The New Jersey State Bar Association supports the ultimate recommendation by the Supreme Court’s Ad Hoc Committee to adopt the “NextGen” Bar Examination. In its comments on the Ad Hoc Committee report , the Association further urged the Court to consider a written version to accommodate technological difficulties and portability for those attorneys who did not take the Uniform Bar Exam. The new exam will be administered for those taking the July 2028 test.
“The NJSBA’s support is premised on the recognition that it provides two distinct advantages: adequate testing for bar applicants coupled with providing the benefits of portability that allow for licensing in multiple jurisdictions,” NJSBA President Christine A. Amalfe said. “This is especially important given the evolution of the profession and nature of its work.”
The Association also supports the July 2028 start to coincide with the exam’s implementation in New York, noting it will give law school professors adequate preparation time to instruct students appropriately. While supportive of the new exam, the NJSBA asked whether a written version of the exam would be available for those who experience technological difficulties or who otherwise might need such accommodation. “The NJSBA recommends the Judiciary be proactive in its preparations to address potential technological difficulties or other necessary accommodations,” Amalfe said.
The Association also asked the Court to consider working with other states to allow attorneys who took the bar exam before any uniform exams were available to enjoy the same portability as with those who took the Uniform Bar Exam. “Lawyers who were admitted before the advent of the Uniform Bar Exam were limited in the number of jurisdictions where they could apply because of the time and resource requirements to take the bar exam in multiple jurisdictions.”
Justice Jaynee LaVecchia (Ret.) led the Ad Hoc Committee. NJSBA First Vice President G. Glennon Troublefield was also on the committee. For a full copy of the report, click here.
Court Updates Processes to Inform Defendants of Immigration Consequences Prior to Guilty Pleas
A series of supplements to various directives revises language in the plea colloquy and forms to inform defendants of potential immigration consequences of a guilty plea before entering a plea. The revisions affect municipal courts, domestic violence contempt matters and criminal courts to ensure alignment with federal and state law. The NJSBA supported the update.
The supplements add questions to be asked of defendants pleading guilty and requests responses to ensure that non-citizen defendants understand the consequences of pleading guilty. The questions ask:
• If the defendant understands that pleading guilty could result in removal or deportation from the United States, denial of naturalization, denial of re-entry, or exclusion from admission.
• The defendant has a right to seek advice from an attorney about the effect of a guilty plea on the defendant’s immigration status.
• If the defendant discussed with their attorney whether and how the defendant’s citizenship or immigration status could be affected by a plea, conviction or sentence.
• If the defendant responds that they discussed the issue of citizenship and immigration status relative to a plea, conviction or sentence, have they been advised of any possible immigration consequences and the right to get legal advice about those consequences and if they still want to plead guilty.
• If the defendant responds that they have not discussed the issue of citizenship and immigration status relative to a plea, conviction or sentence, would the defendant like an opportunity to do so.
The supplement to Directive #09-11 revises the plea colloquy in municipal court for defendants pleading guilty to all disorderly or petty disorderly persons offenses; driving while intoxicated; or operating a motor vehicle in possession of a controlled dangerous substance.
The supplement to Directive #23-21 revises the plea form in Domestic Violence Contempt Matters.