A Report on Mandatory CLE in Maryland

Notice Regarding the Consideration of Mandatory CLE

On December 19, 2024, the Supreme Court voted to continue its consideration of whether to adopt a mandatory CLE requirement. The Court also voted to consider, as an alternative to mandatory CLE, whether to adopt a mandatory reporting requirement of voluntary CLE. 

On Monday, April 28, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a notice regarding the postopnement of consideration of both alternatives until further notice. 

The Court's notice can be found here.

Upcoming Open Meeting

On Thursday, December 19, 2024 at 9:00 a.m., the Supreme Court will hold an online meeting for the purpose of discussing whether the Court should continue to explore the possibility of mandatory CLE in Maryland. The meeting is a continuation of the Court’s discussion that occurred in a similar format on March 27, 2024. No public comments will be taken at this meeting. The meeting will be livestreamed on the Court's webcast page.

Background: On June 16, 2023, the Workgroup to Study Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in Maryland presented its final report and recommendations to the Supreme Court. The Court then solicited written comments on the report and held a public forum to receive further public input on the report. In March 2024, the Court held an online meeting to discuss implementation of MCLE and decided to continue consideration of the report and recommendations. The report and recommendations are below.

Reviewing the Written Comments About the Report and Recommendations

In September 2023, the Supreme Court solicited written comments on the report and recommendations of the Workgroup to Study Mandatory Continuing Legal Education in Maryland. Anyone wishing to review the written comments may do so by coming to the Clerk’s Office at the Supreme Court during regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.). While not required, it would be helpful if you make a reservation to review the written materials. You may do so by emailing the Clerk at [email protected] or by calling 410-260-1500.
 

About the Report and Recommendations:

In November 2022, the Supreme Court of Maryland commissioned a work group to study whether to implement mandatory CLE in Maryland and, if so, how mandatory CLE should be implemented. The attached report is the result of that study.

The work group, chaired by the Honorable Stuart R. Berger of the Appellate Court of Maryland, consisted of 27 attorneys, legal academics, and judges from diverse backgrounds and from around the State. Here are the recommendations of the work group:

• Recommendation 1: The Supreme Court of Maryland should adopt a requirement that attorneys complete a minimum number of CLE hours to remain in good standing.
• Recommendation 2: If the Supreme Court of Maryland adopts mandatory CLE, such a mandate should include the following provisions:
• Recommendation 2(a): A mandate should require a minimum of 12 hours of CLE each year;
• Recommendation 2(b): Attorneys should report their CLE completion each year, with a reporting period that runs from January 1 to December 31, or that otherwise aligns with the other reporting requirements imposed upon Maryland attorneys;
• Recommendation 2(c): The “1-1-1 plan” – within the 12-hour requirement, attorneys should complete at least one-hour each of CLE concerning (1) ethics and professional responsibility; (2) diversity, equity, and inclusion; and (3) mental health and substance abuse;
• Recommendation 2(d): Attorneys can carry-over up to 100 percent, or 12 hours, of CLE in excess of the 12-hour minimum, from one reporting period to the next; this includes carrying over the “1-1-1 plan” requirements, so long as each of the required subjects are reflected within the carried over hours;
• Recommendation 2(e): Only attorneys registered as “inactive” with the Maryland bar should be exempt from compliance with a CLE mandate in Maryland; newly admitted attorneys should be exempt from compliance during the reporting period in which they earn admission to the Maryland bar;
• Recommendation 3: Maryland should embrace the following approach to developing and applying a CLE mandate:
• Recommendation 3(a): Any mandatory CLE rule should take an inclusive and flexible approach to providing credit for CLE activities in an effort to ease the burden of compliance;
• Recommendation 3(b): Any mandatory CLE rule for Maryland should seek to align itself as closely as possible with those rules of neighboring jurisdictions such as Virginia, Pennsylvania, or New York, in an effort to ease compliance for Maryland attorneys who must adhere to multiple CLE rules.

Final Report and Recommendations of the Workgroup to Study Mandatory CLE in Maryland
Appendices to the Final Report