I have written at some length about the problems with ABA accreditation. Alas, some of the most egregious behaviors from the ABA are considered confidential. Thankfully, the Pacific Legal Foundation sent public information requests to 50 public law schools concerning their accreditation process. The ABA routinely encourages schools to engage in unlawful discrimination, and rewards schools that are engaging in unlawful discrimination. The results are at once disappointing, but entirely predictable. The mere fact that the ABA temporarily suspended its DEI mandates does not mean much. They will revert to form as soon as the political pressure is gone.
Here is an excerpt from the report:
On the one hand, 20 law schools received accreditation reports indicating failure to meet the ABA's diversity standards. Common points of failure included not having enough minority faculty, not having enough women faculty, not having enough student diversity, failing to follow through with diversity plans, concerns about the treatment of minority faculty, having limited DEI curriculum integration, not having enough LGBTQ+ support groups, and attrition concerns for minority students. On the other hand, 25 law schools received accreditation reports acknowledging or praising the schools' compliance with the ABA's diversity standards. Common commendations included having a strong commitment to hiring diverse faculty, having diversity-focused scholarships and fellowships, having pipeline programs for minority students, having active DEI committees and task forces, having diversity recruitment strategies, having inclusive classroom initiatives, having a presence of DEI leadership positions, and having faculty diversity training.
Figure 1 displays the number of law schools that received qualitative evaluations of a variety of accreditation diversity standards. Each category aligns with a question in the accreditation report. No more than 15 of the 50 law schools received qualitative evaluations in any particular category.
