Posted: May 2, 2025
Rules Governing Licensed Paralegal Practitioners – Comment Period Closed June 16, 2025
RGLPP15-703. Qualifications for Licensure as a Licensed Paralegal Practitioner. Amend. The proposed amendments to Rule 15-703: (1) changes the educational requirement option for Licensed Paralegal Practitioner licensure from an associate’s degree in paralegal studies to an associate’s degree in any subject plus a paralegal certificate, (2) changes the educational requirement option for Licensed Paralegal Practitioner licensure of a bachelor’s degree in paralegal studies to a bachelor’s degree in any subject, and (3) includes general cleanup to add formatting and technical consistency.
I write in strong support of the proposed amendments to Rule 15-703 regarding the qualifications for licensure as a Licensed Paralegal Practitioner (LPP). Expanding the educational pathways to include an associate’s or bachelor’s degree in any subject—rather than limiting eligibility to degrees specifically in paralegal studies—represents a forward-thinking and inclusive approach to the development of the LPP profession.
Allowing individuals with degrees in other fields, combined with a paralegal certificate, to qualify for licensure will enrich the profession with a broader spectrum of thinking, training, and perspective. Candidates with backgrounds in areas such as social work, business, psychology, education, or the sciences bring with them valuable skills in communication, analysis, advocacy, and empathy—qualities that are critically important in the client-facing roles that LPPs often fulfill. This interdisciplinary knowledge base will ultimately enhance client service and legal problem-solving within the scope of LPP practice.
Moreover, this change is likely to attract a more diverse pool of applicants, including those who may have taken non-traditional educational or career paths. Opening the door to individuals from varied academic and professional backgrounds fosters a more inclusive legal profession that better reflects and serves the diverse communities of Utah.
For these reasons, I support the proposed amendments to Rule 15-703 and commend all those involved for taking this important step toward greater accessibility, flexibility, and diversity in the legal services workforce.
Relaxing the rules for a paralegal license would greatly help many legal professionals who are currently working but don’t have a license because of the requirements of this law. Making licensure more accessible would help relieve the strain on many attorneys that could use the help of a great paralegal.
I do not understand why we are lowering the standard for those who wish to practice in family law any further. The LPPs are primarily helping in family law, which is an important area of work that can cause tremendous consequences to families and children. It is my understanding the reason why we require potential court rostered mediators to take extra steps to mediate divorce matters is to avoid increased potential errors and harming Utah families. If we have a higher bar for mediators, why would we want to lower the bar for LLPs who are going to largely practice in family law? Is there any data to support that there is a large number of qualified individuals are barred from entry?