More would-be Colorado lawyers are locking in extra time and other testing accommodations on the bar exam, a rapid shift that is quietly reshaping how the state decides who gets a law license and sparking a fresh legal fight over how those decisions are made. The approvals have climbed in just a few test cycles, and lawmakers have already stepped in to relax proof rules for applicants who say they need help.
Rising numbers in state records
State records show the number of approved accommodations climbed from the mid-30s in 2022 to 105 in 2025, representing roughly 11.4% of test takers. The most recent February administration granted adjustments to 34 of 223 candidates. Those counts, 36 in 2022, 38 in 2023, 66 in 2024, and 105 in 2025, came alongside about a 75% first-time pass rate in 2025, according to the filings.
The requests generally sought extra time, scheduled breaks, and quiet testing rooms, accommodations that applicants and advocates say are increasingly common as disability diagnoses are better tracked and students grow more familiar with their rights, according to BusinessDen.
What changed under state law
The Colorado Legislature passed House Bill 24-1342 in 2024 to ease documentation requirements for licensing-exam accommodations and to allow applicants to rely on past accommodations as proof instead of paying for fresh, often pricey testing. The bill's fiscal notes anticipated extra staffing and proctoring costs for the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel as accommodated exams increased.
Lawmakers effectively told the regulator to stop treating every request like a brand-new case study and to give more weight to what schools and prior testing agencies have already approved. As outlined by the Colorado General Assembly, HB24-1342 was written with an eye on both legal compliance and practical administration.
A national trend and the debate
The Colorado shift tracks a national trend. A Wall Street Journal analysis has documented rising accommodation rates across jurisdictions, prompting debates about access, fairness, and whether the system tends to favor those who can afford private evaluations. Disability-law scholars and law-school faculty say the uptick follows rising diagnoses of ADHD and anxiety earlier in students' education, while critics warn about potential gaming and pressure on already high-stakes exams.
In other words, the fight is not really over whether disabilities exist, but over who proves it, how much that proof should cost, and how far licensing bodies must go to level the playing field without changing the game itself. As reported by TaxProf Blog, summarizing the Wall Street Journal analysis.
Appeals court revives a high-profile challenge
On May 7, the Colorado Court of Appeals revived a discrimination claim filed by a would-be attorney who sued after an initial denial of his requested accommodations. The panel ruled that the district court erred and sent parts of the case back for further proceedings.
The opinion details the applicant's denials, the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel's later reversal on some requests, and the panel's conclusion that the initial denial gave the plaintiff standing to sue, even though some accommodations were later granted. The court's judgment is available in the Colorado Court of Appeals opinion on Justia.
“We believe the decision reinforces that public entities cannot avoid judicial review of discrimination by changing course after a lawsuit is filed,” attorney Spencer Kontnik told Colorado Politics, framing the case as a test of how seriously regulators must take accommodation requests the first time around.
Regulators say they're adapting
Jessica Yates, who heads the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel, told Colorado Politics that requests for accommodations have been climbing for years, from about 3.2% of applicants in July 2019 to roughly 7.7% in July 2024.
Yates said OARC has updated its guidance so staff rely more often on prior accommodations instead of demanding new, expensive evaluations from bar applicants. “I hope that when people are reviewing this holistically together with federal law and with the practical realities of what medical professionals provide ... they don't see this as somehow additional or onerous or burdensome,” she said in the Q&A, signaling that the office views the changes as an overdue modernization rather than regulatory creep.
Legal implications
The appeals court decision and the 2024 law together sharpen the legal questions regulators and courts now have to sort out: how to balance the individualized assessments required by federal law with Colorado's push to strip away procedural barriers that may keep some disabled applicants out.
For applicants, lawyers, and the regulator alike, the next chapter will likely involve more litigation, more detailed guidance, and more administrative changes as the office processes a higher volume of accommodation requests while trying to preserve confidence in one of the profession's key gatekeeping exams.
