ABA Ponders Accrediting Offshore Law Schools

In August, 2008 the ABA issued a landmark ethics opinion allowing the outsourcing of U.S. legal work.

This August, the ABA is pondering whether to accredit offshore law schools that follow the U.S. system. Because apparently 200 accredited U.S. law schools just isn’t enough. The National Law Journal reports:

The American Bar Association is already tasked by the U.S. Department of Education to accredit U.S. law schools. Now an ABA committee has recommended that it should seriously consider expanding that power to overseas law schools that follow the U.S. model.

In June, the ABA’s Council of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar appointed the committee of law professors, attorneys, judges and law deans to examine whether foreign law schools should be allowed to seek ABA accreditation. The council is scheduled to consider the committee’s recommendations in December.

Globalization, baby! Catch the epidemic fever…

Over the course of this recession, the ABA has shown a shocking inability to regulate the quality of U.S. legal education. When U.S. legal employers are talking about the worthlessness of U.S. law graduates, it makes one wonder what, if anything, the ABA can contribute to the discussion of how to train attorneys.

But the ABA has laid out a reasonable list of pros and cons in terms of extending their regulatory reach offshore:

Sponsored

The committee cited an earlier ABA report’s conclusion that state supreme courts and bar associations are under more pressure than ever to make decisions about admitting foreign lawyers as the legal profession becomes more globalized…

“If we believe that the American legal education model is the ‘gold standard’ for legal education world-wide and that well-trained lawyers are critical to the global economy, then a willingness to expand accreditation to schools embracing the American model is an appropriate way to improve the training of lawyers globally and contribute to the modern economy and the international legal profession,” the panel said.

Here’s another big potential “pro” to expanding accreditation: it could drive down the cost of legal education in America. Don’t get me wrong — the ABA has thus far been impotent when it comes to doing anything about the rising cost of law school. And perhaps the organization has entirely pedagogical goals for expanding its reach offshore. But one thing that seems clear is that the demand for legal education (demand from people who may or may not have ever met a rational motive) far outstrips supply. This allows American law schools to charge pretty much whatever they want.

And while I don’t think the newly formed and still unaccredited Umass Law would be worried about losing students to some random law school in London or Paris, Harvard might. Columbia might. Especially if these new offshore law schools are well respected — Sorbonne Law, anyone? — and significantly less expensive than the top U.S. Schools. If prices come down at the top, maybe that will force prices down at the bottom.

That’s a lot of “ifs” and assumptions. But I’m trying to work with what the committee is considering, because the downside of offshore accreditation is so obvious and terrible it makes one cry:

The committee cited potential downsides to accrediting international law schools, however. For one thing, it might expand practice opportunities for foreign-trained attorneys with no reciprocal benefit for graduates of U.S. law schools. There also could be political fallout if the ABA failed to accredit a government-sponsored law school. The committee said that the cost of the overseas accreditation would be born by the foreign law schools, not the ABA.

Sponsored

I have no hope that a young German or Korean or Nigerian would show any more knowledge of the realities of the U.S. legal market than a young American. You can almost feel the flood of newly “accredited” attorneys sitting for bar exams and further saturating the already completely underwater market for U.S. legal jobs.

And don’t discount the political problems. The last thing we want is for the ABA — again, not an organization renowned for its spine — being forced into accrediting some random law school in Saudi Arabia because we’re trying to get an oil deal. We don’t want law schools from Canada to Greenland being embraced by the U.S. legal market, while law schools in Mexico and Brazil get shut out, further widening our North/South economic divisions. The potential for a total political clusterf**k is high.

Luckily, the ABA is still just thinking about this. Now would be a good time for people with strong opinions to weigh in. Take our reader poll below and tell us what you think:

Do you think the ABA should accredit offshore law schools?

  • No. Dey tuk er jerbs!!! (83%, 635 Votes)
  • Yes. Oui. Ja. Sí. (17%, 131 Votes)

Total Voters: 766

Loading ... Loading ...

Panel recommends the ABA accredit overseas law schools [National Law Journal]

Earlier: Extinction Level Event: Outsourcing
Corporate General Counsel Puts Fear of God into Legal Educators