Push for federal attorneys' licensing stalls amid State Bar controversy

Amid ongoing controversy at the California Bar, several reform bills are advancing--but a proposal to fast-track licensing for departing federal attorneys is not among them.

Following the widely derided February bar exam, disgruntled test takers have urged the bar to ease licensing requirements. Yet Assembly Judiciary Committee Chair Ash Kalra, D-San Jose, has pulled a bill that would have directed the bar to create an expedited licensure program for attorneys who have worked for the federal government.

AB 1522 easily cleared the Assembly in May. But Kalra twice pulled his bill from the Senate Judiciary Committee agenda and ultimately shelved it.

"It is not moving forward this year and has been made a two-year bill," Kalra's office confirmed in an email. 

The bill is backed by the Legal Aid Association of California, which billed AB 1522 as an efficient way to bring an influx of qualified legal professionals into state courts.

"We felt that it was very likely that the federal attorneys would lose their jobs," said association Executive Director Salena Copeland. "There's a number of federal attorneys working in California that are licensed in other states, so it seemed to make a lot of sense."

According to data published last year by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, there were more than 44,000 attorneys working across various federal agencies, including more than 10,000 at the U.S. Department of Justice. President Donald Trump ran on a promise of slashing the federal workforce. Shortly after winning reelection, he announced that attorneys would be a major focus of these efforts.

After Trump took office in January, there was a wave of high-profile attorney departures. It is difficult to determine how many rank-and-file attorneys have left federal service. However, Stacy Young, a former senior trial attorney in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, told several media outlets this spring that roughly two-thirds of the attorneys in her division have left.

Copeland noted that at its meeting on Thursday, the State Bar Board of Trustees will discuss proposed changes to its registered military spouse attorney program. This program allows spouses of military personnel licensed attorneys in other states to practice in California under the supervision of another attorney.

In 2022, Congress amended the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. The changes, which require state reciprocity, allowed military service members with law degrees to also practice, removed the supervision requirements, and eliminated a five-year cap on participation. Copeland said Congress has ordered state bars across the nation to "take the training wheels off" in a way that could also increase the supply of attorneys.

Other pending bills could push the bar away from its efforts to continue the California-only bar exam. Last week, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Tom Umberg, D-Santa Ana, amended the annual bar dues bill to require the Committee of Bar Examiners to provide notice to law schools "if certain changes are made to the bar examination, including changing the functionality of testing software or materials, or if artificial intelligence is used in creating questions for or grading the bar examination."

The changes to SB 253 could create an early warning system for the kinds of changes that sparked widespread complaints about the February exam. Earlier in June, Assembly Judiciary Committee Vice-Chair Diane Dixon, R-Newport Beach, amended one of her bills to require the Committee of Bar Examiners to file a report "on whether adopting a uniform bar examination would be more efficient to administer and lower the cost of administration for the State Bar."

That report would be due next November to the lawmakers, the California Supreme Court and the Bar Board of Trustees. The Senate Judiciary Committee was scheduled to debate AB 484 on Tuesday. A committee analysis said the bill was inspired by "the utter fiasco that was the 2025 February Bar Exam." It also seeks to force the bar to reconsider adopting the NextGen Bar Exam the National Conference of Bar Examiners will roll out in 2028.

Copeland said many law school deans support a nationwide exam.

"California doesn't need to be this special unicorn," she said.