The body responsible for accrediting U.S. law schools is moving to further separate itself from the broader American Bar Association as political scrutiny intensifies over the group’s role in legal education.
Leaders of the ABA’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar are set to review proposals that would grant the council greater independence from the organization often referred to as the “Big ABA.” The move comes amid repeated clashes between the ABA and the administration of Donald Trump over issues such as diversity policies, judicial criticism and the association’s public advocacy.
States question ABA’s role
Council members say confusion about their operational independence has fueled efforts in some Republican-led states to weaken or replace the ABA’s accreditation authority. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court of Texas approved a plan to stop relying on ABA accreditation and instead create its own list of approved law schools.
Similar reviews are underway in Florida, Ohio and Tennessee. Florida’s top court cited the ABA’s “active political engagement” as it re-examined its accreditation rules, adding to concerns that the ABA’s broader policy positions could undermine its standing as the primary gatekeeper for legal education.
Proposals aim to streamline governance
Council leaders stress that their finances and policymaking are already separate from the larger ABA, which frequently weighs in on politically sensitive legal debates. “The Big ABA doesn’t ask us about its amicus briefs or anything else,” said council chair Daniel Thies during a November panel hosted by the Federalist Society.
According to a memo from the council’s governance committee, the proposals under consideration would provide “more autonomy over self-governance.” One plan would create a new entity dedicated solely to law school oversight, while another would limit the role of the ABA House of Delegates in reviewing accreditation rule changes, speeding up the process.
Federal scrutiny adds urgency
The push for independence follows a series of confrontations between the ABA and federal authorities. The White House previously criticized the ABA after it condemned attacks on judges, while the U.S. Justice Department scaled back the association’s role in vetting judicial nominees and restricted department attorneys from participating in ABA events.
In April, Trump directed the U.S. Department of Education to review whether the council should remain the government’s official law school accreditor, citing concerns over diversity, equity and inclusion requirements.
Experts see reputational risk
Legal scholars say the council’s effort reflects growing concern that the ABA brand itself has become a liability. “This is an attempt to separate more formally from the ABA, which is clearly in the crosshairs of the current administration and faces resistance in some states,” said Derek Muller, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame.
As debates over accreditation and political influence intensify, the council’s decisions could reshape how future lawyers are trained—and who decides which law schools meet the bar.
