The future of the nation’s primary law school accreditor now rests in the hands of the Trump Education Department after a federal panel deadlocked 8-8 on whether to strip the American Bar Association (ABA) of its gatekeeper status following dozens of federal compliance failures.

The deadlock hands the decision to Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent, who has up to 90 days to decide whether to revoke the ABA’s decades-long accreditation monopoly over roughly 200 law schools nationwide. In a statement to Digital, a Department of Education spokesperson confirmed that staff had already recommended stripping the ABA’s gatekeeper status after finding the group out of compliance with «more than 26 recognition criteria.»

The advisory body — known formally as the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI) — advises the Education Department on whether higher education accreditors meet federal standards. NACIQI Chairman Jay Greene told Digital that while the panel split 8-8 on what action to take, committee members across the board shared a core concern over how the ABA is structured.

«The primary issue that troubled all members of NACIQI is that the ABA accrediting body is clearly not separate and independent from the ABA as a whole,» Greene said, noting that federal law requires institutional accreditors to operate independently of trade associations. «Everyone on the committee agreed that this was a problem that required changes. The main divide was over whether the ABA was willing and able to take those steps to remedy the problem or not.»

WATCH: BRANDON GILL CORNERS LAW SCHOOL GATEKEEPER WITH DEI QUESTION SHE WON’T ANSWER

Responding to panel criticisms of chronic noncompliance, Melissa Hart, chair of the ABA Accreditation Council, defended the organization’s historic track record.

«The Council has been continuously recognized by the Department of Education since 1952, being found in compliance during every regular recognition cycle for the past 74 years,» Hart said in a statement. «We take accreditation and our recognition as an accreditor very seriously, and we continue to be a reliable authority for accrediting J.D. programs.»

However, legal advocacy groups argue the ABA’s structural defects and recent policy shifts render it unfit to serve as an industry gatekeeper. Reed Rubinstein, senior vice president of America First Legal and former general counsel at the Department of Education, told Digital that the ABA has «disqualified itself and undermined public faith and trust in the legal profession.»

EXPLOSIVE REPORT EXPOSES ‘DANGEROUS IMBALANCE’ IN LAW SCHOOL PIPELINE SHAPING HOW ELECTION CASES ARE DECIDED

Rubinstein also dismissed the ABA’s recent move to repeal its controversial diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) accreditation standard as a «ruse to retain power,» arguing it does not cure the underlying legal flaws.

«The DEI accreditation standard, from the moment it was adopted, conflicted with controlling Supreme Court rulings and the plain text of the Civil Rights Act,» Rubinstein said, urging the Trump administration to permanently strip the ABA of its federal status. «The ABA’s leadership has made it clear, publicly and otherwise, that it will return to its unlawful ideological agenda at its first opportunity.»

For more than 70 years, the ABA has operated as the sole federally recognized accreditor for U.S. law schools, granting the organization a near-monopoly over the legal profession. In almost every state, students must graduate from an ABA-accredited law school to be eligible to sit for the bar exam. Furthermore, the federal government uses the ABA’s accreditation as the gatekeeper for Title IV federal student aid, meaning law schools must secure the group’s stamp of approval for their students to receive federal loans.

BEAUTY SCHOOL MOMS CAUGHT IN ACCREDITATION CROSSFIRE AS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WEIGHS CONSEQUENTIAL DECISION

If Under Secretary Kent ultimately moves to strip the ABA of its recognition, the decision would effectively break that national monopoly. While law schools affiliated with larger universities could rely on their broader institutional accreditors to maintain access to federal financial aid, roughly a dozen stand-alone law schools would be forced to scramble for alternative accreditation. State supreme courts would also face immediate pressure to rewrite their bar admission rules to allow graduates from non-ABA schools to take the exam.

Some states have already begun taking matters into their own hands to bypass the ABA’s grip. Because the legal profession is regulated directly by the judicial branch, state supreme courts hold the ultimate authority to set educational requirements for bar admission.

TRUMP ADMIN URGES RETURNING EDUCATION TO STATES, CITING $3 TRILLION OF TAXES SPENT AND POOR PROFICIENCY SCORES

In January, Texas became the first state in the nation to eliminate its reliance on the ABA for law school accreditation, with the Texas Supreme Court finalizing a rule to take over the approval process itself. Just nine days later, the Florida Supreme Court followed suit. 

By cutting ties with the organization, the Texas high court announced it would judge law schools on «simple, objective, and ideologically neutral criteria» rather than the ABA’s mandates deemed by many as politically-driven.

Other states are now catching on to the rebellion against the ABA. The Ohio Supreme Court formally proposed amendments in May to establish a state-run accreditation process, while supreme courts in Tennessee, Alabama and Washington have all recently taken steps to bypass the organization’s monopoly.

«The ABA’s cartel-like control over law school accreditation drives up costs, limits access, and pushes ridiculous ideological mandates over merit,» Trump’s DOJ said earlier this year. «Ending the Tennessee Supreme Court’s exclusive reliance will expand opportunity AND lower costs.»

Rubinstein noted that transferring authority back to the states marks a long-overdue correction for legal education.

«State supreme courts are ultimately responsible for certifying and disciplining attorneys—there is arguably no need for a middleman,» Rubinstein told Digital. «By returning actual authority over legal education directly to the courts themselves… the result should be a better-quality education for attorneys and more accountability and transparency for the public.»

education, politics, law, regulation, reform, state, college

Los dinosaurios no dejaron una lista de alimentos, pero sus dientes conservaron señales capaces de contar parte de esa historia. Una investigación reciente examinó esas huellas en animales que vivieron en el mismo lugar hace unos 150 millones de años y encontró que no todos buscaban su comida de la misma manera.

La conclusión cambia una idea muy repetida sobre los grandes herbívoros. Durante años, se consideró que la altura de cada animal podía explicar qué plantas consumía. Los nuevos datos indican que la diferencia también estuvo en las partes de las plantas que elegía cada especie, desde hojas y brotes hasta ramas y tejidos más duros.

Según un estudio publicado en 2025 por investigadores de la Universidad de Texas en Austin en la revista científica Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, las señales conservadas en la capa exterior de los dientes permiten distinguir dietas diferentes entre animales que compartían territorio. El trabajo analizó restos hallados en el oeste de Estados Unidos y propuso que esa variedad de alimentos ayudó a que varias especies convivieran sin competir de la misma forma por cada recurso.

El valor del hallazgo está en que transforma una pregunta general en una escena concreta. No alcanza con observar el tamaño de un dinosaurio o la forma de sus dientes. La alimentación también dependía de qué parte de una planta podía aprovechar mejor cada animal, una diferencia que modifica la reconstrucción de los antiguos paisajes.

Los dientes conservan señales de la alimentación de cada animal

Los dientes son una de las partes más resistentes del cuerpo y pueden mantenerse durante millones de años. En su capa exterior quedan rastros vinculados con los alimentos que un animal incorporaba. Al compararlos con las especies actuales, los investigadores pueden aproximarse a qué clase de comida predominaba en su dieta.

El estudio examinó dientes de varios animales que vivieron en el mismo entorno durante el período jurásico. Entre los herbívoros, los resultados mostraron diferencias claras. Unos parecían consumir con mayor frecuencia partes suaves de las plantas, como hojas y brotes. Otros obtenían más alimento de partes leñosas, como ramas.

La diferencia no estaba limitada a la altura desde la que cada dinosaurio podía comer. El tipo de alimento, su textura y su valor nutritivo también ayudaban a marcar una separación entre las especies. Esa conclusión ofrece una explicación más precisa sobre cómo grandes animales podían habitar el mismo espacio.

Los resultados también abarcaron animales que comían carne. Las señales halladas en sus dientes apuntan a dietas distintas dentro de ese grupo: uno —un reptil de aspecto similar al cocodrilo— habría consumido sobre todo peces, mientras el otro, un bípedo de gran tamaño, se alimentaba principalmente de otros dinosaurios. Esa separación reduce la idea de que todos los depredadores de un mismo lugar perseguían las mismas presas.

La variedad de alimentos ayudó a repartir el espacio

La convivencia entre especies grandes exige recursos suficientes y una forma de distribuirlos. Si cada animal buscaba una parte diferente de las plantas o perseguía presas distintas, la competencia directa podía ser menor. Esa dinámica es habitual en ecosistemas complejos y ayuda a explicar cómo territorios con recursos limitados sostienen una gran diversidad de especies.

La investigación sugiere que los herbívoros no se diferenciaban únicamente por el tamaño del cuerpo. Algunos podían preferir alimentos más tiernos, mientras otros aprovechaban estructuras más resistentes. Así, un mismo paisaje ofrecía opciones diversas para animales con necesidades y formas de alimentarse diferentes.

Esa idea también permite revisar imágenes simplificadas de los dinosaurios. Los animales de cuello largo no necesariamente comían lo mismo por alcanzar plantas elevadas, y los más pequeños no quedaban limitados a los recursos cercanos al suelo. La elección de los alimentos fue más variada de lo que indicaba una explicación basada solo en la altura.

El análisis de dientes no reconstruye una comida puntual ni resuelve cada detalle de la vida de un animal. Aporta, en cambio, una pista sobre hábitos sostenidos en el tiempo. Al reunir esos rastros, el estudio describe un escenario en el que la diversidad de dietas ayudó a ordenar la vida de varias especies en un mismo territorio.

saurópodo,estegosaurio,caricatura editorial,paleontología

Minnesota Democratic Gov. Tim Walz reflected on his legacy in a recent interview and his comments sparked immediate pushback both online and from Republican lawmakers in the state who spoke to Digital.

«Fraud — should have stopped it sooner,» Walz told the Minnesota Star-Tribune in a discussion that is being dubbed an «exit interview» with the headline «Walz accepts blame for fraud but says it shouldn’t define his legacy» as he prepares to leave office in January.

«We didn’t stop them. I accept that. I think there does need to be accountability with that. And part of it is that, yep, that’s with me, I’ll step aside.»

Walz claimed the state «immediately» took action on the fraud and then went on to suggest the true cost of the fraud, estimated at $9 billion by federal prosecutors, has been overstated and claimed President Donald Trump’s White House ballroom, expected to cost taxpayers around $300 million, was more expensive than the Minnesota fraud.

WALZ APPROVAL RATING CRATERS TO LOWEST LEVEL EVER AND TRAILS TRUMP AMID MASSIVE FRAUD SCANDAL: ‘TIRED OF IT’

«I should have been down on those agencies a little more, but I will tell you this, in the scheme of things, all the fraud that’s been prosecuted, by the way, and all the fraud that’s probably out there is less than the ballroom at the White House,» Walz said. «So it puts it into perspective. It doesn’t make it right. Doesn’t make it right.»

The outgoing governor then explained his hope that people will remember his other accomplishments when talking about his legacy.

«Those are legacy things to address climate. They’re legacy things to address livability,» Walz said. «And I get it, that fraud tainted a lot of that. It doesn’t change the fundamentals underneath it. This is the best state in the country to raise a child, and it will continue to be so because of those investments.»

Three Republican lawmakers in Minnesota who spoke to Digital had a different take.

«Governor Walz is correct, he shouldn’t only be remembered for fraud,» Minnesota state Sen. Julia Coleman told Digital. «We should remember him spending our $18 billion surplus, raising taxes $10 billion, creating an unsustainable budget, letting rioters burn down Minneapolis, hurting our students and businesses with lockdowns and pardoning a child rapist.»

‘WE HAVE NOT SLOWED DOWN’: MINNESOTA NOT OUT OF THE WOODS ON MASSIVE FRAUD SCANDAL, EXPERT WARNS

Walz has faced fierce criticism for helping approve a full pardon for Tue Lue Vang, a Laotian national convicted of repeatedly raping a girl beginning when she was 10. Critics argued the decision prioritized Vang’s immigration concerns and family ties over the severity of his crimes, with a DHS official calling it «disgusting.»

Minnesota Republican House Speaker Lisa Demuth is running to replace Walz in November as she heads into a matchup with Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar to be the state’s next top executive. Demuth told Digital Walz’s legacy won’t be able to overcome the fraud scandal and pointed to Klobuchar’s tight association with him.

«Tim Walz’s legacy will always be defined by the out-of-control fraud crisis that occurred on his watch,» Demuth said. «Yet Amy Klobuchar praised him as ‘an incredible leader who delivers for the people of Minnesota.’ As the senior member of our state’s congressional delegation, Sen. Klobuchar likewise failed to address the fraud crisis and even skipped hearings on the matter in D.C. Minnesotans deserve better than four more years of Walz-style failure.»

Republican State Rep. Kristin Robbins chaired the last legislative session’s Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee, and she told Digital that «no matter how hard he tries to spin it, Tim Walz’s legacy will be that he allowed rampant fraud.»

«He says he ‘should have stopped it sooner,’ which is obvious, but he could still be doing more NOW,» Robbins said. «He has been silent on fraud for months instead of taking the actions that are STILL under his control.»

Robbins said Walz could have taken several steps to combat fraud, including firing senior DHS official Shireen Gandhi to send a message that abuse would not be tolerated, blocking Minnesota from seeking a SNAP waiver that allows applicants to attest to eligibility by phone without recording the call, and asking Attorney General Keith Ellison to prosecute Partners in Nutrition, a nonprofit that administered federally funded meal programs, rather than approve a settlement.

«His legacy will be fraud because he continues to enable fraud, despite two years of hearings, investigative journalists, and Office of the Legislative Auditor (OLA) reports,» Robbins said. «He was never serious about stopping it and still isn’t.»

Walz’s comments not only drew scrutiny from Republican lawmakers but also sparked backlash on social media.

«Walz accepts blame for fraud, but believes his loss of $9 billion in taxpayer dollars ‘shouldn’t define his legacy,’» the X account for Minnesota House Republicans posted on X. «It does, and Minnesotans are paying attention to his blatant disregard of their hard-earned tax dollars.»

Digital reached out to Walz’s office for comment.

politics, tim walz, minnesota fraud exposed, minnesota, gubernatorial