I Can Check Out Anytime I Like, But I Can Never Leave
Since I don’t care to toss my bar card out the window, I’m still subject to California MCLE requirements. Most state bars say if you live in another state and comply with the CLE of that state, they’re cool with it. Not California. California says we’ll count the MCLE you take if its accredited by one of the states we’ve chosen to accredit ourselves, but you still have to complete all the requirements of our state even if they don’t make sense in yours. Thus, while I may have left the most politically correct state in the union behind, I still have to “educate” myself by allowing them to “eliminate” any “bias” I may have that’s out of sync with theirs. Since “elimination of bias” is not a recognized category here in the Old Dominion (or, I hope, anywhere else except Kalifornia), the only way to complete the requirement is through California providers, such as the California Bar itself. If the category “elimination of bias” sounds a bit politically charged to you, take a gander at what passes for education in that category. No “bit” there at all. Your taxes My bar dues at work.
August 12th, 2006 at 6:02 pm
Oh, we have to eliminate our bias in the Oregon Bar as well. Repeatedly.
But I went inactive. So I am permitted to avoid MCLE and retain whatever bias that persists after mandatory education intended to strip me of values inconsistent with the leftist creed.
Not much remains. The only bias I’ll admit in public is that I think Oregonians are fond of odd shoes.
Other than that, I pretty much love Big Brother.
August 14th, 2006 at 12:26 pm
Is that constitutional? What if you say you like your bias just as it is, thank them very much, and don’t want to eliminate it? Does that make you an unfit person to be a lawyer, like Matthew Hale?
August 14th, 2006 at 12:54 pm
I think the key here is that you don’t care to toss your bar card out the window. You claim to have “left the most politically correct state in the union behind,” but you really haven’t. You’re trying to keep your right to practice law there. The solution to get out from under the CLEs is simple: don’t like their rules? Get rid of your membership.
August 14th, 2006 at 4:19 pm
Phil, I’m sure you’d be equally dismissive of the issue if the shoe were on the other foot, and some ultra-conservative state required its lawyers to take “elimination of moonbattery” classes every now and then. No problem, don’t want to practice law in that state, don’t get a license there. Right?
August 15th, 2006 at 5:52 pm
I went inactive, too. When we moved to Hawaii, neither Kansas nor Missouri would recognize CLE credits earned in the Aloha State and I wasn’t about to fly back to the Midwest for the year-end CLE Grand Slam course. So I went inactive.
Then I moved back and realized I didn’t give a rat’s ass about practicing law anymore.
So, I’m still “inactive.”
August 15th, 2006 at 9:47 pm
I have looked into the possibility of going inactive in CA. Unfortunately, that option didn’t work because my company has nationwide operations, and the CA Bar couldn’t give me a straight answer as to what advice I can give to whom without being deemed to be practicing law “in” California. By their logic, I guess I need to be licensed in all 50 states. Oh, bother.
August 16th, 2006 at 1:24 pm
I actually found the article pretty informative. Not to mention that for one full hour of CLE credit it looked pretty easy. I don’t see it taking a full hour to complete.
I know you quake at the idea of eliminating “bias,” though — what would XLRQ be without bias. After all, an awful lot of your bloggin is dedicated to reinforcing and reiterating your personal biases.
August 16th, 2006 at 1:43 pm
You’re correct that the quiz can easily be completed in less than an hour; that’s true of just about all of the self-study written materials. As to your snark about bias, let’s just say that I’d have a lot less of a problem with “eliminating bias” if that were really what they were doing, rather than shoving their own biases down everyone else’s throat. Then again, asking anyone, especially the Cal. Bar, to actually eliminate bias, rather than simply to substitute one kind of bias for another, is a rather tall order. If that’s not reason enough to abolish the requirement, maybe they could meet me halfway and at least give the requirement a more honest name. How about “elimination of certain kinds of bias?”
August 19th, 2006 at 12:21 am
CLE sucks. It costs more than it’s worth, and generally wastes time, especially when you have to drive 100 miles to attend a program. I’d much rather spend the time doing research. Or being waterboarded.