“The American Bar Association places pressure on top public law schools to implement ‘unconstitutional’ race and sex-based preferences in admissions and hiring, according to a new report by the Pacific Legal Foundation,” reports The College Fix;
The foundation’s report,..says the ABA does this through its “monopoly” accreditation process….20 of the responding schools were criticized [by the ABA] for failing to meet the ABA’s “diversity standards,” thus risking their accreditation status. These criticisms include failing to hire a sufficient amount of faculty from minority groups, having “limited DEI curriculum integration,” and “not having enough LGBTQ+ support groups.”…these [ABA] standards often require or encourage practices that conflict with the U.S. Constitution and state and federal civil rights laws….“The ABA has told law schools that they have to implement the ABA’s own problematic diversity standards, even if state or federal law might prohibit them from doing so,” [says] Zack Smith, senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation….the bar association’s accreditation Standards 205 and 206 obligate law schools to demonstrate a commitment to diversity and inclusion…Schools that fail to meet these standards risk punishment….The report documents examples of schools being pushed to adopt racial preferences despite [state laws banning racial preferences]….George Mason University School of Law faced an extensive ABA investigation that ended only after the school “quietly lowered” its admissions standards for certain racial groups to satisfy the accreditor’s diversity requirements.
The American Bar Association is the only accreditor of juris doctorate programs, so it wields significant influence over law schools — “monopoly power,” according to the report. This gives the ABA a “quasi-governmental” status that makes its positions and pressuring of universities unconstitutional, the report says.
Even private entities can be liable for pressuring or colluding with the government to unconstitutionally discriminate, according to the Supreme Court’s decision in Addickes v. S.H. Kress Co., and federal appeals court rulings such as Dossett v. First State Bank (2005).
The federal law against racial discrimination in contracts (42 USC 1981) allows people and entities to be sued for aiding or abetting illegal discrimination, even when it is discrimination by private institutions.
So the ABA could be sued under 42 USC 1981 & 42 USC 1983 for pressuring law schools to make hiring and admissions decisions based on race.
