Florida, Ohio Consider Dropping ABA After Texas Cuts Ties (2)

Texas’s decision to end the American Bar Association’s authority to decide who can practice law there is casting doubts on the viability of the organization’s accreditation wing in Republican-led states, with Florida and Ohio considering similar action.

Texas on Tuesday formally ended its decades-long relationship with the ABA, finalizing a new rule that shifts law school accreditation authority to the state’s Supreme Court. Only the justices can decide which law schools are approved for the bar exam, though their list for now includes all of the schools accredited by the ABA and no others.

The ABA will continue to work with the Texas Supreme Court “to help preserve the portability of law school degrees throughout the country,” Jenn Rosato Perea, managing director of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar, said in a statement Wednesday.

The change in Texas and those contemplated by other GOP-led states follows conservative criticism of ABA’s diversity and inclusion requirements that the Trump administration cited in threatening to pull the group’s accrediting power nationwide last year. The ABA in February 2025 suspended enforcement of its diversity, equity, and inclusion mandate in the wake of pressure from conservatives, and later extended the moratorium until August of this year.

In Texas, justices initiated the split in April by requesting input on a potential breakup, with the feedback split between ending ties and maintaining them. Deans at eight of the state’s 10 law schools said the relationship should continue.

Opening the test to graduates of non-ABA accredited schools is “likely to reverse decades of progress in measuring the excellence of legal education,” the deans said in a June 28 letter.

If Texas implements new standards—and if other states follow suit—accreditation could become “an absolute mess,” said Austen Parrish, Dean of UC Irvine School of Law and president of the Association of American Law Schools.

“If other states begin to do what Texas is doing the pressure at some point will be for them to create their own state standards,” he said. “You’d have to comply with 50 state standards—and those might be conflicting.”

Growing Movement

While Texas struck first in cutting off the ABA, Florida isn’t far behind.

The justices in Tallahassee are weighing options developed by a committee formed to explore methods for ditching ABA accreditation as a requirement for taking the Florida bar exam.

One possibility is the California route—creating a state license issued to schools allowing those students to sit for the bar alongside students from ABA-accredited schools. Other possibilities include adopting apprenticeship models allowing work experience to replace law school, or joining an alternative-accreditation framework.

Republican leaders in the state, including Chief Justice Carlos G. Muñiz, have openly criticized the ABA. Some candidates vying for Ron DeSantis’ (R) appointment to the state Supreme Court have said breaking with the national group should be a priority.

“We need to get Florida legal education out from under the yoke of the ABA,” First District Court of Appeal Judge Adam Scott Tanenbaum said in December during his interview for the job.

Texas’ move potentially paves the way for other states, raising questions about whether headaches are around the corner for schools who must meet multiple accreditation standards to give their graduates access to bar exams in every state, said D. Benjamin Barros, dean of Stetson University College of Law, Florida’s oldest law school.

“I care that my students can take the bar in any jurisdiction, so if there are additional requirements in Texas” or another state, “we’ll have to figure out how to jump through those hoops,” he said.

In its new rule, the Texas Supreme Court says it “intends to preserve the portability of Texas law-school degrees into other states and to preserve the portability of out-of-state law-school degrees into Texas.”

No additional action is required of schools currently accredited by the ABA to remain approved in Texas.

“If the worry is that increased regulation is bad for schools, then multiple overlapping regulations are also bad,” Parrish said. “It’s completely contradictory to a traditional conservative viewpoint.”

New Competition

Texas’ new rule opens the door to schools not currently accredited by the ABA that wish to be recognized by the state.

That state’s Supreme Court declined comment Wednesday when asked for next steps in developing that process. Nahdiah Hoang, executive director of the Texas Board of Law Examiners, which will assist the court in the plan, also declined comment.

It’s unclear if outside parties will get a say, “but if so, Purdue Global Law School would be delighted and honored to be involved,” Martin Pritikin, the school’s dean, said.

Purdue Global, an online school without ABA accreditation, urged Texas to end its reliance on the ABA in comments submitted to the court. A quality legal education can be delivered virtually at a fraction of the cost of traditional schools, Pritikin argued.

Ohio’s look at law school accreditation authority began after Texas’s and Florida’s. State Supreme Court Justice Sharon L. Kennedy (R) last July formed a committee made up of law school deans, Republican lawmakers and staffers, and court personnel.

The news release announcing the committee didn’t mention the ABA, and the court’s administrative director said that its “responsibility to uphold the integrity and efficacy of the profession means constant reflection, research, and openness to innovation.”

Paul Rose, dean of Case Western Reserve University Law School in Cleveland, said diversity and inclusion hasn’t come up in the conversations he’s had with state court leaders as something driving a potential change in Ohio.

“I expected that to come up more and it really hasn’t,” said Rose, who’s not on the committee examining accreditation but meets quarterly with Kennedy and the deans of the state’s eight other law schools.

Instead, conversations have surrounded the ABA’s requirements. Meeting them can be burdensome, he said.

It’s clear the state chief justice is serious about the potential for change, Rose said.

“We recognize the value of having an accreditation process,” Rose said, “but at the same time I welcome the ABA reexamining some of its standards and whether those standards continue to apply.”