[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 80 (Tuesday, April 25, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 24226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-10231]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division

[Civil Action No. 95-1221 (CRR)]


United States District Court for the District of Columbia, United 
States of America, Plaintiff, vs. American Bar Association, Defendant

    Take notice that The United States of America and the American Bar 
Association (``ABA'') have filed a joint motion for an order modifying 
the final judgment entered by the United States District Court for the 
District of Columbia on June 25, 1996 (``Final Judgment''). The parties 
have agreed to modify the Final Judgment to reflect changes in the law 
school accreditation process necessitated by regulations promulgated by 
the Department of Education (``DOE'') pursuant to the Higher Education 
Act, 20 U.S.C. 1099(b) (1998). Prior to the entry of the order 
modifying the Final Judgment, the Court and the parties will consider 
public comments. Any such comments on the proposed modification 
described in this Notice must be filed within 60 days following the 
date of this Notice. The Complaint, Final Judgment and proposed 
modification are further described below.
    The Complaint, filed on June 27, 1995, alleged that the ABA had 
violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act in its law school accreditation 
activities. The Complaint alleged that the ABA had restrained 
competition among professional personnel at ABA-approved law schools by 
fixing their salaries and other compensation levels and working 
conditions, and by limiting competition from non-ABA-Approved schools. 
The ABA and United States agreed to a settlement, and on June 25, 1996, 
the Court entered the Final Judgment, enjoining the ABA from fixing 
compensation and from enforcing a boycott of non-ABA approved schools. 
Moreover, because the Complaint alleged that the ABA had allowed the 
accreditation process to be misused by law school personnel with a 
direct economic interest in its outcome, the Final Judgment ordered the 
BA to take a number of steps to limit the influence of law school 
personnel in the accreditation process, including having the ABA's 
House of Delegates review and approve certain aspects of the 
accreditation process.
    After the Final Judgment was entered, DOE determined that allowing 
the House of Delegates to act as the final decision-maker for 
accreditation activities did not conform to provisions of the Higher 
Education Act and DOE regulations. Consequently, the ABA, in order to 
retain its status as a DOE-recognized accreditation agency, has 
modified the House's role, and the parties to the Final Judgment have 
agreed that the Court should make appropriate modifications to the 
Final Judgment so that it conforms to the DOE requirements.
    Under the joint proposal, Sections IV(A) and VIII(D) of the Final 
Judgment will be modified and a new Section IV(M) will be added. As 
modified, the Judgment will be consistent with DOE's rules which 
prevent the House of Delegates from being the final decision-maker in 
establishing the standards, interpretations, and rules used to evaluate 
law schools or in determining whether a school receives or maintains 
its accreditation. Consistent with DOE requirements, the House of 
Delegates will maintain a role in reviewing standards, interpretations, 
and rules and in reviewing accreditation decisions and can remand such 
actions to the Council of the ABA's Section on Legal Education and 
Admissions to the Bar, the DOE-recognized accrediting agency.
    The United States has filed with the Court a memorandum setting 
forth its position with respect to modifying the Final Judgment. Copies 
of the Complaint, the Final Judgment, the Modification to the Final 
Judgment, the Stipulation containing the parties' tentative consent, 
the Joint Motion, the United States' memorandum and all other papers 
filed in connection with this motion are available for inspection at 
the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the 
District of Columbia, 333 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 
20001, and at Suite 215, Antitrust Division, Department of Justice, 325 
Seventh Street, NW, Washington, DC 20530, (Telephone: (202) 514-2481).
    Interested persons may submit comments regarding this matter within 
sixty (60) days of the date of this notice. Such comments, and 
responses thereto, will be filed with the Court. Comments should be 
directed to Nancy M. Goodman, Chief, Computers and Finance Section, 
Room 9500, 600 E Street, NW, Antitrust Division, Department of Justice, 
Washington, DC 20530, (telephone: (202) 307-6122)

M.J. Moltenbrey,
Director of Civil Non-Merger Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 00-10231 Filed 4-24-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M