What was supposed to be a cost-saving innovation in California’s bar exam process has quickly morphed into one of the most chaotic episodes in the history of legal licensure — and now, more than 200 test takers are suddenly waking up as licensed attorneys.
After a disastrous February exam marked by widespread technical failures and lawsuits, the California Bar’s Committee of Bar Examiners has approved a sweeping grading adjustment that retroactively changed 230 scores from “fail” to “pass.”
The move pushes the exam’s overall pass rate to 63%, nearly double the state’s historical average of 35% — and far beyond what anyone expected from what’s traditionally one of the nation’s toughest bar exams.
At the heart of the controversy was the hybrid format California introduced in February, combining remote and in-person testing while dropping long-standing national bar exam components. The move was supposed to save the state nearly $3.8 million annually. Instead, the result was so disastrous that resolving the crisis is now expected to cost nearly $6 million — and the legal headaches aren’t over yet.
Technical meltdowns, system crashes, and administration issues plagued the two-day test, triggering at least three lawsuits: two from test takers and one from the state bar itself against the private company that ran the exam.
In response, the bar committee adopted a series of remedies. The most consequential: for applicants whose written answers received a second read, the higher score is now being counted instead of an average. This subtle but impactful shift handed a pass to hundreds who were just shy of the threshold. And unlike some bar-related changes, this adjustment didn’t require the blessing of the California Supreme Court.
Those who are now deemed to have passed will be automatically withdrawn from the July exam, avoiding the nightmare of sitting through another potentially flawed process.
The reaction to the changes has been mixed. While the bar maintains that its goal is “fair solutions” without sacrificing public protection, some state trustees are voicing concern. A pass rate of 63% — in a state that has traditionally guarded its legal gate with one of the strictest curves in the nation — raises the question: Are we still protecting the public, or just patching the system?
And more changes may be coming. The bar plans to ask the Supreme Court to approve additional score-boosting methods, including statistical adjustments to performance test scores, and even a provisional licensure program that could allow all February examinees — even those who withdrew — to begin practicing law under supervision.