Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye said Tuesday the state Supreme Court has no immediate plans to reconsider the passing score on the California bar exam despite a historically low success rate on the July test.

Fielding questions at her annual meeting with reporters in her San Francisco chambers, Cantil-Sakauye said the high court will wait to see the conclusions of two related studies, one assessing California law school students and the other considering what skills contemporary lawyers need and how those traits can be tested, before considering any action.

The pass rate on the July 2018 exam plunged to 40.7 percent, marking a 67-year low for the summer test.

“I understand what those numbers mean, and it's frightening,” Cantil-Sakauye said. “So we're continuing to take a review.”

More test-takers have failed the California bar exam than have passed it in each of the last five years. In the wake of those results, law school deans and some legislators last year pleaded with the Supreme Court to reduce the exam's required passing score, or cut score—the second-highest in the nation. The justices said then that they were “not persuaded” that changing the score was necessary “ at this time.”

“We know we still need to take a look and we're waiting for those [studies'] results to come in,” Cantil-Sakauye said. “And then we'll sit around this table, all seven of us, and we'll talk about these results and whether or not we should lower the exam score.”

The dismal pass rate on the July exam reignited the debate over the California test and its pass rate, which is significantly lower than those in other states. The state bar is nearing completion of a report analyzing data about law school students, their LSAT scores and other factors that may influence bar exam scores. The second job-skills analysis is expected to be completed in the summer of 2019.

Jennifer Mnookin

In an op-ed last week in the Los Angeles Times, the deans of three California law schools called on the state bar, the Legislature and the state Supreme Court to lower the cut score.

University of California, Hastings College of the Law's David Faigman, University of San Diego School of Law's Stephen C. Ferruolo and University of California, Los Angeles' Jennifer Mnookin wrote that the high exam failure rate is hurting the job prospects of otherwise competent would-be lawyers. Moreover, they wrote, there's no proof the high bar for passing the test provides greater protection to the public from bad lawyers.

“By all means, let's keep studying the issues, but that shouldn't hold us back from making the sensible decision to align the state's cut score with the rest of the nation,” the deans wrote. “Until this happens, California's high failure rate remains both sui generis and a self-inflicted wound.”

The chairman of the Assembly Judiciary Committee also called on the bar and the Supreme Court to take a “fresh look” at the bar exam's viability.

“The longer the downward trend continues, the more likely it will be that highly qualified applicants to law school are deterred from pursuing a career in the law and will opt for other career paths,” Assemblyman Mark Stone, D-Scotts Valley, said. “The trend will further perpetuate the downward trajectory of bar passage rates, negatively affect diversity of the legal profession and the bench, and ultimately hurt public access to justice.”

|

➤➤ Sign up for Ahead of the Curve to stay up on the latest innovations in legal education. Learn more.

Read more: