The relationship between a two-semester university-based legal clinic experience and the moral judgment of third-year law school student participants was investigated. A nonstandard form of the Kohlberg Moral Judgment Interview (MJI) was administered to 20 students at the beginning of the clinic and to the remaining 14 students near the completion of the clinic 9 months later. Moral Maturity Scores (MMS), which measure changes in moral judgment, increased significantly (at least one-half stage) in the direction of principled post-conventional thought between pre- and post-clinic interviews for one-half of the sample. Principled thought is the realization that principles of justice rather than rules and laws underlie human relationships. In one case, the increase was of one full stage, stage 3 to stage 4. For the remaining half of the sample, all but two individuals increased their MMS upward within a range of 42 points, with a mean increase of 24.4 points. Given the limitations of the research, the results appear to suggest that law clinics provide an opportunity for moral education and can challenge existing meanings of justice. It was suggested that role-taking opportunities during the clinic promoted the changes. (SW)