Do
you
have
a
lifelong
ambition
to
be
a
lawyer,
but
don’t
have
the
LSAT
score
to
actually
get
into
law
school?
May
I
suggest
a
four-year
stint
in
the
North
Dakota
legislature
as
a
paid(!)
way
to
the
career
of
your
dreams?
That’s
right,
according
to
a
proposed
new
law,
North
Dakota
House
Bill
1609,
introduced
by
state
Rep.
Lori
Van
Winkle
(R-Minot),
folks
would
be
able
to
sit
for
the
bar
exam
with
nothing
more
than
four
years
as
a
legislator
under
their
belt!
This
is,
objectively,
an
awful
idea.
The
bar
exam
covers
a
shit
ton
more
than
just
statutory
interpretation,
and
exactly
nothing
about
serving
in
the
legislature
for
a
mere
four
years
gives
you
the
ability
to
distinguish
between
whether
evidence
is
nonhearsay
or
an
exception
to
the
hearsay
rule.
There’s
a
lot
of,
well,
law,
that
you
learn
in
law
school
and
someone
trying
to
become
an
attorney
through
this
laughably
inadequate
path
is
likely
to
find
themselves
frustrated
at
the
prospect.
Not
to
mention
the
potential
problems
this
could
cause
for
the
public
when
they
depend
on
lawyers
as
experts
to
guide
them
through
the
often
confusing
maze
of
legal
requirements.
As
Rob
Port,
a
reporter
who’s
covered
the
North
Dakota
legislature
for
two
decades,
writes:
Would
you
feel
adequately
represented
in
a
legal
proceeding
in
which
your
liberty
and
property
is
at
risk
by
someone
whose
legal
qualification
is
a
term
in
Bismarck
voting
on
book
bans
and
blue
laws?Would
we
let
someone
qualify
as
a
surgeon
because
they
spent
some
time
working
in
a
butcher
shop?C’mon.
Let’s
be
serious.
The
current
legal
licensing
scheme
is
far
from
perfect.
But
if
the
ongoing
quest
of
Kim
Kardashian
to
get
that
Esq.
after
her
name
via
a
less
that
traditional
path
teaches
us
anything,
it’s
that
for
good
or
for
bad,
the
law
school
to
bar
exam
route
is
a
lot
more
consistent
way
to
start
a
legal
career.