20 Pages Posted: 9 Aug 2012 Last revised: 17 Jan 2013
Date Written: November 30, 2012
This paper argues for a revision of the rules of the New York Court of Appeals to allow students to sit for the bar after two years of law school classes. This revision, reflecting what the rule had been when both President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Associate Justice Benjamin Cardozo attended Columbia Law School, would cut the costs of legal education for many students by 1/3, hence addressing in part the concern that law school debt drives down the availability of public service lawyers. Moreover, such a move would put pressure on law schools to deliver educational services more attuned to the practical needs of their students in order to secure their enrollment for the third year. This is a matter of considerable importance at a time many law schools place fewer than half of their graduates in full-time positions requiring legal training. Although the proposal does not address what law schools do or should do, reducing the law school study requirement for bar eligibility from three to two years may encourage some law schools to embrace a more professional than rather purely academic orientation that should in turn lead to enhanced skills training for students likely to be practising on their own or in small firms not capable of providing sustained training. A better trained solo or small-firm practitioner will better serve the legal needs of Americans of average means.
Keywords: Civil Justice, Pro Se, Legal Education, Bar Admission, Legal History, Clinical Education
JEL Classification: K40, K41, K49
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Estreicher, Samuel, The Roosevelt-Cardozo Way: The Case for Bar Eligibility After Two Years of Law School (November 30, 2012). New York University Journal of Legislation and Public Policy, vol. 15, issue 3; NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 12-39. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2126849