Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public policy matters. Any expressions of opinion are those of the author. We welcome responses to the views presented here. To join the debate, please email us at [email protected].

At next month’s National Lawyers Convention, the Professional Responsibility and Legal Education Practice Group will present a panel discussion that will address two recently proposed standards for legal education promulgated by the American Bar Association’s Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar.

That ABA Section is responsible for law school accreditation through an appointment from the U.S. Department of Education. Recently, the Section adopted a revision to Standard 303, Curriculum. One subsection calls for law schools to provide “substantial opportunities for students for . . . the development of a professional identity.” In addition, it has mandated that law schools “provide education to students on bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism.” That training is to be offered twice: “(1) at the start of the program of legal education, and (2) at least once again before graduation.”

For its part, the ABA’s guidance states, cross-cultural competence entails “the obligation of lawyers to promote a justice system that provides equal access and eliminates bias, discrimination, and racism in the law.” And, the personal identity “means understanding, accepting, internalizing, and demonstrating all the competencies, obligations, and values that are needed for a successful practice that owes special responsibilities to clients, the justice system, the rule of law, and society.” “Bias (explicit and implicit), discrimination (overt and subtle), and racism (systemic and structural manifestations of bias and discrimination) can impede the legal system’s fulfillment of its pledge of equal justice under the law.”

Our panel of experts will discuss the nature of the obligations the revised standard places on law schools and the scope of such terms as “cross-cultural competency” and “racism.” Will the new standards require new courses or course changes? Will the new courses displace any of the old ones? Will the implementation turn out to be education or training? If bias can be implicit, how will it be identified? Will the training necessarily include guarding against microaggressions? Is this standard in tension with Students for Fair Admission v. UNC? What role does the Department of Education have to scrutinize this new standard?

Please join us on Thursday, November 14, at 1:45pm in the Georgetown Room of the Washington Hilton (or via livestream) as our experts discuss these and other related issues.