by Locker Room contributor
Writing on NRO this morning, Peter Kirsanow (a member of the US Civil Rights Commission and also the National Labor Relations Board, where he appears to be interpreting the authoritarian National Labor Relations Act in a way that Big Labor doesn’t like, judging from a planned AFL-CIO protest) discusses the American Bar Association’s proposed “diversity” standards and argues that they run afoul of the Supreme Court’s rulings in Grutter and Gratz. You can read his piece here.
I know that there are a number of law schools which have never played the “diversity” game by trying to get more people from “underrepresented” groups into the student body. Such institutions would face the possible loss of ABA accreditation under the new standards.
There is a solution that cuts the Gordian Knot: Remove all legal consequences to having ABA accreditation or not. There is no reason why any law school should have to dance to the ABA’s tune if it doesn’t want to. “Accredited” doesn’t mean “good” and “unaccredited” doesn’t mean “bad.”