Lawyered by luck? Hundreds moved from fail to pass in California bar exam mix-up
California bar exam grading error moves hundreds from fail to pass. (AI Image)
California bar exam result 2025:
More than 200 candidates who initially failed the California bar exam in February 2025 have now been notified that they passed after a major grading recalibration.
This unexpected reversal pushes California's overall pass rate to a record 63 percent, nearly doubling the state's long-term average of 35 percent.
The sudden change has sparked widespread debate about fairness, competence, and the integrity of the legal profession.
The February bar exam was plagued by technical glitches and lawsuits, leading to a wave of public outrage. The State Bar responded by adopting a new grading method, giving test-takers the benefit of the doubt by awarding the higher score for each written question rather than averaging multiple readings.
As a result, 230 candidates who were on the borderline crossed the passing threshold, dramatically altering the final results.
Historic pass rate surge amid controversy
The revised pass rate of 63 percent is unprecedented for California, known for its traditionally difficult bar exam. According to the USA Herald, a spokesperson for the State Bar said, 'This recalibration was necessary to address the flaws in the original grading process and ensure fairness to all applicants.'
However, critics have expressed concern that the change may compromise the quality of legal professionals entering the field.
Legal experts and bar exam critics warn that the remedy could flood the market with underprepared lawyers, undermining public trust. As reported by the USA Herald, some allege a pattern of 'lowering the bar' influenced by DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) pressures, which has intensified calls for increased oversight and legal challenges.
Supreme court weighs in amid mounting pressure
Amid ongoing litigation, the California Supreme Court is considering granting itself broad new authority over the State Bar's exam process. Another proposal under review would allow all February test-takers, including some who did not complete the exam, to practice law provisionally. The USA Herald reports that this unprecedented move reflects the extraordinary nature of the current crisis.
For the 230 candidates whose status shifted from fail to pass, the decision is life-changing. But for the legal community and the public, the grading recalibration raises serious questions about the balance between fairness, competence, and the profession's future. The debate over California's bar exam shake-up is far from over.
Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
8 hours ago
- Business Standard
US SC ruling opens door to reverse discrimination lawsuits over DEI
The US Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously ruled that majority-group employees—such as white or straight workers—must not face a higher burden of proof when suing for workplace discrimination. The verdict significantly alters how reverse discrimination claims will be handled across American workplaces, according to The New York Times. The case was brought by Marlean Ames, a straight woman who sued the Ohio Department of Youth Services after being passed over for promotions and later demoted. These positions, she said, went to gay colleagues with less experience or fewer qualifications. Lower courts had dismissed her lawsuit, citing a precedent that required majority-group plaintiffs to demonstrate 'background circumstances' showing that their employer was capable of discriminating against members of a traditionally dominant group. The Supreme Court rejected that standard. Title VII protects all equally Writing for the court, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson stated that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 'draws no distinctions between majority-group plaintiffs and minority-group plaintiffs.' The law protects every 'individual' equally, she wrote, regardless of identity. The ruling eliminates the need for additional evidence in such cases and sets a uniform standard across US courts. Until now, nearly half of federal appeals courts imposed stricter requirements on majority-group plaintiffs. Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, issued a concurring opinion questioning the logic of defining 'majority groups' in a diverse society. He called the idea that only 'unusual employers' discriminate against dominant groups 'nonsensical.' Thomas specifically pointed to widespread corporate and institutional use of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, which, he argued, may introduce bias against majority-group employees. Legal tide against DEI The decision comes amid growing political and legal scrutiny of DEI programmes in the US. It follows the Court's 2023 ruling that struck down race-based college admissions. Since returning to office, former President Donald Trump has taken aggressive steps to dismantle DEI efforts across federal agencies, schools, and corporations. Executive orders from his administration have revoked DEI requirements for contractors, ended related federal training programmes, and targeted officials involved in such initiatives. Universities and companies have responded by cancelling DEI events and cutting funding in anticipation of legal and political challenges. The Supreme Court's latest ruling could embolden more majority-group workers to file discrimination claims, creating new challenges for DEI compliance and implementation.
Hindustan Times
8 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Global LGBTQ advocates gather 'on Trump's doorstep' at World Pride despite travel anxiety
WASHINGTON — Days before she was to deliver opening remarks to World Pride's human rights conference in Washington, Phyll Opoku-Gyimah, the co-founder of UK Black Pride, said she was denied entry to the United States after her visa was revoked due to her travels to Cuba earlier this year. Opoku-Gyimah, widely known as Lady Phyll, said she applied immediately for a nonimmigrant visa. The earliest date she was given: September. 'I've called. I've written. I've pleaded,' she said over a video livestream. 'And the answer was a cold, bureaucratic 'No.'' Many LGBTQ travelers have expressed concerns or decided to skip World Pride due to anxieties about safety, border policies and a hostile political climate. Yet cross-national strategizing has still been central to the gathering as international attendees echoed that they wanted to send a clear message of opposition to U.S. officials with their presence. 'This is World Pride on Trump's doorstep," said Yasmin Benoit, a British model and asexual activist. "And that's all the more reason to be here. We want to show the U.S. that there's a lot of eyes on what's happening here.' World Pride gathers LGBTQ advocates from around the globe and has taken place most recently in Australia, Sweden and Denmark. This year, which marks the 50th anniversary of Washington's Pride festival, is the first time the city is hosting the gathering. Yet for many, the global celebration has been complicated by President Donald Trump's policies targeting transgender people and diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. Trump, a Republican, has said that whether a person is a man or woman is determined by that person's biological characteristics at birth, and about two-thirds of U.S. adults agree with him, according to an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll. He has denounced DEI policies as a form of discrimination that threatens merit-based decision-making. Several countries, including Denmark, Finland and Germany, issued cautions for LGBTQ travelers visiting the U.S. for World Pride, culminates in a closing festival this weekend with a parade, a rally and concerts. Capital Pride Alliance, which organized World Pride D.C., included an advisory for transgender and nonbinary international travelers alongside security protocols. Egale Canada, one of the country's largest LGBTQ advocacy organizations, announced in February that its members would not attend any events in the U.S. through June, including World Pride. It cited concerns for transgender and nonbinary staff members. 'I didn't feel it was safe to have our staff crossing into the U.S. with the current hostilities, through legislation and rhetoric,' said Helen Kennedy, the organization's executive director. The African Human Rights Coalition, meanwhile, called for a boycott of World Pride in Washington 'because the event is being held in a venue ... governed now by an antagonistic fascist regime which presents distinct dangers to foreign LGBTQI attendees,' the organization said in a statement. Jessica Stern, a former U.S. special envoy for the human rights of LGBTQI people, acknowledged that many potential attendees decided to skip World Pride as they 'wonder if they'll be safe in U.S. airports and on our streets.' 'Thank you for coming to the U.S. amid a time of great uncertainty,' she said in her opening remarks before an emcee later instructed attendees to shout out where they had traveled from. Answers included New Zealand, Sweden, England, Zimbabwe, Australia, Nigeria and India. As an increasing number of international travelers have expressed anxiety, John Tanzella, president of the International LGBTQ Travel Association, said he has assured people that Washington is an inclusive city but advised them to stay informed of local policies, connect with LGBTQ organizations on the ground and book with trusted businesses with track records of inclusion. The organization is working on guidance for transgender and nonbinary travelers in the U.S. for the World Pride parade and march. 'Safety always comes up, especially in the current climate, but there's also a deep desire to bring our community together,' he said. 'For many, World Pride in Washington, D.C., feels extra meaningful given its location. There's caution, yes, but above all, people want to show up, be seen and be heard.' Benoit's friends had warned her not to travel to the U.S., and her anxiety was mounting in the days leading up to her flight. She planned to avoid telling customs agents she was traveling for World Pride. But when that information surfaced, she said agents took her passport and asked her questions for an additional hour about where she was staying and for how long. Still, she said, it is more important now than ever to 'send a message to Trump in his own backyard" and to embrace the global nature of World Pride. 'The ability to bring people together to understand how interconnected everything is, how this harmful rhetoric may bleed over to other countries, is really important," she said. 'And it's an opportunity to access resources and people you may not have access to back home.' Essy Adhiambo, executive director of the Initiative for Equality and Non Discrimination, deleted all the social media apps on her phone before her 35-hour journey from Mombasa, Kenya, worrying that her phone might be searched. Still, Adhiambo said being visible as an international LGBTQ community is powerful amid threats to the community across the globe. 'We must continue to protest in the current context we are in," she said. "Those of us who are able to make this journey have to hold space for those who could not, especially our trans siblings. We want to amplify our message on the land of the people who are supporting homophobia.' Nikki Phinyapincha, co-founder of Trans Pride Thailand, set off on a 25-hour journey to World Pride from Thailand after issuing a travel advisory from her organization for Thai LGBTQ people. 'The political climate and instability is not new, but it makes it more important that we are here," she said. "We need to keep doing this work, strategizing together and being adaptive.' For people from marginalized communities, Opoku-Gyimah said, 'just traveling to speak truth can often feel like a mountain.' 'We have to prove our worth at every border, every checkpoint,' she said. Yet Opoku-Gyimah applauded the international nature of World Pride amid "connected, coordinated ... and increasingly violent" attacks against LGBTQ communities across the globe. She said the U.S. government's rolling back of DEI initiatives, protections for the transgender community and reproductive rights have had ripple effects abroad, including in the U.K. 'When the U.S. sneezes," she said, 'other parts of the world catch that cold.'
Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
Supreme Court Expands Reverse Discrimination Claims for Majority Groups, ET LegalWorld
A unanimous Supreme Court made it easier Thursday to bring lawsuits over so-called reverse discrimination, siding with an Ohio woman who claims she didn't get a job and then was demoted because she is straight. The justices' decision affects lawsuits in 20 states and the District of Columbia where, until now, courts had set a higher bar when members of a majority group, including those who are white and heterosexual, sue for discrimination under federal law. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote for the court that federal civil rights law draws no distinction between members of majority and minority groups. Advt Advt Join the community of 2M+ industry professionals Subscribe to our newsletter to get latest insights & analysis. Download ETLegalWorld App Get Realtime updates Save your favourite articles Scan to download App "By establishing the same protections for every 'individual' - without regard to that individual's membership in a minority or majority group - Congress left no room for courts to impose special requirements on majority-group plaintiffs alone," Jackson court ruled in an appeal from Marlean Ames, who has worked for the Ohio Department of Youth Services for more than 20 he joined Jackson's opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas noted in a separate opinion that some of the country's "largest and most prestigious employers have overtly discriminated against those they deem members of so-called majority groups."Thomas, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, cited a brief filed by America First Legal, a conservative group founded by Trump aide Stephen Miller, to assert that "American employers have long been 'obsessed' with 'diversity, equity, and inclusion' initiatives and affirmative action plans."Two years ago, the court's conservative majority outlawed consideration of race in university admissions. Since taking office in January, President Donald Trump has ordered an end to DEI policies in the federal government and has sought to end government support for DEI programs elsewhere. Some of the new administration's anti-DEI initiatives have been temporarily blocked in federal opinion makes no mention of DEI. Instead, she focused on Ames' contention that she was passed over for a promotion and then demoted because she is heterosexual. Both the job she sought and the one she had held were given to LGBTQ people. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars sex discrimination in the workplace. A trial court and the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against 6th circuit is among the courts that had required an additional requirement for people like Ames, showing "background circumstances" that might include that LGBTQ people made the decisions affecting Ames or statistical evidence of a pattern of discrimination against members of the majority appeals court noted that Ames didn't provide any such Jackson wrote that "this additional 'background circumstances' requirement is not consistent with Title VII's text or our case law construing the statute."
