Maggie Ellis says the new Texas Supreme Court should revisit its break with the ABA's law school accreditor. Nothing changes until she has five votes.
Texas voters elected a new chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court on November 3, and she has already said she wants the court to revisit one of its most watched recent orders: the January decision to stop relying on the American Bar Association’s law school accreditor. For firms that hire in Texas and for students choosing a law school there, this is a story about who decides which law degrees count for the bar. This piece follows our coverage of the judicial races and of the federal accreditor rules. It reports what named people have said and takes no side.
What the Court Did in January
On January 6, the court gave final approval to amendments to Rule 1 of the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar of Texas, effective immediately. The order reasserted the court’s own authority over which law schools qualify, and it adopted an initial approved list that includes every school already approved under the old rules.
The order says a school already on the list need only comply with four named ABA standards to keep its approval, and that losing ABA accreditation alone would not be enough to remove it. It describes those criteria as “simple, objective, and ideologically neutral.” It also says the court intends to preserve the portability of Texas degrees into other states, does not anticipate immediate changes to the list and may later rely on a multistate accreditor other than the ABA “should a suitable entity become available.”
The ABA Journal reported at the time that the U.S. Federal Trade Commission had blessed the plan, and that the moves by Texas and other states followed an April 2025 executive order aimed at higher education accreditors. The council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, which is separate from the ABA itself, had served as Texas’ sole accreditor since 1983.
What Changed on Election Day
According to the Texas Tribune, Democrats won all four Texas Supreme Court seats on the ballot, including the chief justice race, in which Maggie Ellis, a justice on the Austin-based 3rd Court of Appeals, defeated Chief Justice Jimmy Blacklock. The Tribune reports that the result leaves Republicans with a 5-4 majority on the nine-member court.
Ellis told Bloomberg Law on November 5 that she wants to revisit the accreditation decision when she joins and leads the court in January. Bloomberg Law reported that the all-Republican court ended the relationship over the ABA’s diversity, equity and inclusion requirements. It also noted that rescinding the order would take the votes of all four incoming Democratic justices plus one Republican, and that all of the court’s current Republican justices signed off on the change.
On November 10, the ABA Journal followed up with a response from the council.
“The council is heartened by the possibility of being able to again serve as a recognized accreditor in Texas, in the interests of students, graduates and the public,” Carla Pratt, chair of the legal education council, told the ABA Journal.
The same article reports that the council’s own federal recognition is under review by the U.S. Department of Education, with a decision by Under Secretary Nicholas Kent expected by the end of the year.
What It Means for Lawyers and Law Schools
For now, very little changes on the ground. Bloomberg Law reported that the Texas Board of Law Examiners said in September it was still awaiting direction from the justices on a new approach, and that Texas continues to recognize only ABA-accredited schools. That is why Bloomberg Law described a return to the ABA as potentially seamless: the court never rolled out a new accreditation rubric.
The practical questions sit with three groups. Law school deans in Texas have to plan around two possible regimes, and Bloomberg Law reports that deans of eight of the state’s 10 law schools had urged the court to keep the council. Prospective students and recent graduates care about portability, since most states still require graduation from an ABA-accredited school to sit for the bar. Firms and legal departments that recruit in Texas care mainly that the pipeline stays predictable, which is what both the January order and the council’s statements say they want.
Ellis also told Bloomberg Law she wants to revisit other recent orders, including the end of central docket case assignment in Bexar and Travis counties. Lawyers who litigate in those counties should watch that thread too.
Common Questions
Has Texas reversed its decision on ABA accreditation?
No. Ellis has said she wants to revisit it after she takes office in January. Any change would require a majority of the nine-member court.
Can graduates of ABA-accredited schools still sit for the Texas bar?
Yes. The January order adopted every previously approved school, and Bloomberg Law reports Texas still recognizes only ABA-accredited schools.
Does this affect lawyers already licensed in Texas?
Nothing in the January order or the reporting since points to any effect on existing licenses. The question concerns which schools qualify new applicants.
What to Watch
Watch for the Education Department’s decision on the council’s federal recognition, expected by year’s end, and for any order from the reconstituted court after the new justices take office in January. Also watch whether Florida and Alabama, which the ABA Journal says also moved away from the council, revisit their own decisions.
*QUINN ASHBY*Staff Writer, Legal Tech Circle
e. quinn@lionfiregroup.co w. www.lionfiregroup.co
In this story
See every round in the Funding Tracker