This paper tries to outline how written exams at Austrian law schools could be designed in order to foster skills that students might need in a legal world permeated by Large Language Models (LLMs). After reflecting on differences between LLM-decision-making and human legal interpretation, the paper argues that LLMs could be a threat to the plurality of legal opinions and derives a model person for legal education, the “critical lawyer”, merging the need for using automatization benefits whilst maintaining the legal profession’s fundamental role in a democratic society. Subsequently, the paper analyses FÜM III, University of Vienna’s obligatory written exam in public law, as to whether it serves the model person of a “critical lawyer” or could be partially improved.