ILNews

ADA violations in bar admission catch attention of Indiana BLE

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana State Board of Law Examiners is taking notice of a finding by the U.S. Department of Justice that Louisiana’s treatment of bar applicants with mental health conditions was in violation of the American with Disabilities Act.

Justice Department officials found that the Louisiana attorney licensure system’s practice of evaluating and treating bar applicants who have mental health disabilities was discriminatory. In particular, the DOJ concluded that the requirement that applicants to the state bar answer the mental health questions included on the National Conference of Bar Examiners Request for Preparation of a Character Report tended to screen out individuals based on stereotypes and assumptions.
 

skolnik Skolnik

The department put its findings in a letter to the Louisiana Supreme Court and requested court officials work with the DOJ to resolve the matter in an “amicable and cooperative fashion.”

Indiana’s application for admission to the bar contains the questions that were the focus of the DOJ investigation but, according to Bradley Skolnik, executive director of the Indiana State Board of Law Examiners, Indiana has not received a letter from the Justice Department.

The BLE is carefully reviewing the DOJ letter sent to Louisiana and will continue to monitor the situation, Skolnik said. “The board is committed to ensuring all policies and procedures comply with the ADA.”

Following a 2011 court order, Indiana’s board did modify one of its admission questions regarding diagnosis and treatment of any mental health disorder. Judge Tanya Walton Pratt of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana found the question to be improper under the ADA because it was overly broad and captured information not related to serious mental and emotional problems.

Skolnik said mental health and substance abuse issues, raised through questions on the bar admission application, are considered when assessing an individual’s character and fitness.

“The process is highly confidential because it does involve analysis of personal information,” he said. “The board has no desire to be intrusive but it does have a very high duty to ensure applicants have the ability to practice law and discharge their duties.”

According to the Justice Department, the Louisiana Supreme Court Committee on Bar Admissions was using the responses to the mental health questions to single out applicants.

The Louisiana admissions committee was recommending conditional admission to applicants with mental health diagnoses. These applicants had to sign consent agreements that gave the Office of Disciplinary Counsel permission to monitor the applicants, have “full and unfettered access” to their medical records, and to contact their employers and supervising attorneys to discuss the conditional admission.

The Indiana State Board of Law Examiners can give conditional admission if it has concerns about an applicant’s drug, alcohol, psychological or behavioral problems. Skolnik said a conditional admission could have provisions attached that, for example, would require an applicant to check in on a quarterly basis or be subject to testing for substance abuse.

In lieu of denying admission, Skolnik said, the board can ask for a conditional admission to make sure the applicant meets the standards necessary for the practice of law.

Other than the adjustment order by Pratt, the board has not made any significant changes to the application for admission in several years. However, the board did recently launch an online application process. Individuals wanting to take the bar exam in Indiana can now file for admittance electronically. Skolnik said the response has been “very positive” and the online process has improved efficiency.

Also, the board is still in the process of considering changes to the bar exam itself.

The BLE submitted a proposal in 2013 to replace the essay topics on commercial law, personal property and taxation with debtor/creditor law and employment law. In addition, the board suggested including six topics from the Multistate Bar Exam in the Indiana Essay Examination.

Skolnik said the public has made “thoughtful comments” on the proposed changes that the board is carefully considering. He anticipates the board will soon make adjustments to its suggestions.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT