Bar Examiners Appeal to Avoid Accommodating Blind Law Grad

[Kate Moser]

Two weeks before a blind UCLA law school grad is set to take the California bar exam, the administrators of the national portion of the test have thrown her a curveball.

The National Conference of Bar Examiners this week appealed the preliminary injunction Stephanie Enyart won two weeks ago from Northern District Judge Charles Breyer, who ordered that she be able to take the test with the assistive technology (free reg. req.) she used all through law school.

The exam administrators, represented at the preliminary injunction hearing by Cooley Godward Kronish partner Gregory Tenhoff, cited security concerns and also the worry that granting one blind student’s preferred accommodations would open Pandora’s box.

Indeed! Disabled law school grads everywhere getting the reasonable accommodations they say they need! Stand down, Americans with Disabilities Act.

Disability Rights Advocates, which is representing Enyart and where she also is working as a law clerk, told the Chronicle that the appeal was “flabbergasting … irrational and mean-spirited.”

Tenhoff didn’t immediately return a phone call seeking comment.

Comments

[DEM]

I sympathize with the Bar examiners. It's like feeding cats -- toss a reasonable accommodation to one blind student and the next thing you know, blind people from all over the country will be enrolling in law school, taking spots away from us hard-working sighted students, who never seem to get any breaks. I had a damn drinking disability in law school, but no one ever gave me double time and an assistant to help me compensate for my hangovers.

Good job Bar Examiners. And way to go Cooley Godward Kronish partner Gregory Tenhoff. This bud's for you!

(Seriously dude, you should be ashamed of yourself for pursuing this case. You and your clients suck.)

[Christine Elfers]

Cooley Godward Kronish & Tenhoff & NCBE - you should be ashamed of yourself!!
It would appear that this "team" is making determinations based on their fears about "security"... apparently, you have full capacity of all your "senses" but that doesn't mean you should be able to define "reasonable accommodations" for this physically challenged law graduate.
Why site "security concerns" when NCBE will have possession of the computer in question; will be loading the software on the computer being used; and hire the proctors present during the examination? Perhaps the NCBE is fearful of "their security plan" based on cheating experiences with "sighted law grads" taking the exam? For whatever reason this "FEAR" exists it does NOT give the NCBE the "liberty" to reinterpret the ADA.

[KAC]

did any of you actually read the accommodations offered to the student? they certainly seemed reasonable.

[Christine Elfers]

Yes - I did my research about "reasonable accommodations"
I found that each blind person "sees" differently - and as a result of this difference, their "toolbox" for accessing information is also different.
The comment "seemed" reasonable - why would someone who has worked with specialists to identify ways to "read" material have to adapt to another way to take this test? Stephanie mentioned that she has used this software during law school (UCLA) and prior to attending law school.
What you are suggesting is that she needs to adapt to a "foreign way" of taking this high stakes test.... "she" needs to adapt! Wait! this is the way she "reads"
Perhaps all law students should have to take the exam in braille... ummm... would they be able to adapt??
physical challenges are not all the same - nor are the way in which people learn to access information (read, hear, walk, etc) with their particular challenge.
Stephanie is asking to "read" the test materials in the way in which she has accessed print materials for many years...