A National Bar Exam?

Several states are moving closer to adopting a national bar exam, according to one article. The benefits for bar examinees are "increased job mobility" and leveling the playing field for underrepresented groups when it comes to bar admission. I wonder if increased job mobility means that there will no longer be state-specific bar licenses. In other words, if you are a licensed attorney in the United States, you can practice law in any state.

This would entail a huge overhaul of state ethics rules -- such nuanced differences between states would no longer exist. This could have the effect of bringing lawyers closer together as a unified force. We could collectively lobby for more fair ethics guidelines surrounding, for example, advertising rules, since there would, presumably, be only one set in which to focus our attention. Some of you may recall the ordeal of the Connecticut attorneys whose advertising structure put them in hot water with the Connecticut bar. Both sides of the dispute tried to argue and flesh out the fine line that sometimes occurs between advertising and seeking referrals (the latter being problematic where a referral is provided to a lawyer in exchange for something of value, in violation of rule 7.2 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, a rule also adopted in the State of Virginia and many other states). With a unified bar, our collective attention as lawyers could be on one set of ethics rules.

But there would be a downside in that state bar associations would lose the wind in their sails. They would not be responsible for drafting bar exams with all of its state specific material, often geared toward common litigation in that state (for example, Gas & Oil law in Texas or Mortgage law in Massachusetts). This wouldn't benefit new lawyers who will still, most likely, be practicing where they live and must respond to the needs of the majority of their clients. State bar associations would be left to offer networking or educational events. They would have to accomplish through mandatory CLEs what they could not accomplish through the bar exam. Although many states already have mandatory CLE requirements, those requirements could become more stringent and costly for lawyers.

The potential outcomes and ramifications of a national bar exam and unified bar are endless, with both pros and cons on either side. One thing is certain is that it would bring serious changes to the structure of state bar associations, bar dues, CLE requirements and ethics rules.