Removing the LSAT: The Impact of Deregulating Law School Admissions Testing

The American Bar Association (ABA), founded in 1878, is the authority on legal standards, and continues to bear “a commitment to set the legal and ethical foundation for the American nation,”(ABA). The Law School Admission Test (LSAT) began in 1945 “to promote fairness in law school admission by opening the door to all qualified candidates, regardless of their undergraduate institution or area of study,” (LSAC). The LSAT’s mission was to offer equal opportunity to any applicant. Furthering this agenda, in 1960, the LSAT adopted a formal policy to racially desegregate testing centers. Then, in 2019, the LSAT became digital, expanding its access.

In November 2024, The ABA announced that the Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar (Council) had voted, and would now allow law schools to abandon the consideration of LSAT scores for law school applicants, (ABA). The ABA stated that “the council approved a variance permitting law schools to accept applicants who did not take a ‘valid and reliable admissions test,’ as now required by Standard 503,” (ABA). Now, law schools may apply for a variance that allows schools to “admit up to 100% of their students without an admissions score” (ABA). Further, the ABA added that this variance will be available for three to five years, (ABA). This replaces the current 10% maximum required by Standard 503.

The current ABA Standard 503 reads, “ADMISSION TEST. A law school shall require each applicant for admission as a first-year J.D. degree student to take a valid and reliable admission test to assist the school and the applicant in assessing the applicant’s capability of satisfactorily completing the school’s program of legal education. In making admissions decisions, a law school shall use the test results in a manner that is consistent with the current guidelines regarding proper use of the test results provided by the agency that developed the test,” (AmericanBar). Specifically, “[i]t is not a violation of this Standard for a law school to admit no more than 10% of an entering class without requiring the LSAT,” (AmericanBar).

While law schools must choose to apply for this variance, the option to fully remove any LSAT consideration marks a significant change for law school applicants. Although government regulations are often a malevolent force to limit competition; the Law School Admission Council’s (LSAC) LSAT functions to serve as a necessary realignment of thinking. The pattern of thinking associated with the LSAT is the same critical thinking that will assure students success as they enter into law school. The LSAT is a personal right of passage to profess one’s zealous declaration to pursue lawyerdom, thus relaying that passion for advocacy and upholding justice unto society. It remains essential that applicants comport with some standard, to preserve the standard of jurisprudence for posterity; thereby producing the best possible attorneys capable of diligently representing the client. Similarly, the majority of people would opt for a medical doctor who had considerable training and experience, rather than a doctor who had bypassed some standards. Lawyers should be no different.

In advocation of the ABA’s decision, journalist Julianne Hill wrote “[r]esearch has shown that white test-takers consistently score higher on the LSAT than minority test-takers,” (ABA). Hill’s referenced “research,” links to an article from a law journal in 2020 produced by the University of Maryland Law, reading “[t]his article will not explore the following reasons why the LSAT has a discriminatory impact on minority students: prior educational disparities, socioeconomic status, biased questions, family structure, and stereotype threat,” (DigitalCommons). But an absence of disparities is not a necessary condition for success in law; it comes down to one’s personal commitment. Now, law schools will consider “more established measurements of potential law student success, such as undergraduate grades or more established testing scores,” (ABA).

Clearly, data does not indicate that different races are any more or less intelligent. There are many types of individuals within any given ethnicity. The study references “decades of research [that] explain the LSAT performance gap,” (DigitalCommons). But, the “performance gap” noted from “decades of research” relies on the necessary condition that every LSAT applicant has correctly disclosed their ethnicity, not their racial identity. This is not the case.

The LSAT data, thus ignores second-generation immigrants. The U.S. Census Bureau defines immigrants as “first generation refers to those who are foreign born . . . second generation refers to those with at least one foreign-born parent . . . third-and-higher generation includes those with two U.S. native parents, (Census). Accordingly, many second generation and third-and-higher generation immigrants racially identify as “white.” But any second-generation immigrant or mixed-ethnicity who chooses to check “white” dilutes the validity of this acclaimed data. Therefore, Hill’s claim ‘that “white” people are any more intelligent than minorities’ cannot be assured. A study from Pew Research Center on second-generation immigrants noted that “[a]bout three-quarters of second-generation Hispanics (78%) and Asian Americans (72%) say that most people can get ahead if they’re willing to work hard. Moreover, there are many reasons immigrants or mixed ethnicities may choose to check “white” over another choice—reasons completely separate from the LSAT. The Pew Research Center conducted a survey on race in 2021, surveying Foreign-born Hispanics and U.S.-born Hispanics to determine their racial identity. The results indicated that “more than half of Hispanics in the survey identified their race as White (58%)” (Pew). For both of the groups “more than half say their race is White,” (Pew). Conversely, the University of Virginia’s Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service claims that “[t]he ‘white’ majority only seems to be disappearing because a growing number of white Americans are counted as minorities in many applications of census data,” (CooperCenter). In both conflicting instances census data is erroneous in that one’s personal assessment on the basis of racial identity does not guarantee to accurately indicate one’s racial ethnicity. Thus, the data that suggests low LSAT scorers are minorities is fundamentally incorrect.

God created man in His image (Gen 1:27), originating from one blood, (Acts 17:26); thus, there is only one race. The concept of a single race (human beings) is initially controversial, as there are many different diverse cultures and socioeconomic circumstances. All people originating from one unnamed race means that it is physically impossible that any culture is more intelligent than another culture. The LSAT uses logical reasoning and reading comprehension. There is no reason that any member of any race cannot learn basic logic or reading. Initially-low-scoring applicants of any race, ought to reject any predetermined intellectual superiority of “white” people claimed by Hill and other “researchers,” and instead commit themselves to improving their score through regular studying and routine practice tests. Disparities affect all human beings; skin pigment does not provide any intellectual advantage. The ABA’s newly imposed variance does not supplant this natural Biblical law. Human beings of all races are created in the image of God. As it is written in the New Testament, by Luke the Physician, “[b]eing then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man,” (Acts 17:29; ESV). Race is, thus, a human construct based on ethnicity that divides people through worldly standards of opinion.

In sum, the ABA’s vote to remove the LSAT requirement was made with benevolent intentions, attempting to expand access to more minorities. Yet, decentralization of standardized testing through a temporary variance is a double edge sword, and the removal of the LSAT may not produce this effect. On one hand, law schools can now make exceptions for all students, including zealous splitters who receive a low LSAT score, no matter their ethnicity; granting them acceptance. On the other hand, the ABA has now formalized an action based on the assumption that minorities are less apt to understand logical reasoning, comprehend reading, discern various points of view, locate an argument, or understand the main point of a passage. While this assumption is backed by data, its accuracy cannot be assured. The ABA’s imposed variance is fallacious in that it generalizes test-takers based on race. But any second-generation immigrant currently studying for the LSAT needn’t be deterred by the ABA’s decision to deregulate law school applications. Instead, the ABA’s vote to offer a total variance to participating law schools is a temporary shift in standardization—one that does not mandate compliance. Applicants can still take the LSAT, and schools can still opt to consider their scores. Thus, the LSAT will remain; newly imposed variance does not signal a permanent departure.

Bibliography

ABAJournal. (Accessed on December 18th, 2024). Aspiring law students could skip standardized admissions testing under new ABA variance. https://www.abajournal.com/web/article/aspiring-law-students-could-skip-a-standardized-testing-under-new-aba-variance.

Census. (Accessed on December 18th, 2024). Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Foreign-Born. https://www.census.gov/topics/population/foreign-born/about/faq.html

CooperCenter. (Accessed on December 18th, 2024). The Misleading Narrative of a Disappearing White Majority | Cooper Center. https://www.coopercenter.org/research/misleading-narrative-disappearing-white-majority.

DigitalCommons. (Accessed on December 18th, 2024). https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1336&context=rrgc

DigitalCommons. (Accessed on December 18th, 2024). https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/rrgc/vol19/iss2/

PewResearch. (Accessed on December 18th, 2024). Racial identity of Latinos: How we measured it | Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/race-and-ethnicity/2021/11/04/measuring-the-racial-identity-of-latinos/

PewResearch. (Accessed on December 18th, 2024). Second-Generation Americans | Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/02/07/second-generation-americans/.