At its 2025 Mid-Year Meeting, the ABA Board of Governors unanimously adopted Resolution 608, creating a brand-new ABA Model Rule on Conditional Admission.
The great news for TLAP, its participants, and all concerned, is that TLAP is (and was) already fully compliant with this new Rule. Thus, TLAP’s services are ADA compliant.
This new Model Rule supplants the prior Rule from 2008, and it recognizes 17 years of clinical advances in treatment and monitoring fitness to practice.
You can see the new Rule here.
This effort took three years to complete and was championed by the CoLAP Law School Committee. CoLAP’s Committee on Monitoring LAPs also contributed to the mission.
To ensure uniform support by the ABA, Resolution 608 was distributed to all ABA Sections, Divisions, and Forums, as well as their staff counsel/directors. It was also distributed to all ABA Committees, Commissions, and Task Forces, and their staff directors/counsel.
More specifically, prior to filing, Resolution 608 was distributed for comment to the following ABA entities:
ABA Commission on Disability Rights
ABA Commission on Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Accounts
ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Regulation
ABA Standing Committee on Lawyer Referral & Information Service
ABA Standing Committee on Lawyer’s Professional Liability
ABA Standing Committee on Professional Regulation
ABA Standing Committee on Professionalism
ABA Standing Committee on Public Protection in the Provision of Legal Services
Law Practice Division
ABA Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice
ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar
ABA Law Student Division
ABA Young Lawyers Division
Supporters and co-sponsors of 608 were the Disability Rights Commission, the Section of Legal Education and Admissions, the Standing Committee on Professional Regulation, the Section on Civil Rights and Social Justice, the New York City Bar, and the Young Lawyers Division.
The result is an ADA-compliant Model Rule, co-sponsored by the ABA Disability Rights Commission.
As to satisfying the ADA, it is important to recognize that the Rule does not focus at all on diagnosis or disability. Instead, it focuses on addressing past conduct. It states that conduct within the last five years is relevant.
In Tennessee, the only regulatory referrals TLAP ever receives are bar admissions cases sent by the Board of Law Examiners (“BLE”) or disciplinary cases sent by the Board of Professional Responsibility (“BPR”). The BLE and BPR never refer cases to TLAP based upon diagnosis or disability; all such referrals to TLAP involve conduct as identified by the BLE and BPR.
Also, and of critical importance, the Rule now specifically recognizes that clinical best practices for LAPs and monitoring lawyers are provided by the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM):
“Terms of the Conditional Admission Agreement should be based upon best practices for supporting the fitness of the attorney to practice law. A resource for Admissions Authorities relating to such best practices is the American Society of Addiction Medicine Treatment Criteria for Addictive, Substance-Related and Co-occurring Conditions, Fourth Edition (‘ASAM Criteria’).”
The Report supporting the new Rule further opined regarding clinical standards:
“The American Society of Addiction Medicine’s Treatment Criteria for Addictive, Substance-Related and Co-Occurring Conditions, Fourth Edition (ASAM Criteria) was published (December 2023) . . . [many] issues are resolved in Chapter 23 of that publication through acknowledging the medical framework for best practices in the monitoring and treatment for legal professionals including lawyers and judges.”
This ASAM acknowledgement by the ABA soundly rejects claims made in some quarters that TLAP-approved diagnostics, treatment, and monitoring for up to five years are somehow inapplicable to lawyers or unduly burdensome.
The Tennessee Supreme Court has rendered clear opinions in the past citing that the BLE must protect the public from the misconduct or unfitness of members of the legal profession and preserve the confidence of the public in the integrity and trustworthiness of lawyers in general.
Moreover, the Court has held that it would be a disservice to the public and the legal profession—and applicants themselves—to provide law licenses to applicants in disregard of potentially disqualifying conduct on the ground that obtaining help for a related substance use disorder may be “burdensome.”
In sum, TLAP’s programming utilizes the ASAM guidelines and the success is astonishing. In the last three years in substance use disorder cases, TLAP’s monitoring program generated no-relapse rates of 85%, 88%, and 89%. By following the New ABA Model Rule on Conditional Admission and utilizing ASAM clinical best-practices for lawyers, TLAP’s monitoring program objectively generates clear and convincing evidence of fitness to practice. This saves lives and careers in addition to protecting the public.
Before TLAP was created, unethical conduct entangled with a substance use disorder or other mental health issues could preclude any hope of obtaining a law license in Tennessee. Today, Tennessee bar applicants, lawyers, and judges receive modern, cutting-edge professional clinical support and monitoring from TLAP that supports being granted the privilege of practicing law.