United States Ninth Circuit

In this action challenging Arizona Supreme Court Rule 34(f), which describes how experienced attorneys can be admitted on motion to the State Bar of Arizona, summary judgment in favor of defendant-justices is affirmed, where: 1) Rule 34(f) requires attorneys admitted to practice law in states that do not have reciprocal admission rules to take the uniform bar exam in order to gain admission to the Arizona Bar; and 2) although plaintiffs can establish Article III standing, plaintiffs fail to establish that Rule 34(f) is unconstitutional on First Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, or Privileges and Immunities Clause grounds.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/08/2014
• Published 12/08/2014

Judges

• Smith

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel