Introduction
As a collective body of academic law library directors, we reaffirm the importance of the standards set forth in Chapter 6 of the ABA Standards and Rules of Procedure for Approval of Law Schools.[1]These standards protect not only the integrity of law libraries, but also the quality of legal education they support. In particular, we highlight three foundational requirements: law library directors must: (1) hold faculty appointments with security of position; (2) have appropriate qualifications, knowledge, and experience in law library administration to support the law school’s program of legal education, and (3) have sufficient administrative autonomy separate from other campus libraries to direct the growth and development of the law library, control the use of its resources, and determine the sufficiency of its personnel.
Role of SALLD
We write in our capacity as members of the Society of Academic Law Library Directors (SALLD).[2] SALLD is an organization established to promote academic law librarianship and to represent the interests of academic law libraries. SALLD provides academic law library directors with an independent forum to speak on issues affecting legal education, law libraries, and the profession. SALLD’s members are directors of ABA-accredited or AALS-member law school libraries in the United States and its territories.
Security of Position and Due Process
ABA Standards, section 603(d), requires that “Except in extraordinary circumstances, a law library director shall hold a law faculty appointment with security of position reasonably similar to tenure.” This requirement reflects a core principle of legal education: law library directors serve in roles that combine substantial administrative leadership with research, service, and teaching, and they must be able to perform those roles with appropriate institutional protection.
Those with tenure have security of position in that they hold an indefinite appointment that can be terminated only for cause or under extraordinary circumstances.[3] For law library directors to have security of position, they must share the same protections. The principal purpose of tenure is to safeguard academic freedom, which is necessary for all who teach and conduct research in higher education. When faculty members can lose their positions because of their speech, publications, or research findings, they cannot properly fulfill their core responsibilities to advance and transmit knowledge.[4] Security of position has long been understood to provide a sufficient degree of economic security to make the profession attractive to individuals of ability; it is indispensable to the success of an institution in fulfilling its obligations to its students and to society.[5]
Security of position is meaningful only if it is accompanied by a fair and established process. Law library directors carry complex and consequential responsibilities—budgets, personnel, facilities, compliance, and strategic direction—that directly support the law school’s educational mission. These duties demand capable leadership, and institutions must address legitimate concerns about performance or workplace conditions.
At the same time, accountability must be exercised through the procedures and protections attached to the director’s appointment. A law school may not simply bypass those protections through summary action or by asserting that a law library director does not hold the security of position required by Standard 603(d). Such an action would violate Standard 603(d). Compliance with the ABA Standards requires both accountability and process.
Qualifications
Law library directors must have appropriate qualifications, knowledge, and experience in law library administration to support the law school’s program of legal education.[6] There is a strong presumption that the law library director has earned both a law degree and a degree in library or information science. Law schools with a law library director who lacks both degrees bear the burden of demonstrating compliance with the ABA Standards.[7]
We recognize that institutions may, in limited circumstances, make interim leadership appointments while a search is underway. Even in interim situations, however, law schools should ensure that leadership arrangements preserve the law library’s ability to meet accreditation requirements, support students and faculty, and maintain professional confidence in the law library’s governance. Interim appointments should be temporary, transparent, and structured with meaningful input from qualified law library professionals.
Administrative Autonomy
Academic law library directors must also have sufficient autonomy to run the law library without undue interference from the university library system to remain in compliance with ABA requirements.[8] Standard 605 requires that the law school have sufficient administrative autonomy to direct the growth and development of the law library, control the use of its resources, and determine the sufficiency of its personnel.[9] The standard further requires that the law library and the dean, in consultation with the faculty, shall determine law library policy.[10]
These protections are not matters of convenience or internal preference. They are necessary to ensure that the law library can meet the law school’s educational mission. When law library decision making is displaced or diluted by forces outside the law school, the law school’s ability to fulfill these obligations may be compromised.
SALLD Position
As academic law library directors, we write to reaffirm the accreditation principles. The Standards provide clear expectations for law library leadership, governance, and institutional responsibility. Faithful adherence to the ABA Standards is critical to maintaining the integrity of legal education.
We urge law schools to:
- Honor the security of position protections required by ABA Standard 603(d) and follow appropriate process in personnel matters;
- Ensure that law library leadership appointments satisfy ABA Standard 603(c) or, in interim circumstances, are arranged in a way that preserves compliance and the effective operation of the law library; and
- Preserve the administrative autonomy of the law library as required by Standard 605.
The ABA Standards exist to protect the integrity of legal education. Law libraries are essential to that mission, and law library directors must be positioned to lead them with both accountability and the protections the Standards require.
On behalf of the Society of Academic Law Library Directors (SALLD),
Carla Wale, Chair
Sara Gras, Vice Chair
Melanie Knapp, Secretary
Alyson Drake
Monique Gonzalez
Cody James
Jordan Jefferson
Todd Melnick
Jane O’Connell
[1] American Bar Association, 2025-2026 Standards and Rules of Procedure for Approval of Law Schools, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/accreditation/standards/standards-rules/
[2] Society of Academic Law Library Directors, Mission, https://acadlawlibdir.wordpress.com/
[3] See American Association of University Professors (AAUP), Tenure, https://www.aaup.org/tenure#:~:text=A%20tenured%20appointment%20is%20an%20indefinite%20appointment,such%20as%20financial%20exigency%20and%20program%20discontinuation.
[4] Id.
[5] See AAUP, 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure with 1970 Interpretive Comments, https://www.aaup.org/reports-publications/aaup-policies-reports/policy-statements/1940-statement-principles-academic#11
[6] ABA Standard sec. 603(c).
[7] ABA Standard 603, Interpretation 603-2.
[8] “This Standard envisions law library participation in university library decisions that may affect the law library. While it is preferred that the law school administer the law library, a law library may be administered as part of a university library system if the dean, the law library, and the faculty of the law school are responsible for the determination of law library policies, priorities, personnel matters, and funding requests.” ABA Standard 605, Interpretation 605-1.
[9] ABA Standards sec. 605(a).
[10] ABA Standards sec. 605(d).
