
include bar passage rates, tuition cost, class size, grants and
scholarships awarded, grade point averages, LSAT scores,
demographic information, curriculum, attrition rates, and
faculty information. By contrast, California State Bar
accredited law schools and non-accredited law schools are not
required to post this information.
To ensure that prospective law students can make informed
SB 1281
Page 5
decisions about which law schools to attend, requires law
schools not accredited by the American Bar Association (ABA) to
post information on their Internet Web sites, including bar
passage data, tuition, fees, financial aid, employment outcomes
for graduates, conditional scholarships, enrollment data,
faculty information, average class size for required courses,
and the number of clinical offerings.
Comments
The author writes:
Students attending a non-ABA accredited law school have
a significantly lower likelihood of passing the
California Bar exam. In February of 2015, a first-time
student from an ABA accredited law school had a 53.9%
[bar passage rate]. By comparison, a first-time student
attending a California Bar accredited law school had a
30.3% passage rate, while a student attending an
unaccredited law school had a 35.4% passage rate. The
gap widens significantly for repeat test takers. Where
47.5% of repeat takers from an ABA accredited school
passed, only 17.3% of repeat takers from [California]
Bar accredited schools passed. Repeat takers from
unaccredited schools only had a 15% bar passage rate.
It is clear that students attending non-ABA accredited
programs are less likely to pass the Bar exam in
California. What is also clear is that ABA-accredited
law schools are required to make significant disclosures
to their students, while non-ABA accredited schools are
held to nowhere near the same standard.
[The ABA] requires law schools to post important
disclosure information on their websites, including: bar
passage rates, tuition cost, class size, grants and
scholarships awarded, GPA and LSAT scores, demographic
information, curriculum, attrition rates, and faculty
information.
An unaccredited law school is required by law to make
some disclosures to students, but only after a student
SB 1281
Page 6
has applied to the institution. California Bar
accredited schools are required by regulation to post
Bar passage rate information on their website. The
disclosures required [by the ABA] are not only more
robust, but also more useful, as they are available to a
prospective student before beginning the application
process.
SB 1281 will allow prospective students to make "apples
to apples" comparisons between ABA accredited and
non-ABA accredited law schools in California.
Related/Prior Legislation
SB 1257 (Block, 2016) requires any person who applies to become
a licensed California attorney to complete at least 50 hours of
pro bono service, as defined, prior to filing an application for
admission with the State Bar of California. The bill is
currently in the Assembly Judiciary Committee.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:NoLocal: No
SUPPORT: (Verified6/17/16)
Association of California Accredited Law Schools
Center for Public Interest Law
Monterey College of Law
Public Advocates
Public Law Center
OPPOSITION: (Verified6/17/16)
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Supporters contend, from a consumer
protection perspective, prospective law students benefit from
SB 1281
Page 7
access to information to make informed decisions regarding where
to invest their time and money in pursuit of legal education.
In support, the Center for Public Interest Law at the University
of San Diego School of Law (CPIL) notes that "students who yearn
to practice law are being persuaded to enroll in institutions
with low Bar passage rates and are incurring life-altering debt;
debt that cannot be eliminated through bankruptcy." CPIL further
notes that "the institutions where the chances of passing the
Bar exam are the best have the best disclosures and the
institutions with the least chances have the worst disclosures."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 6/16/16
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker,
Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon,
Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper,
Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines,
Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson,
Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Holden,
Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder,
Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina,
Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen,
Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago,
Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber,
Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon
NO VOTE RECORDED: Brough, Roger Hernández
Prepared by:Margie Estrada / JUD. / (916) 651-4113
6/17/16 15:03:57
**** END ****