Kevin Frazier in short piece in Reason offers food for thought about reform of legal education, a hot topic in light all of what is going on in the world (including AI, political and economic turbulence), universities and law schools, and the legal profession.

Frazier’s thesis: “Legal education has lost its way. Its primary purpose should be training lawyers to meet society’s legal needs, yet no one involved—law schools, faculty, or bar exam prep companies—seems to care. These actors are too invested in the status quo . . . . The solution? Overhaul legal education by creating two tracks: one for practicing attorneys and another for designing the legal systems of the future.”

Frazier sees his call for reform similar to that made by Karl Llewellyn 90 years ago in his article, “On What is Wrong with So-Called Legal Education“:

“Llewellyn insisted that legal education should serve society—not just cater to students or academics. He pushed the profession to consider difficult but necessary questions. Are quality lawyers too expensive for everyday Americans? Can certain types of business be standardized and cheapened, and so made available to all who need counsel? Where is it adequate, and where is it not? Where and for whom are there gaps in the tasks performed.”

Food for thought.