Applicants v. Texas State Board of Law Examiners

The Texas Board of Law Examiners (the Board) (defendant), the state-licensing board responsible for assessing applications for admission to the Texas Bar, conducted investigations of each applicant’s moral character and fitness to practice law. Texas state law required applicants to the bar to verify that they were not “mentally ill.” The Board’s character-and-fitness investigation included questions about the applicant’s mental-health history that originally broadly inquired about all mental-health issues within the previous 10 years. The Board would launch a more specific investigation only if the applicant answered affirmatively; the Board could potentially review the applicant’s mental-health records, consult the applicant’s treatment providers, and require the applicant to be evaluated by an expert. If the Board believed that the applicant might pose harm to potential clients, the Board would issue a preliminary finding that the applicant was not presently fit to practice law, and the applicant had a right to a hearing before the Board. Three law students who planned to seek admission to the Texas Bar (the applicants) (plaintiffs) sued the Board in federal district court, alleging that the Board’s mental-health inquiries violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The applicants sought injunctive and declaratory relief for themselves and similarly situated applicants. While the lawsuit was pending, the Board revised the relevant application question, and none of the applicants would have answered affirmatively to the revised question. The revised question asked (1) whether, within the last 10 years, the applicant had been diagnosed with or treated for bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, paranoia, or any other psychotic disorder, and (2) whether the listed disorders had resulted in any hospital admissions or inpatient treatment. In 1994, the district court held a nonjury trial and issued a written opinion.