From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   The True Melissa  wrote:   
   >did atropos@mac.com deliver unto us this message:   
      
   >>If I graduate from an accredited law school, why should I have to take   
   >>an exam in order to practice law?  Doesn't my degree, all the exams I   
   >>took while I was there, and the grades I received prove I know what's   
   >>necessary? Aren't you admitting that if the bar exam is necessary to   
   >>establish my competency, then the law school's curriculum and staff   
   >>aren't sufficient, and if that's the case, why are they accredited?   
      
   >There are a few other reasons to get a JD. A law librarian, for example,   
   >has both a JD and an MLS, but isn't expected to be licensed to practice   
   >law.   
      
   >I'm not saying you're wrong overall. It probably started as just a test,   
   >and then schools sprang up to prepare people for the test, and now we   
   >have this.   
      
   This discussion inspired me to do some reading. Here are blog posts   
   written by a reference librarian at Library of Congress law library   
   about bar exams.   
      
   https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2024/02/the-history-of-the-u-s-bar-exa   
   -part-i-the-laws-gatekeeper/   
   https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2024/02/the-history-of-the-u-s-bar-exa   
   -part-ii-the-gate-openers/   
   https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2024/08/the-bar-exam-then-and-now/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)