[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 4, 2014)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E163-E164]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 EFFORT UNDERWAY BY THE STANDARDS REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN BAR 
  ASSOCIATION MAY RESTRICT ACCESS TO LEGAL EDUCATION FOR STUDENTS OF 
                                 COLOR

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. CEDRIC L. RICHMOND

                              of louisiana

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  Mr. RICHMOND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose efforts currently 
underway by the Standards Review Committee of the American Bar 
Association (ABA) that may unintentionally restrict access to legal 
education for students of color and negatively affect minority serving 
institutions.
  Five years ago, a broad based, national coalition of groups that 
included all of the national bar associations of color helped craft the 
current ABA accreditation standard regarding bar passage. That standard 
balanced the need for quality assurances with the goal of maintaining 
access to law school for students of color. It required law schools to 
demonstrate that three out of their last five graduating classes got an 
ultimate pass rate of at least 75% or an average of 75% over five 
years.
  Since then, as part of the ABA Council of Legal Education's 
application for re-recognition, the Department of Education as the 
accrediting agency for law schools, the Department reviewed this 
standard, did not find any problems with it, and renewed the Council's 
accrediting authority.
  Now the Council's Standards Review Committee is proposing to change 
this standard to rigidly require schools to demonstrate that every one 
of its graduating classes achieved an ultimate pass rate of 75 percent 
in every year, regardless of the pass rates in the jurisdictions where 
the school's graduates sit for the exam, or else the school would face 
an immediate sanctions hearing, which is the first step in revoking a 
school's accreditation.
  The SRC has acknowledged that it hasn't done a study and does not 
know the effects of its proposal. Instead of undertaking the work 
needed to justify raising its bar accreditation requirement, it has 
taken a shortcut. This shortcut will potentially limit enrollment for 
students of color, and affect many minority serving institutions, 
including law schools affiliated with historically black colleges and 
universities.
  A wide-ranging coalition--over forty letters express opposition to 
this standard. Included among the groups opposing the change are the 
Society of American Law Teachers, Clinical Legal Education Association, 
ABA Council of Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Educational Pipeline, 
Historically Black College and University Law School Deans, deans of 
other schools, the National Bar Association, Hispanic National Bar 
Association, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, National 
Native American Bar Association, and the Congressional Black, Hispanic, 
Asian Pacific, and Progressive Caucuses.
  People care about this issue because the Standards Review Committee 
proposal would create a perverse incentive for law schools to limit 
enrollment solely to students with high standardized test scores. When 
law schools face accreditation review, their only way to remedy 
perceived deficiencies is to reduce the chance that students will not 
pass the bar. The ranks of lawyers reflect a different reality. Many 
students enter law school with adequate but not stellar standardized 
test scores and prove through hard work an ability to succeed, 
graduate, pass the bar, find a job, and contribute meaningfully to the 
legal profession.
  Another issue is not immediately evident, but equally damaging. The 
National Bar Association has posted in its SRC comments on the 
proposal, a study worth reading. The study shows that students of color 
tend to sit for the bar exam in state jurisdictions where the bar exam 
is harder, and bar passage rates are lower. Schools that graduate these 
students will fare worse under the proposal than schools with a higher 
percentage of students that remain in state and tend to have a higher 
percentage of Caucasian students. I note here that law schools 
affiliated with historically black colleges and universities have 
produced some of the most important African American leadership 
throughout the history of this nation. The proposal's potential effects 
warrant in-depth study to ensure they are fully understood.
  This is one of the issues, raised by many of those who have written 
to the Standards Review Committee--that the committee is making policy 
without data. The Council of Legal Education controls the only 
available data on the ultimate pass rates of particular schools in 
particular jurisdictions, but despite repeated requests, it has not 
undertaken a careful impact study before moving forward on this 
fundamental policy change.
  This is why we believe that the Standards Review Committee bears the 
burden of conducting a careful ultimate pass rate study of the pass 
rates achieved by particular schools in particular jurisdictions before 
moving forward on this proposal. To date, it risks unintentionally 
discriminating against schools that graduate large numbers of students 
of color.
  Mr. Speaker, I will close by restating the American Bar Association's 
own arguments in support of diversity in the legal profession. The ABA 
has outlined four powerful rationales for why it must focus its 
energies on helping to diversify the legal profession:
  The Democracy Rationale--that lawyers and judges play a unique role 
in our democratic institutions, and a more diverse judiciary and legal 
profession will create greater trust and confidence in the fairness of 
our mechanisms of government and in the rule of law.
  The Business Rationale--that businesses must be responsive to their 
increasingly diverse customers and clients, here and around the world, 
and lawyers who are culturally diverse can help businesses reach and 
better serve these diverse populations.
  The Leadership Rationale--that lawyers often play leadership roles in 
our society, both in and out of politics, and a more broadly inclusive 
legal profession is essential to providing under-represented groups 
with access to these roles.
  The Demographic Rationale--that by 2042 or sooner, America will be a 
country of color, in which a majority of her citizens will be people of 
color.
  These arguments reflect the import of expanding access to the legal 
field, not making it harder.

[[Page E164]]



                          ____________________