Frequently asked questions

Alternative pathways are methods of licensing new attorneys that do not rely on a traditional bar examination. Instead, alternative pathways use other methods to assess whether individuals have the minimum competence needed to practice law.

Alternative pathways use methods of assessing attorney competence that align with research exploring minimum competence in the legal profession. Examples of alternative pathways include curriculum-based pathways, supervised practice, and hybrid pathways.

• The traditional bar exam does not assess the full range of competencies defined by recent research or minimum competence to practice law. The traditional bar examination emphasizes rapid responses over reflection and deliberation. It often focuses on knowledge and skills that are not in demand in contemporary law practice; for example, extensive memorization of common-law rules that are superseded by state statute.
• Research suggests that the bar exam disadvantages candidates who are otherwise competent but struggle to demonstrate this on a high-pressure, time-limited, and primarily closed-book test. Bar exam passage is  highly correlated with a person's ability to prepare to take the test.  Candidates with higher household income are significantly more likely to pass the bar exam than their less affluent peers. People who must work during bar exam preparation, have caregiving responsibilities, or cannot afford bar exam prep courses are less likely to pass the exam. Candidates who forego commercial prep courses are significantly more likely to fail the bar exam than their peers, even after controlling for LSAT scores, law school course selection, and other factors.
• In many jurisdictions, it is difficult to find legal help due to the lack of available lawyers. Many states face a shortage of attorneys who practice in public interest and in rural areas. Alternative pathways to bar admission may help address these legal deserts, which exacerbate the justice gap.

Minimum competence refers to the knowledge, skills, and professional abilities that new lawyers must possess to practice independently and competently at a novice level. Minimum competence is difficult to define. Recent research has explored what it means to be minimally competent to practice law and has identified components that lawyers must possess to meet this standard, including foundational knowledge and analytical skills, ethics and professionalism, communication and durable skills, and legal practice skills.

Over the past 20 years, several studies have examined what knowledge, skills, and abilities lawyers must possess to effectively practice law. 

• Shultz and Zedeck (2008)
• Think Like a Client, Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (2019)
• National Conference of Bar Examiners (2020)
• Building a Better Bar, Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (2020)

Together, these studies show strong consistency in defining the key components of practice readiness. 

They span four categories:

1. Foundational knowledge & analytical skills
2. Ethics & professionalism
3. Communication & soft skills
4. Legal practice skills

The NextGen bar exam moves closer to assessing practice competencies identified in the research; however, researchers have raised questions about the extent to which the exam will address each of the four categories identified by the research above. NextGen does not address pass-rate gaps for individuals facing income, caregiving or other constraints. Nor does it strengthen pathways into rural and public interest practice.

CLEAR  is the Committee on Legal Education and Admissions Reform (CLEAR).  Established by the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) and the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA) in 2023 via Resolution 1, members of CLEAR spent more than a year examining how changes in legal education and licensure practices can help address the justice gap, while ensuring public trust and confidence in the legal profession. The Committee released a report on July 30, 2025, outlining eight key findings based on regional listening conferences, interviews and focus groups of a wide range of stakeholders, and surveys of over 4,000 judges, 4,400 practicing attorneys, and 600 law students. The work of the Committee continues via a permanent, standing committee that supports implementation of its recommendations.

As the regulators of the legal profession, state supreme courts are charged with safeguarding the protection of the public and ensuring competency of licensed attorneys. State supreme courts lead structural reforms that can help close the justice gap by advancing innovation and reform of legal education and admissions processes.

State supreme courts establish bar admission requirements, enact rules that determine who is eligible to be admitted to the bar, and set the application procedures they must follow. State supreme courts set the cut score for bar exam passage and oversee character and fitness requirements. State supreme courts also maintain post-admissions standards, including continuing legal education, and disciplinary authority over attorneys who have already been admitted to the bar.

Each state takes a varied approach. Most require some combination of the following elements:

• Bar Examination - a written standardized examination, approved by a state supreme court that is used to assess a lawyer's minimum competence to practice law and to protect the public from the harm of incompetent legal representation. Usually administered over two days. Question formats include multiple choice, short answer, essay, and practical questions.
• Other Admission Requirements – to ensure that attorneys understand ethical obligations and adhere to appropriate standards of conduct. Examples include educational requirements such as a J.D. (potentially from an ABA accredited law school), character and fitness, and sometimes state-specific requirements, such as the MPRE.

States are beginning to offer alternative pathways (also called "innovative licensure pathways"), which allow individuals to become members of the bar through a process different from the bar examination, professionalism, and character and fitness route.

There are three main categories of alternative pathways. 

1. Curriculum-based pathways (also called law school programs)
2. Supervised practice (both pre- and post-graduation)
3. Hybrid models (also called combined models), which are a mix or hybrid of the above approaches.

Alternative pathways:

1. Permit new attorneys to engage with the real practice of law, as the profession undergoes rapid change and evolution. The rise of artificial intelligence has diminished hands-on training experiences that are essential for skills development. New attorneys have fewer opportunities to hone early practice and litigation skills than they did in the past. 
2. Modernize the assessment of minimum competence, by examining a wider range of skills and capabilities that modern research has identified.
3. Can strengthen pathways into rural and public interest practice, through experiential learning and supervised practice that often takes place in these settings.
4. Address non-competence-based barriers that are present in states that use the traditional bar examination. Examples include speeding up the timeframe to bar admission from 6 months or more to immediately upon graduation, and by reducing pass-rate gaps for certain individuals.

No. Alternative pathways are no more or less rigorous than the traditional bar exam. Alternative pathways simply measure different things than the traditional bar examination. States use different methods, including objective, standardized rubrics, and independent portfolio review by bar examiners. Alternatives to the bar examination could very well be more work for a bar applicant.

Reciprocity is the ability to practice law in another state without retaking a bar examination. The question about whether attorneys who are admitted to the bar via an alternative pathway will be able to transfer this license to another state depends entirely upon the rules of the state in which they want to practice. Some states do not grant reciprocity for any out-of-state attorney. Others, offer reciprocity after an attorney has practiced law in their originating jurisdiction for a certain period — often three to five years. Other states permit motion-based admission. States that have adopted alternative pathways to licensure are considering ways to address portability and reciprocity. 

Exploring alternative pathways to bar admission brings new stakeholders into the licensing process. It requires a great deal of commitment and coordination. New processes can ultimately improve licensure and strengthen the pathway for new attorneys into law practice. States should convene groups that include legal educators, boards of bar examiners, disciplinary council, state bars, practicing attorneys, public interest and government employers, and courts.