The American Bar Association (ABA) faces mounting criticism over a proposed change to its law school accreditation standards that would eliminate explicit references to “race and ethnicity,” per Reuters.
Legal education leaders and civil rights organizations argue that the move could hinder efforts to diversify law school faculties and student bodies.
The ABA currently mandates that accredited law schools ensure “full opportunities” for “racial and ethnic minorities” and foster a diverse student body “with respect to gender, race, and ethnicity.”
The proposed revision, however, renames the standard as “access to legal education and the profession” and replaces references to specific identities with broader language, requiring that law schools promote access for “persons including those with identities that historically have been disadvantaged or excluded from the legal profession.”
Prominent groups, including the Law School Admission Council (LSAC), the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the Society of American Law Teachers, and a coalition of 44 law school deans, have voiced opposition to this proposed change.
In public comments submitted to the ABA, these groups warned that removing explicit language around race and ethnicity could roll back decades of progress in creating more inclusive environments within legal education.
Response to Supreme Court’s Affirmative Action Ban in Admissions
The proposed revision follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling, which barred colleges and universities from considering race as a factor in admissions. This decision stemmed from cases involving Harvard University and the University of North Carolina.
In response, the ABA’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar formed a subcommittee to revise its diversity standard. Although the court’s ruling limited the use of race in admissions, critics argue that the ABA’s response goes beyond the court’s requirements.
In a joint letter, 44 law school deans, including those from the University of Michigan, UC Berkeley, Vanderbilt, and Boston University, argued that the Supreme Court ruling does not prevent institutions from aiming for diversity. The court “only limited the means” by which diversity goals can be pursued, they emphasized, while maintaining that diversity remains a crucial objective in legal education.
Concerns Over Impact on Diversity and Inclusion Progress
The Law School Admission Council echoed these concerns, asserting that the revised standard could “undermine the progress that has been made toward fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion in legal education.”
Despite these objections, a small number of groups and individuals support the revision. A coalition of attorneys general from 17 Democratic-led states backed the new standard but recommended reinstating the term “diversity” in its title.
While it remains unclear how the Supreme Court’s affirmative action ruling will impact law school demographics long term, some preliminary figures are emerging. Among the nation’s top 14 law schools, five have reported steady or increased proportions of students of color since the ruling.
However, Harvard Law School revealed a decline, with students of color comprising 43% of the current class, down from 51% in 2023.
The ABA will continue to review public feedback on the proposed changes and will release its own demographic data on law school admissions affected by the Supreme Court ruling later this year.
