An act to add Section 6046.9 to the Business and Professions Code, relating to attorneys.
Summary
AB 2109 would require California’s Committee of Bar Examiners to stop using the California bar examination and, beginning January 1, 2029, replace it with the National Conference of Bar Examiners’ Uniform Bar Examination, or any successor or replacement exam. The bill adds a new section to the Business and Professions Code and directly changes the licensing pathway for applicants seeking admission to practice law in California.
The measure is framed as a structural change to attorney licensure rather than a funding or enforcement bill. It would align California with the national bar exam format used in many other jurisdictions, potentially affecting how law graduates prepare for admission, how the State Bar administers the exam, and how attorneys may qualify for portability across states.
Impact
AB 2109 would amend the State Bar Act by mandating a specific replacement for the California bar exam on a fixed date, limiting the examining committee’s discretion over the form of the licensing exam. It would affect the State Bar of California, the Committee of Bar Examiners, law school graduates, bar-prep providers, and applicants seeking admission to practice law in California. The bill does not appropriate funds, create a local program, or directly alter attorney discipline or practice rules beyond the exam requirement.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests broad support at the committee level, with a 12-0 do pass vote. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no recorded debate to indicate organized opposition or detailed concerns in the materials supplied. Overall, the bill appears to have been received favorably as a modernization and standardization measure.
Contention
The main policy question underlying AB 2109 is whether California should retain its state-specific bar exam or move to the Uniform Bar Examination. Supporters would likely view the change as improving efficiency, reducing administrative costs, and making licensure more portable for attorneys. Potential concerns, though not documented in the provided transcripts, would center on preserving California-specific testing standards, the impact on exam preparation and transition timing, and whether a national exam adequately reflects California law and practice.