I had planned to spend today reflecting on Juneteenth and race in America, intending only to re-tweet and like tweets relating to these topics. But a new development regarding diploma privilege in WA has emerged. Only read this long thread if this is of interest to you.
Someone on the WSBA Board of Governors (BOG) posted a message on the Snohomish County Bar Association webpage. SnoBar is not on twitter but on FB facebook.com/Snohomish-Coun…. Screenshot of message. This BOG Gov communicates initial BOG position. Great - I'm all for transparency. 
This message raises process and substance. Process - takes issue that, following @seattleulaw letter, Court @WACourts decided diploma privilege (DP), with "no opportunity to alert members to the request or obtain member comment." I can't speak to process Court followed.
If BOG rep. wants to complain about process and solicit comments about process, fine. If BOG rep. wants to "re-litigate" DP, this ignores APR 1. WA Sup. Ct. has plenary authority regarding licensure. (Oregon, are you listening? You do, too.) Process & substance. Ship has sailed.
Don't know if this BOG rep. looked at agenda. I did (at least posted preliminary agenda). Doesn't seem to be about process and substance of what @WACourts did in its previous DP order, but instead any issues that have arisen or not been taken care of.
For general discussion on that agenda item, I'd focus on how to make things operate smoothly in order to not create a 2 class bar for this group whether got DP or bar exam passage. Focus on employer education about what UBE actually tests and what it fails to measure.
Listen to law deans and professors about what we do in our classrooms, clinics, and supervised externships. If @WAStateBar or @WACourts think law schools need to do a better job in educating and training our students, let us know. We're listening. Hope you are too.
