National Conference of Bar Examiners @ncbex has come out strongly against diploma privilege. Much has been made of fact that its Pres/CEO got licensure through Wisc. diploma privilege. But I'm not here to do an ad hominem attack. Instead, let's look at what NCBE says. 1/ 
They distinguish Wisc. DP by saying (1) extensive required curriculum; and (2) character and fitness investigation. The second is a red herring. NO state supreme court that is considering DP would ditch that. And no ad
Good if true. But it's not. I studied this 6 months ago. Reviewed again today. Mandatory courses - nearly all law schools already require; add'l courses picked from categories, that again, nearly all students take. So no, NCBE's justification that Wisc DP okay doesn't hold water.
This notion that Wisc. DP is okay is partly constructed to justify DP only for Wisc. schools. They've been sued over this. Last lawsuit settled, if memory serves, 10 years ago. Don't know its terms. Interesting con law exam Q. Dormant commerce clause I think was primary theory.
