A coalition of 21 state attorneys general is demanding that the Council of the American Bar Association end its advocacy for race-based accreditation.
Led by Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, a Republican, the GOP attorneys general noted in a letter to the ABA Council, the organization that serves as the accrediting body for U.S. law schools, that a current rule requires law schools to consider race in admissions and employment. The attorneys general are demanding the ABA align with the Supreme Court’s ruling ending affirmative action and race-based admissions practices at schools.
“The rule of law cannot long survive if the organization that accredits legal education requires every American law school to ignore the Constitution and civil rights law,” Skrmetti said in a press release. “The American Bar Association has long pursued the high calling of promoting respect for the law and the integrity of the legal profession, and we call on the organization to recommit to those ideals and ensure that its standards for law schools comport with federal law.”
Currently, ABA standards say that “a law school shall demonstrate by concrete action a commitment to diversity and inclusion by providing full opportunities for the study of law and entry into the profession by members of underrepresented groups, particularly racial and ethnic minorities, and a commitment to having a student body that is diverse with respect to gender, race, and ethnicity.”
Skrmetti said that if those standards remain in place, every accredited law school in the country could see itself as the target of “punitive civil rights litigation.”
According to the letter, the ABA is in the process of considering revisions to the section in question, Section 206, due to the Supreme Court ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. But the state attorneys general argued the proposed revisions would not solve the problem, as they would maintain language about taking “concrete actions” to achieve racial and gender diversity.
The attorneys general also pointed out that through the proposed revisions, the ABA appears to be “telling law schools that if they comply with binding nondiscrimination law, their accreditation is in jeopardy” because, quoting the proposed revision, the ABA said, “Any law that purports to prohibit consideration of any of the identity characteristics listed in [the accreditations standards] in admissions or employment decisions is not a justification for a school’s non-compliance with [the racial standard].”
The proposed revisions also encourage law schools to find loopholes and “means other than those prohibited by law” to achieve the diversity goals, according to the letter.
Skrmetti was joined by the attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Virginia.
Jennifer Rosato Perea, managing director of ABA Accreditation and Legal Education, told the Washington Examiner in a statement that the ABA Council is considering revisions to its standards.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“In February at its quarterly meeting, the Council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar delayed further consideration of proposed changes to Standard 206 in light of the June 2023 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that struck down the use of race in higher education admissions,” Rosato Perea said.
“The Council is now considering revisions to Standard 206,” she added, “with the intent to adopt recommendations at its August meeting. Recommendations adopted by the Council are subject to a Notice and Comment period, and this input will be reviewed consistent with the process in which the Council considers any change in legal education standards.”
