Legal education news of the week (5/25)

May 25, 2026 - 14:51

This week brought several notable developments in legal education, from accreditation shakeups to strict new rules on artificial intelligence at a top law school.

Trump's Accreditation Overhaul Advances

Inside Higher Ed reports on the Trump administration's push to change accreditation rules. Key controversies include requiring accreditors to verify that public institutions follow the First Amendment. A potentially positive shift is the requirement that accreditation be "cost-effective" and avoid "unwarranted prescriptive processes." For the American Bar Association, this could mean a more formal separation between the organization and its Council on Legal Education. Some current Council members might become ineligible under the new rules.

New York State Bar Association Weighs In

The New York State Bar Association published a piece titled "The Threat to ABA Accreditation of Legal Education and Its Impact on Licensing of Lawyers." The article notes that since 1952, the ABA Council has been the sole arbiter of legal education standards nationwide. That is changing as states set their own standards or drop ABA accreditation as a bar admission requirement. The conclusion warns that law students will need to decide where they want to practice before choosing a school, and employers will face limits on recruiting based on portability of credentials.

UC Berkeley Law's Strict AI Ban

Forbes reports that UC Berkeley Law School adopted a new, strict ban on AI use by students. The policy prohibits AI for conceptualizing, outlining, drafting, revising, translating, or editing any work submitted for credit. AI is also banned in any exam situation. Students cannot upload course materials into generative AI systems. AI can only be used for research to identify sources like cases or statutes. Students remain responsible for accuracy, and citations to nonexistent sources will trigger a presumption of prohibited AI use.

The policy does not define "AI," which raises concerns. A simple Google search, grammar check in Word, or basic Westlaw query could arguably meet the definition. Even "conceptualizing" a matter is barred, which might include basic conflict checks for a journal article. Uploading a publicly available syllabus into ChatGPT would also be prohibited. While the policy allows faculty to opt out on an individual basis, it seems overbroad and potentially unenforceable or arbitrarily enforced. The requirement that students ask instructors in writing about any questionable use will likely generate many emails.

Other News

Law.com reports that NYC lateral hiring reached a three-year high, suggesting AI has not yet disrupted the legal services market. Another Law.com piece asks whether legal AI tools Harvey and Legora could be on borrowed time, citing the rise of Anthropic and criticism from a former Latham lawyer. For law schools, the value lies in teaching skills like prompt hacking that will transfer across different AI services.

Finally, Andy Hessick has been named dean of the UNC School of Law.