There’s understandable sympathy for the 645 law school graduates who gathered in Yakima last month, prepared to take the Washington state bar exam but sidelined by a last-minute computer glitch. Graduates spend months studying for this high-stakes test, not to mention enduring the pressure and paying hundreds of dollars as well.
All of these factors are significant but do not rise to the level of ditching the test for this unfortunate group as a requirement to becoming a lawyer in Washington.
But that is what Washington’s law schools have asked the state Supreme Court to do: grant the applicants diploma privilege, a status that would allow them to become licensed in Washington without having to take the exam. The court should do what’s best for the entire state and reject the law schools’ requests.
The Supreme Court has granted diploma privilege before, such as in 2020 when COVID-19 interrupted millions of lives. The court then granted diploma privilege to 567 applicants. Some proponents of this latest request cite the pandemic as good reason to do the same now.
The computer snafu was unfortunate, much like other setbacks people encounter in their careers. And as lawyers, they will endure months- and even yearslong court delays throughout their careers.
Other professions require state exams in order to become licensed to practice. Nurses, for example, must past the National Council Licensure Examination that certifies them as competent to perform their jobs at the highest level, unassisted. Imagine allowing 600 nursing school graduates to tend to patients without a license.
Granted, lawyers aren’t charged with saving lives, but they do greatly affect lives, livelihoods and a person’s rights and freedom.
Changes have been made recently to the bar exam nationally. This year is the first time Washington made the NextGen test available as an option for graduates. Some in the legal field criticized the change as an attempt to “water down” the bar exam. The Times editorial board agreed with the changes proposed by a task force as a way to address different learning styles.
Seattle University Law School Dean Anthony Varona, who is also co-chair of the task force that recommended the NextGen test, recently wrote that “the only equitable remedy in this very difficult situation is for the Washington Supreme Court to grant licensure through diploma privilege.”
Automatically passing the thwarted test-takers because the test couldn’t be administered properly on its first attempt isn’t equity; allowing them more time to again prepare and take the test without any additional obstacles is fair and equitable, and would avoid any cloud over them throughout their careers for not meeting this time-honored requirement.
In 2024, when the NextGen test was announced, Varona told the editorial board, “Different human beings learn differently and show their competency in different ways. So what we wanted to do is to build into the licensure regime that kind of choice of pathway while ensuring we were retaining rigor and we were protecting the public.”
Minus a global pandemic or any other situation that could not have been avoided and immediately rectified, the court should not grant bar numbers to lawyers who don’t have the credentials that set them apart as bona fide members of the field of law. As Varona said about the NextGen test, the state should ensure rigor and protect the public.
Editor’s note: This editorial has been updated to correct the name of the organization that made the request for diploma privilege. The requests came from law schools, not the Washington State Bar Association.
