The Trump Administration Is Right to End the ABA's Monopoly on Law School Accreditation
Source: Breccan F. Thies. "Trump Starts Breaking ABA's Law School Accreditation Monopoly." August 21, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The article argues that the Trump administration is correct to strip the American Bar Association of its exclusive power to accredit U.S. law schools, because the ABA has abused this monopoly to push left-wing political agendas onto legal education. The author suggests that introducing competition among accreditors will reduce political bias and improve accountability in legal education.
Conclusion
The Trump administration is justified in moving to strip the American Bar Association of its exclusive status as the sole accreditor of U.S. law schools.
Premises
- Accreditation monopolies function like cartels, and lack of competition allows accreditors to impose political preferences and ideologies rather than focus on educational quality.
- The ABA has used its accreditation power to force left-wing ideologies (e.g., DEI programming, affirmative action hiring requirements) onto law schools under threat of losing accreditation.
- A nearly 500-page Department of Education report concluded the ABA lacks sufficient independence from the legal profession to be a trustworthy accreditor.
- The ABA's recent claims of rolling back discriminatory requirements are not credible, as watchdog groups believe these are merely temporary concessions pending a future Democrat administration.
- Introducing competition among accreditors, and allowing university-affiliated law schools to be accredited through their parent institution's accreditation, provides a viable alternative without harming access to federal student loans.
Assumptions
- Political neutrality in accreditation is achievable and desirable, and competition among accreditors would produce more neutral outcomes.
- The specific policies criticized (DEI programming, affirmative action hiring) constitute improper ideological imposition rather than legitimate educational standards.
- The Department of Education's report and characterization of the ABA are accurate and unbiased.
- Ending the ABA's monopoly will not compromise law school educational quality or accreditation rigor.
- The motivations behind ABA policy changes (rolling back DEI) can be reliably inferred to be insincere or strategic rather than genuine reform.