I wonder what or who prompted this idea?

I believe CA Bar President Jon Streeter meant to say anyone who can pass the bar examination or pay someone else to do it for them.

If this idea becomes reality I believe it would be appropriate to name the new requirements after a certain Rancho Santa Margarita crapticing attorney.

The first step is admitting there's a problem.

Check.

In the case of one very glaring existent problem, the horse is already out of the barn. What can you do? Retest the obviously incompetent? Have the apparently incompetent ones demonstrate other knowledge? You can try to ensure that certain uneducated types never get into the loop, but you really can't toss out the existing incompetent ones.

The problem with Orly is not merely that she is flagrantly unqualified to practice even the simplest kind of law.

It is that, having been licensed, she has been allowed to flout the rules with total impunity.

The State Bar of California should start by actually enforcing the rules they already have. Creating new ones is clearly beyond their limited capabilities.

An observational point of view of a perfect storm:

A CA attorney like Taitz is getting schooled across the country one state after another. The light may (hopefully) have finally come on that Taitz is single-handedly destroying the CA state bar's standard of excellence bragging rights.

Edit: ALL, I didn't see your post before posting. We're agreed.

Most of O'rly's recent cases have been pro se in other states. She doesn't have much going on in California. Even if she had been debarred, she would have continued with her smears across the country skirting sanctions as a vexlit.

Even if she does act as pro se, she does make a point of being a lawyer whenever she can: putting "Esq." after her name at every opportunity is a clue. Like in Million Dollar Baby, the punch wasn't technically admissible under boxing rules, but your fighter is the one out on the stretcher. The analogy not being that Taitz could knock out anyone, but like you say, she skirts the rules. And she does so because people have so far let her skirt the rules for the benefit of a pretended "integrity" of the game. Kinda, sorta, but I think this assessment is pretty close.

Yes.

Ouch....

The truth hurts.

Very nicely put.

Not very likely the English 2 year training contract concept for lawyers will take root in the US. In England one can get a Bachelors in Law instead of wasting 3 years in law school and then do the 2 year training contract.