Chuck Bryant

So more states are kind of getting on board with this.

California last year actually rejected a proposal to become more like Oregon with those apprenticeship hours, even though the state bar of California's board of trustees said, we think this is a good idea.

The state Supreme Court said, no, no, no.

But coming around the corner now, we have the next gen bar exam, right?

Yeah, the NCBE is like, everybody settle down.

So starting in 2018, they're like, we're going to change this a little bit.

The tests are going to be shorter.

We're going to make it so it's possible to take it remotely if need be.

And then it's just going to be a little different where...

I think it's a little more essay heavy than the original test, but they're also carving out some stuff that they're not going to test on like family law and that kind of thing.

So it's a little leaner, meaner kind of bar exam that they're coming up with.

Two things that I saw that are worth mentioning real quick.

If you do away with the bar exam, there's a couple of benefits to that.

One is that it puts the onus on law schools themselves to graduate competent lawyers.

Right now, there are some law schools that are considered diploma mills.

Because as long as 75% of your graduates pass the bar within two years, like you stay accredited and you can make a lot of money off that other 25%.

That's one thing that would happen.

Another one is that legal fees would probably come down.

Because one of the functions of gatekeeping that the bar exam does is it artificially keeps the supply of lawyers low, which artificially inflates the fees associated with lawyers, too.

Pretty neat.