Gill Opens Hearing on the Future of DEI in Law Schools and the Legal Profession

WASHINGTON-Task Force on Defending Constitutional Rights and Exposing Institutional Abuses Chairman Brandon Gill (R-Texas) delivered opening remarks at today's hearing titled "The Future of DEI in Law School Accreditation and the Legal Profession." In his remarks, Task Force Chairman Gill showcased how the American Bar Association (ABA) has been ideologically captured by radical leftists and has been pursuing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices in both law school admissions and the legal profession. He continued on to say that while enforcement of DEI in law school admissions is currently suspended, DEI-related mandatory coursework remains in force, and that the ABA remains committed to promoting these discriminatory policies.

Below are Task Force Chairman Gill's opening remarks as prepared for delivery:

The rule of law and equal access to justice for Americans are bedrock principles enshrined in the Constitution.

Access to our legal system and the rights and freedoms we enjoy as Americans as a result of the rule of law are fundamental components of the success of our Nation as we celebrate the 250^th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

So it should concern all Americans that these principles are eroded by discriminatory DEI practices, and concern them even more that these DEI policies have been promoted by attorneys with the legal training to know better.

The ABA as an institution plays an outsized role in American law and the legal profession.

Ever since it was founded in 1878, the ABA has grown to be the entity that sets the accreditation standards for American Law Schools.

Since 1952 the ABA has been recognized by the federal government as the only law school accreditor.

Though State Supreme Courts have power to regulate the conduct of legal professionals within those states, many states also recognize the ABA as the accreditor for their law schools.

Furthermore, the ABA evaluates judicial nominees, promulgates model rules of professional conduct for attorneys, and speaks, for many people, as a voice for attorneys in the United States.

So, what has the ABA done with this impressive accumulation of power and prestige?

Unfortunately, it appears that the ABA, ideologically captured by radical leftists, has continuously pursued discriminatory DEI practices.

This included requiring law schools to consider race as a factor for admissions and to elevate racial discrimination over merit in order to "diversify" the profession.

This wasn't done in secret. The ABA published an accreditation standard to enforce it, Standard 206.

And the implementing guidance for Standard 206 says that even if those DEI practices are illegal under a constitutional provision or statute, that illegality is quote "not a justification for a school's noncompliance with Standard 206." End quote.

Even after the Supreme Court held in 2023 that race-based admissions practices violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the ABA did not voluntarily reverse course.

It doubled down and told law schools it would continue to enforce its DEI standards in the accreditation process.

Through accreditation Standard 206 and Standard 303(c), the ABA used its institutional power to bully law schools to also require mandatory DEI related courses in addition to instituting race-based policies in admissions.

As we heard from witnesses during our hearing on July 14, discriminatory DEI policies, in addition to being illegal, seek to pit Americans against one another on account of their immutable characteristics, and, at their core, fundamentally reject the American ideal of equal justice and of achieving success based on one's merit.

The ABA-an organization made up of attorneys who should know better-persisted in promoting DEI practices even though race-based admissions, forced speech, and considering race in employment decisions clearly violate the law.

These practices violate federal civil rights statutes passed by Congress more than 60 years ago in addition to violating the U.S. Constitution.

It wasn't until President Trump issued executive orders and threatened the ABA's accreditation monopoly at the federal level that the ABA begrudgingly started to assess whether to get rid of these DEI requirements.

Enforcement of Standard 206 on DEI in admissions is currently suspended, and although the ABA Standards Committee recently recommended that it be repealed, it received numerous comments still supporting keeping DEI in full force, and the full repeal has not yet taken effect.

Standard 303(c) on DEI related mandatory coursework remains in force. And although the Accreditation Committee is reviewing that standard as well, no final decision has been made.

Meanwhile, the ABA devotes entire pages on its public-facing website to promoting DEI in the legal profession, leaving me skeptical that it has learned the error of its ways and will make a clean break from racist DEI policies.

ABA President Behnke even stated in February of this year when speaking to the ABA Delegates that, "we will not abandon our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion."

Given this reality, it's no surprise that many states like Florida, Texas, Alabama and Tennessee are moving away, or considering moving away, from the traditional monopoly in law school accreditations exercised by the ABA.

Our purpose today is to examine the role and future of an institution like the ABA in law school accreditation and in the legal profession in our country.

The harm that DEI has caused to the legal profession and to Americans who deserve equal access to justice and competent representation from their legal professionals is extensive.

We must ensure a course of action that will restore merit and integrity to American law and the legal profession.