More good news for Wisconsin law school students and graduates: the Wisconsin Supreme Court decided to keep the diploma privilege on Monday. We have kept you posted on this issue, but for a quick refresher, Wisconsin’s “diploma privilege,” allows graduates of ABA accredited Wisconsin law schools that teach Wisconsin law to practice in Wisconsin without sitting for the bar exam. Despite allegations that the rule discriminates against out-of-state students who want to practice in Wisconsin, the Supreme Court justices decided to keep the practice and rejected a proposal from a group of lawyers to allow all law school graduates to skip the bar exam or require that everyone must sit for it. For more information, check out the full article, High Court Keeps ‘Diploma Privilege’ Rule. In addition, the State Bar of Wisconsin’s Board of Governors has officially declared its opposition of attempts to eliminate Wisconsin’s diploma privilege. To read more, see BOG opposes diploma privilege petition from the Wisconsin Law Journal.
There’s good news for Wisconsin law school students and graduates, who get to keep their “free pass.” The U.S. District Court dismissed the case that challenged Wisconsin’s “diploma privilege,” which allows graduates of ABA accredited Wisconsin law schools that teach Wisconsin law to practice in Wisconsin without sitting for the bar exam. Wisconsin agreed to pay the plaintiff, Corrine Wiesmueller, $7,500. She alleged that since the practice of law falls under interstate commerce, Wisconsin’s diploma privilege discriminates against out-of-state students who what to practice in Wisconsin and must sit for and pass the bar exam.
Wisconsin’s diploma privilege seems like a mutually beneficial arrangement for Wisconsin law students and the state’s interests. State law school graduates don’t have to deal with the time, stress, and expense of taking the bar exam. On the other hand, the state of Wisconsin has an incentive to offer some of its best students to stay and practice law in the state and it doesn’t have to devote as much resources to its bar exam process. What about out-of-state students who want to practice in Wisconsin – are they disadvantaged? Do you think other states should adopt a diploma privilege? Would you be more tempted to go to law school in a particular state with a diploma privilege?
Personally, if I knew I wanted to go into practice when I started law school and states with major cities and a healthy job market offered a diploma privilege, I would definitely take that into consideration!
Here’s a link to the original article.
As we previously reported, Wisconsin’s diploma privilege is currently under attack in the federal courts. The diploma privilege, which allows graduates of Wisconsin’s two law schools to practice in the state without passing the bar exam, is alleged to be in violation of the Interstate Commerce Clause because graduates of Wisconsin schools are treated differently from graduates of schools in other states. The petitioners ask for summary judgment declaring that the privilege violates the clause; the obvious remedy would be to discontinue the privilege for all students.
Now, the privilege is under attack from another source: instead of requesting that it be abolished, Steven Levine, a past State Bar of Wisconsin president, filed a petition with the Wisconsin Supreme Court asking that that the privilege be extended to graduates of all law schools.
In 2007, the ABA reported that Levine has long been a critic of the diploma privilege, and has gone so far as to compare it to the “separate but equal” doctrine. This seems like a difficult argument to make; certainly in-state versus out-of-state law students would receive a lower level of scrutiny than did black versus white school children. Opponents would be hard-pressed to argue that the diploma privilege bears no rational relationship to ensuring the competency of Wisconsin lawyers—an argument based on the Commerce Clause may fare better. But, more importantly, it seems that Levine—as a former president of the state bar—would have reasons other than fairness for opposing the diploma privilege. If he feels that Wisconsin school graduates are less competent for lack of the bar exam, then why would he want to see the diploma privilege extended to all graduates? Conversely, if he feels that out-of-state students are less competent because of taking the bar exam, then we have a different problem altogether.
While it’s true that extending the privilege to all students would level the proverbial playing field, it’s hard to imagine that it would be the best option for the Wisconsin Bar. So is Levine’s argument valid, or is he simply stirring the pot?
