« on: June 01, 2015, 03:04:01 PM »
I think most of the posters on this thread are missing the point-
the Bar is pure protectionism. Now that we have licenses, we should want to keep the pass rates as low as possible. Barrier to entry and all that.
Instead of asking how to make the CalBar easier, you should be asking how to make it much, much harder. After all, three days is nothing. Why not five?
I agree that protectionism is a key function of the bar. The point is certainly not lost on me. The thing is, I'm generally against protectionism. As a consumer, I love competition in every single other field. Why be blatantly hypocritical and argue that the laws of supply and demand shouldn't apply to lawyers? If we're going to argue that the public should only have such limited access to lawyers as we see fit to give them, should the public in turn have a say in limiting the lawyers fees?
Chemerinsky isn't arguing that the bar should be dumbed down, he's arguing for the adoption of the Uniform Bar Exam. As far as I know, the UBE is still a demanding test and requires brains and skill to pass. The primary benefits would be greater economic and geographical mobility for lawyers, and yes, greater choices for the consumer.