Update:

The American Bar Association (ABA) house of delegates rejected the elimination of the LSAT (or GRE option) as a requirement for law school admissions at its February 2023 meeting. The rationale for maintaining the entrance exam was the need to ensure that students admitted to law school are ready to succeed. While the ABA heard concerns about the LSAT as a barrier to admission, it also heard counter-concerns that its elimination would exacerbate the problems by replacing the LAST with more biased, alternative admission criteria (like reliance on grade point average). The issue is likely to be revisited in the future. But for now, aspiring law students must take either the LSAT or GRE (if authorized by the law school) as an entrance exam requirement of admission. 

Law School Trends to Watch – the End of the LSAT Requirement?

The Law School Admission Test (LSAT)—an exam long-required for admission into law school—may soon be phased out. The American Bar Association’s accrediting council, comprised of lawyers, law school faculty and admissions professionals, voted 15-1 on November 18, 2022, to drop the requirement that law school applicants take the standardized admission exam effective for the Fall 2025 admission cycle. The decision still needs to be finally ratified by the full ABA delegation at its February 2024 meeting, and individual law schools would be allowed to still require the LSAT (or some form of admission test like the GRE) as a requirement for admission. It is not clear yet just how many law schools are likely to make the LSAT optional only as part of their admissions requirements.

Why the Change?

The LSAT does not test content or legal knowledge but rather is a skills-based exam that test logical reasoning, reading comprehension, and writing abilities. Performance on the LSAT exam has been correlated with law school success—and thus, has been viewed as a strong measure of aptitude for the legal profession and a predictor for law school and bar-passage success. Attending law school is expensive and graduates are not allowed to practice law without passing state bar (or licensure) examinations upon graduation. The LSAT, in other words, was a gatekeeping mechanism to ensure that students entering law school had the requisite ability and skills to succeed in the legal profession.

The gatekeeping function of the LSAT, however, also served as a barrier for many aspiring law students. Studying for the exam is time consuming and commercial preparation courses are costly. For some prospective law students, the cost of the entrance exam and credential assembly services provided by the Law School Admission Council (LSAC)—the nonprofit corporation which administers the LSAT—were prohibitive. The LSAC provided fee waivers, but the application criteria were stringent and the process less than easy.

Moreover, there was mounting evidence that the LSAT unfairly discriminated against poor and minority students who tend to perform more poorly on the exam. While law schools consider a range of admissions factors, including grade point averages, letters of recommendation, and extra or co-curricular experiences—the LSAT score plays a disproportionate role in admissions decisions, particularly at the higher ranked law schools.

Disabled students also saw the LSAT as posing barriers. While students with disabilities can qualify for accommodations when taking the LSAT, the use of accommodations is noted in their application, discouraging some students from utilizing legitimate accommodations. Moreover, the logic games—a section on the exam with which many students most struggle—typically require the use of schematics and visualizations to solve more readily—a factor that substantially impacted those with vision impairment. Because of this, the LSAC already had plans to revise or phase out the logic games as part of a legal settlement following a challenge under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Michigan Person with Disabilities Civil Right Act.

 
And then along came the COVID pandemic which disrupted the traditional in-person, limited administration of the LSAT. The pandemic required the LSAC to move to a more-frequently offered LSAT-flex option wherein the exam could be taken online under monitored conditions. The transition to online-testing was often problematic, resulting in frequent complaints from students over proctoring, privacy, and technology issues. The transition back to in-person testing and loss of administrative flexibility has been equally challenging.

Another blow to the LSAT was dealt when an increasing number of law schools announced that they would accept the Graduate Records Examination (GRE) in place of the LSAT. The switch to the GRE option allowed law schools to diversify their applicant pool and tap into the well of students who were undecided between law and graduate school as a potential career pathway. The ABA’s formal approval of the GRE option as consistent with ABA standards opened the floodgates, so that 100+ of the 185 or so accredited law schools now accept the GRE in place of the LSAT.

Is LSAT-optional Ultimately a Good Thing?

Not everyone is convinced that elimination of the LSAT as an admission requirement is ultimately a good thing. Indeed, many pre-law advisor associations were split on their recommendations when asked by the ABA for comment on the proposed change. Why are some law school professionals concerned? First, we can anticipate that the elimination of the LSAT as a requirement is likely to increase the number of applications submitted in the admission cycle. That means that that law schools may have a more difficult task in admissions decisions, and are losing a data-point that did have predictive value of law school success. The concern is that law schools may admit more students who are not fully prepared for the rigors of law school or the profession.

There are also concerns about the overall saturation of the legal market in terms of the number of law schools and the number of graduates that law schools collectively produce. The concern is that the higher-ranked law schools will continue to require the LSAT while struggling institutions may go the optional route, thereby unintentionally exacerbating race, gender, and economic inequalities that the elimination of the LSAT requirement was intended to alleviate. While admissions might be more readily gained under LSAT-optional criteria, the advantage may be offset by the increased number of applicants and the diminished value or reputation of the institution if graduation completion, bar passage, or employment rates fall. Some critics of the LSAT-optional decision fear that waiving the exam as a gatekeeping mechanism may lead more students to amass on law school debt for a degree that they cannot successfully complete.

What Does this Change Mean For You?

Many students will undoubtedly rejoice at the prospect of the LSAT being eliminated as a required admission criterion for law school. But there is an argument that taking the LSAT exam provides an applicant with a significant advantage relative to those relying on GRE scores or no entrance exam at all. Admissions committees, in other words, may still favor students who take and perform well on the LSAT. This means that, as a prospective law student, you will want to carefully consider whether the time and expense of taking the LSAT, the GRE, or no admissions test at all, makes the most sense for your situation. That is, will the time and effort of taking the LSAT increase the probability of your admission to a law school of choice?

It also means that you should be even more thoughtful about where you apply and should not let the test requirement be the sole determinant of your choices. That is, applying to an LSAT optional as opposed to an LSAT-is-still-required-by-this-institution law school may have ramifications for your chances at acceptance and the overall value of your law degree. In some cases, having a strong grade point average, resume, and great letters, may be strengthened (or mitigated) by your decision to take the LSAT. One thing that is unlikely to change—if you do take the LSAT exam, the law schools to which you apply will be able to see your scores. So, it is still the case that you should not take the LSAT without adequate preparation. And you should plan on taking it only once—that is, never take the LSAT cold or treat the actual exam like a practice exam.

It is important to remember that getting into law school is only the first step to a successful legal career. Once admitted you also need to graduate and graduate with a record that is likely to ensure your success in the profession. That means, you need the skill sets to do well in courses, earn decent grades in law school, and be adequately prepared to pass the state bar exam. For this reason, your undergraduate preparation and major are likely to be more important than ever in insuring that you have the requisite writing, reading, and logic skills beyond foundational content knowledge or general familiarity with legal system that are necessary.

Finally, it should be cautioned that just because the application process might seem less daunting without the dreaded LSAT, the decision to attend law school should not be made lightly or as a “let’s just see,” or default because you do not know what else to do upon graduation option. While law degrees are often advertised as versatile degrees with which one can do “most anything,” attending law school is a major commitment of time and money that is primarily intended to prepare one for the practice of law. As you think about career pathways, take time to explore what the preferred terminal degree is for the profession of your interest.