DOJ: Antitrust Probe Targets ABA Adjunct Professor Rules

• The Justice Department has warned the American Bar Association of a potential antitrust investigation regarding its accreditation rules for adjunct professors.
• Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward sent an October 7 letter to the ABA's Council, arguing that limits on part-time faculty teaching loads hurt legal education and increase tuition.
• Woodward contended that adjuncts are more affordable and bring valuable real-world experience, and that current rules appear to violate federal antitrust law.
• The ABA's Council was given 15 days to either change the standard or explain its compliance with antitrust law.
• Failure to provide a sufficient response could lead to further investigatory steps by the Justice Department.

Should the ABA's response be deemed "insufficient" by the Justice Department, the agency has indicated it "may proceed with additional investigatory steps necessary to address the apparent violation of federal antitrust law."

The United States Department of Justice has issued a stern warning to the American Bar Association, indicating a potential antitrust investigation. This action represents a new phase in the federal government's ongoing examination of the ABA's practices, specifically targeting its accreditation rules concerning part-time faculty, commonly known as adjunct professors.

The warning was conveyed in an October 7 letter from Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, who holds the third-highest position within the Justice Department. The communication was directed to the ABA's Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, the specific entity responsible for accrediting law schools across the nation. This development, initially reported by The Wall Street Journal, highlights a significant challenge to the established norms of legal education.

At the core of the Justice Department's concern are the ABA's existing accreditation standards that place limits on the teaching loads of part-time faculty members. Associate Attorney General Woodward argued that these restrictions are detrimental to legal education and contribute to escalating tuition costs. He posited that adjunct professors, who are typically more cost-effective, also bring invaluable real-world experience to the classroom, enriching students' learning beyond what full-time academics might offer.

Woodward's letter explicitly stated that the current cap on adjunct teaching appears to violate federal antitrust law. He further noted a personal impact, writing that the standard restricts his own capacity to teach first-year law students, a role he holds as an adjunct law professor at Catholic University. This personal perspective underscores the DOJ's broader argument that such limitations stifle competition and innovation within legal education.

The Justice Department has given the ABA's Council a strict 15-day deadline to respond to its concerns. Within this timeframe, the Council must either amend the accreditation standard in question or provide a comprehensive explanation demonstrating why the existing rule does not contravene federal antitrust statutes. This ultimatum signals a serious intent from the DOJ to challenge what it perceives as anti-competitive practices.

Should the ABA's response be deemed

Should the ABA's response be deemed "insufficient" by the Justice Department, the agency has indicated it "may proceed with additional investigatory steps necessary to address the apparent violation of federal antitrust law." This could lead to a formal DOJ antitrust probe into ABA adjunct professors and the broader law school accreditation framework, potentially reshaping how legal education is structured and delivered across the United States. Associate Attorney General Woodward, who previously served as Walt Nauta's defense lawyer in the Trump classified documents case, is leading this charge, highlighting the high-level attention this issue is receiving.

Lawyers and compliance officers should monitor this development as it signals the DOJ's willingness to apply antitrust scrutiny to professional accreditation bodies and their rules, potentially impacting the structure and cost of legal education. This could set a precedent for challenges to other professional licensing or accreditation standards that limit competition or labor practices.

Source: Original reporting via The Wall Street Journal