The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights yesterday released a report echoing a controversial theory — minority students who gain special admission to better-regarded law schools based on their race end up in academic settings for which they aren’t qualified, leading to lower grades and bar passage rates than if they had been admitted to a school that doesn’t use racial preferences. (Here’s a press release from the commission, today’s NLJ story on the report, and a recent WSJ op-ed by one of the report’s authors.)
The 220-page report gives momentum to an idea first researched by UCLA law professor Rick Sander, which he laid out in a 2004 law review article.
Using data on grades and bar-passage rates for black and white law students across the country, Sander found that black and white law students granted admission to a school based on similar credentials earned roughly the same grades and passed the bar at a similar rate. But black law students given preferential treatment over white students — that is, admitted to a school despite lesser qualifications than their white counterparts — had poorer grades and bar-exam results, and higher attrition rates, than whites who attended the same school.
The explanation? Sander blames racial preferences in admissions, writing that even though affirmative action has led to more black students in law schools, it has actually resulted in a 7.9% drop in the number of black attorneys entering the profession.
The commission’s report largely picks up Sander’s theme, stating that “admitting students into law schools for which they might not academically be prepared could harm their academic performance and hinder their ability to obtain secure and gainful employment.”