This panel discusses two different yet complementary multi-year advocacy strategies to challenge restrictive Board of Law Examiners’ (BOLES) policies. Prof. Griggs will discuss ways that pandemic bar exam administration policies highlighted the inequities of bar applicants and her work advocating the adoption of national best practices for bar exam administration. Profs. Johnson, Karin, and Cooper will discuss forming Menstrual Policies and the Bar and working with UDC and Fordham clinical law students to challenge obstacles in the path of menstruators, largely but not exclusively cis women, seeking to enter the legal profession. We will share our experiences and takeaways and seek collaborators to further this work in specific jurisdictions.
Our advocacy includes conducting empirical research of bar examinees and legal analysis of BOLE policies (often not readily-available) that prohibited menstruators from bringing their own products to exams, barred them from using the bathroom, and required them to carry their products in clear bags (particularly problematic for trans/nonbinary test-takers). MP and the Bar’s Model Policy protects both the rights of menstruating examinees and the security interests of BOLEs. We launched a nationwide campaign based on the Model Policy, including publishing a law review article and op-eds, developing a webinar for BOLE administrators, and providing support for an ABA Resolution based on the Model Policy. We have started to see real change (e.g., District of Columbia, Minnesota).
We will share our take-aways—identifying what strategies have worked well, where our struggles have been, and what lessons we have learned; providing you with advocacy tools you can adapt; and brainstorming different mechanisms for pursuing this work (through your clinic or otherwise). We will use interactive modalities that we hope will leave you excited about working on this new project, with MP and the Bar as a resource for you.