[Fopbc] Fwd:NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BAR EXAMINERS (NCBE) DISCRIMINATES AGAIN...

Wed Nov 4 15:28:49 UTC 2009

NEWS RELEASE  
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

November 3,  2009 

CONTACTS: 

Chris  Danielsen, Director of Public Relations, NFB, (410) 659-9314, ext.  
2330 

Scott Labarre, Labarre Law Offices, P.C., (303)  504-5979 

Daniel Goldstein, Brown, Goldstein & Levy,  LLP, (410) 962-1030 

Larry Paradis, Disability Rights  Advocates, (510) 665-8644 

NATIONAL  CONFERENCE OF BAR EXAMINERS (NCBE) DISCRIMINATES AGAINST BLIND 
AND LOW VISION  LAW SCHOOL GRADUATES 

OAKLAND, Calif. - A suit  filed today in Federal court alleges that The 
National Conference of Bar  Examiners (NCBE) discriminates against blind and 
low vision law school  graduates. The suit charges that the NCBE is violating 
Title III of the  Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California's 
civil rights law by  denying accommodations on the Multistate Bar Exam (MBE) 
and the Multistate  Professional Responsibility Exam (MPRE) to a law school 
graduate who is  blind. 

The Plaintiff is represented with the  support of the National Federation 
of the Blind ("NFB") by Labarre Law  Offices, P.C., in Denver, CO, and by 
Brown, Goldstein & Levy, LLP, in  Baltimore, MD. The Plaintiff is further 
represented by Disability Rights  Advocates (DRA), a non-profit law center that 
specializes in civil rights  cases on behalf of persons with disabilities, 
based in Berkeley,  CA. 

The NCBE provides standardized examinations  for the testing of applicants 
for admission to the practice of law. Two of the  tests it controls, the 
Multistate Bar Exam (MBE) and the Multistate  Professional Responsibility 
Examination (MPRE) are required for admission to  the bar by most states. The 
California Bar examination has two sections; a  California section and the MBE. 
Although both parts of the exam are  administered by the California State 
Bar, the NCBE controls the type of  accommodations each state can offer test 
takers with disabilities for the MBE  portion of the bar exam. 

Even though the  California State Bar is a named Defendant in the suit, 
they have offered to  provide the Plaintiff with all the accommodations she 
requested for the  California section of the bar examination. However, the NCBE 
refuses to allow  the California Bar Examiners to give the Plaintiff 
certain of the  accommodations that she needs on the MBE portion of the bar exam. 
The  California State Bar is fulfilling its legal obligation and is only 
named in  the complaint as an indispensable party. Plaintiff hopes that the 
lawsuit will  convince the NCBE to follow the California State Bar's example 
and provide the  requested accommodations on the MBE portion of the bar  exam. 

The NCBE has also denied Plaintiff the  accommodations at issue on the MPRE 
exam. This is a separate exam that bar  applicants need to pass to be 
admitted to practice. The ACT is also named in  the complaint since it 
administers the MPRE examination for NCBE and is thus  also an indispensable party. 

The Plaintiff  Stephanie Enyart is a law school graduate who is legally 
blind and requires  accommodations to take the MBE and MPRE. She has requested 
to take the exams  on a laptop computer equipped with screen reading (JAWS) 
and screen  magnification (ZoomText) software. Ms. Enyart has relied on this 
combination  of assistive technology as an accommodation on her exams 
throughout law school  and in her current legal work. 

The NCBE has  refused to allow Ms. Enyart these reasonable accommodations 
for the MBE and  MPRE on several occasions during the past years. In recent 
discussions with  Plaintiff's counsel, the NCBE has indicated that it will 
continue to deny Ms.  Enyart her requested accommodations. Instead, the NCBE 
has offered alternative  accommodations that are not suited to Ms. Enyart's 
disability and are not  effective. The NCBE's denials of accommodations are 
preventing Ms. Enyart from  obtaining admission to the bar, impeding her  
career. 

Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the  National Federation of the Blind (NFB), 
supporting the lawsuit, said "Too  often law students who are blind or have 
low vision have to prolong their  prospects for licensing while they fight 
to get the same accommodations  they've had throughout their educational 
history. Those that opt to settle for  inadequate accommodations usually 
struggle to pass or sometimes do not pass at  all. Those who control admission to 
the practice of law must obey the  law." 

Janice Ta, President of the National  Association of Law Students with 
Disabilities (NALSWD), which expressed  support for the lawsuit, said "The legal 
profession must recognize and be  prepared for the spectrum of conditions 
and disabilities that law students  have. Testing entities need to be open to 
a wide range of accommodations. But  we find that time and again they don't 
seem to understand their obligation for  providing individualized 
accommodations and adaptive technologies that reflect  the way real law students with 
disabilities get tested, study, and make their  way around the  world." 

### 
_______________________________________________ 
Nfbf-l  mailing list 
_Nfbf-l at nfbnet.org_ (mailto:Nfbf-l at nfbnet.org)  
_http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org_ 
(http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org)  
To  unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for  
Nfbf-l: 
_http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org/bluegolfshoes%40aol
.com_ 
(http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org/bluegolfshoes@aol.com)  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/fopbc_nfbnet.org/attachments/20091104/7da3e91f/attachment.html>