The ABA Retreats From Its Diversity Mandate—or Does It?

James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal ^ | October 16, 2024 | Mark Pulliam

[karpov]

Most industries and occupations have trade associations to promote their interests through lobbying, marketing, and public relations. Lawyers are no exception. One difference between, say, the American Urological Association and the American Bar Association, however, is that instead of merely providing opportunities for professional networking and vacation junkets dressed up as “conventions,” the left-leaning ABA is clothed with quasi-governmental regulatory authority over the entire field of legal education. The ABA effectively oversees the operations of nearly 200 law schools in the United States. Absurdly, this professional cartel regulates itself!

The U.S. Department of Education limits eligibility for federal student loans to law students enrolled in schools approved (or “accredited”) by the ABA. More importantly, the supreme courts of all but four states restrict eligibility to take the bar exam to graduates of law schools accredited by the ABA. Law schools cannot operate unless their students are eligible for federal student loans to defray the exorbitant tuition costs, and, with rare exceptions, no students would enroll in an expensive three-year J.D. program unless they could sit for the bar exam upon graduation. Thus, the activist ABA is the de facto gatekeeper for the entire legal academy, and therefore the legal profession itself.

The ABA’s detailed accreditation requirements micro-manage every aspect of law school, including admissions, facilities, governance, curriculum, faculty hiring and tenure, and even internal policies regarding free speech. Leaving aside the question why the ABA has been accorded these awesome (and monopolistic) regulatory powers, it is axiomatic that the ABA cannot force law schools to violate the law, including the 2023 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, which prohibited race-based preferences in admissions.

[jagusafr]

I’ve been a practicing attorney for 39 years. Never been a member, specifically because it adopts positions diametrically opposed to my deeply held moral and religious beliefs.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

I never joined either, for the same reasons.

Some state bar associations have the same issues, and also have been given various degrees of authority within their states.

[Notthemomma]

That’s also true for the medical side of it. The premiere lobbying group is the AMA, and less than 25% of physicians are members. Few physicians can agree with its political leanings. No, not leanings, bent way over to one side, almost horizontal.