Bias, DEI, and CLE: Navigating the Constitutional Limits of Mandatory Training
Jurisdictions increasingly require attorneys to complete CLE credits addressing bias, diversity, and inclusion in the legal profession. These requirements are often justified as tools to help lawyers reduce bias and ensure competent representation of clients from varied backgrounds. But these mandatory programs also raise significant and unsettled questions about how the profession may regulate bias in a manner consistent with federal law. When does a required course permissibly educate lawyers about bias, discriminatory conduct, barriers to access to justice, or cultural competency in legal practice? And when might mandatory training cross the line into compelled speech, viewpoint discrimination, or race- or sex-conscious practices that conflict with constitutional principles or civil-rights statutes?
Join us for a CLE program examining the boundaries of these mandatory CLE requirements, including how such rules and programs can be structured to help lawyers recognize and mitigate bias in the legal profession while remaining consistent with constitutional and statutory limits.
Featuring:
- Prof. Josh Blackman, Professor of Law, South Texas College of Law Houston
- Daniel Lennington, Deputy Counsel, Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty
- Prof. William Jacobson, Clinical Professor of Law, Cornell Law School
- (Moderator) Prof. Michael S. McGinniss, Professor of Law and J. Philip Johnson Faculty Fellow, University of North Dakota School of Law
CLE
Continuing Legal Education is expected for this webinar. Further details will be updated on the website soon.
*******
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
