Abstract
This article argues that the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (MPRE) should not test knowledge of the Comments to the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Through textual analysis, the author demonstrates that the Comments have become increasingly long, complex, and difficult to understand over time. The analysis also reveals an inconsistent use of mandatory versus advisory language, creating confusion about the Comments’ intended role as interpretive guidance rather than binding rules. The author argues that the role of the Comments is broadly misunderstood, and that requiring MPRE test-takers to master this extensive body of complex advisory material has the potential to compound that misunderstanding. While the article views the Comments as profoundly valuable resources for research and practice, it concludes that new lawyers should not be required to commit them to memory.
Keywords
LegalEthicsEducation, ModelRulesComments, MPREReform