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 ****