A recent comprehensive study reveals a concerning trend: many law students with disabilities feel underserved and unsupported by their law schools. As the legal profession increasingly strives for diversity and inclusion, this gap in support threatens to undermine efforts to create equitable educational environments for all future lawyers.

Growing Awareness of Disability in Legal Education

The landscape of law school demographics has shifted in recent years, with more students openly identifying as having disabilities, including mental health conditions. According to a survey of nearly 12,000 law students, approximately one in five students report having a disability, with the majority indicating conditions such as anxiety, depression, ADHD, or other developmental or psychological challenges. This increased visibility calls for law schools to rise to the challenge of accommodating a diverse range of student needs beyond traditional academic supports.

The Reality of Law Students With Disabilities

Despite existing federal mandates such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, which require educational institutions to provide reasonable accommodations, many law students with disabilities continue to face significant barriers. These include difficulties accessing appropriate accommodations, stigma, and a lack of tailored support services that address their unique challenges.

The survey data illustrates this divide clearly: while approximately 70% of non-disabled law students express satisfaction with the academic and career support their schools provide, only about 62% of students with disabilities feel similarly supported. The difference may appear small at first glance, but it translates to thousands of students who feel their law schools fall short of providing the environment they need to succeed.

Areas of Concern: Academic and Emotional Support

Students with disabilities report lower levels of satisfaction not only with academic advising but also with mental health and career counseling services. For many, the intense pressures of law school exacerbate existing mental health conditions, making access to comprehensive mental health support critical. However, the survey indicates that many institutions have not yet fully developed or implemented programs tailored to these needs.

Furthermore, students with disabilities often express a feeling of exclusion or a lack of belonging on campus. This sense of isolation can negatively affect their academic performance and overall well-being. Some students report that even when accommodations are granted, they feel stigmatized or singled out, discouraging them from fully engaging with their law school communities.

Legal Obligations vs. Practical Implementation

While laws like the ADA set clear standards, enforcement and compliance vary widely among institutions. Many law schools focus primarily on ensuring compliance by providing exam accommodations, such as extra time or a quiet room. However, this approach often neglects the broader spectrum of supports that students with disabilities require to thrive—such as adaptive technology, flexible attendance policies, and accessible career development opportunities.

One expert notes, “Legal compliance alone is not enough. Law schools must foster an inclusive culture where students with disabilities feel genuinely supported and empowered.” This means moving beyond a reactive model of accommodation to a proactive approach that anticipates and addresses barriers before they become obstacles.

The Importance of Inclusion in the Legal Profession

Supporting students with disabilities in law school is more than a matter of legal obligation; it is essential for the health and diversity of the legal profession itself. Lawyers with disabilities bring critical perspectives and experiences that enrich the profession and improve the delivery of justice. When law schools fail to adequately support these students, the profession risks losing valuable talent and perpetuating systemic inequalities.

Organizations such as the American Bar Association (ABA) have highlighted the need for greater inclusivity, urging law schools to expand efforts around accessibility and accommodation. These calls align with broader diversity initiatives aimed at increasing representation of marginalized groups within the legal community.

Steps Toward Improvement: What Law Schools Can Do

Experts and advocates recommend several concrete steps law schools can take to better support students with disabilities:

1. Develop Proactive Policies
   Rather than waiting for students to request accommodations, law schools should proactively identify common barriers and implement inclusive policies and practices. This can include flexible course formats, accessible materials, and universal design principles that benefit all students.
2. Enhance Faculty and Staff Training
   Faculty, administrators, and support staff need regular training on disability awareness and inclusive teaching strategies. Understanding the diverse ways disabilities can affect learning and participation is key to creating a supportive academic environment.
3. Expand Support Services Beyond Exams
   Accommodations should extend beyond testing environments to encompass holistic academic support, career counseling, and mental health services. Offering accessible internships, networking events, and mentoring opportunities can help students with disabilities transition more smoothly into the profession.
4. Encourage Open Communication and Community Building
   Law schools should foster environments where students feel comfortable discussing their needs without fear of stigma. Creating support groups or affinity organizations can promote connection and advocacy among students with disabilities.
5. Regularly Assess and Improve Support Systems
   Institutions should collect data and feedback from students with disabilities to monitor the effectiveness of accommodations and support programs. Continuous improvement based on student input is essential to meeting evolving needs.

The Role of Students and Advocates

While institutions have the primary responsibility to create accessible environments, students and advocates also play crucial roles. Empowering students with disabilities to self-advocate, participate in leadership roles, and collaborate with administration can help ensure that policies reflect lived experiences and practical realities.

Looking Ahead

The current state of support for law students with disabilities highlights a significant opportunity for growth in legal education. Law schools committed to equity and inclusion must recognize the unique challenges faced by these students and respond with comprehensive, thoughtful strategies.

Investing in disability support is not just compliance—it is a commitment to nurturing the next generation of legal professionals who represent the full diversity of society. By doing so, law schools help build a legal profession that is not only more inclusive but also stronger, more empathetic, and better equipped to serve justice.

Looking to navigate law school with confidence or explore career opportunities designed to support your unique needs? Visit LawCrossing — the premier resource for law students and legal professionals seeking jobs, internships, and valuable guidance. Whether you’re a student with disabilities or simply want to stay informed on the latest legal career trends, LawCrossing has the tools and support you need to succeed. Don’t miss out — start your journey today!

See Related Articles:
•15 Top Law Schools: Best Program for Aspiring Lawyers
•Decode Law Schools Ranking
•Law School Profile

The post Law Schools Fall Short in Supporting Students with Disabilities, Study Finds first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

New Proposal Aims to Equip Attorneys with Tools for a Changing Legal Landscape

Wisconsin lawyers may soon be able to earn continuing legal education (CLE) credits for courses on “cultural competency” and “bias reduction,” a move that is being debated as a response to the state’s evolving demographic trends. The proposal, which has already sparked strong opinions, is set for public hearing before the Wisconsin Supreme Court this Wednesday. If approved, the change would allow lawyers to claim up to six of their required 30 CLE credits from training sessions on these important topics.

The Push for Cultural Competency and Bias Reduction

The proposal, introduced by the State Bar of Wisconsin, is positioned as a way to help attorneys navigate a diverse and increasingly complex society. Proponents of the initiative argue that by offering CLE credits for courses focused on cultural awareness and reducing bias, lawyers can enhance their ability to serve clients from a wide variety of backgrounds, thereby fostering better relationships and outcomes within the legal system.

The proposal comes at a time when the legal profession, like many others, is grappling with how to address diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) concerns. As the state’s population becomes more diverse, advocates believe that such programs can help lawyers keep pace with societal shifts and provide more effective representation.

Growing Debate Over Diversity Training in the Legal Profession

Despite the proposal’s support among many legal professionals, it has faced opposition from conservative groups. Notably, the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) has expressed concerns about the effectiveness and quality of DEI-related education. The group argues that equity and inclusion courses have not demonstrated measurable success and have raised questions about the integrity of such programs. WILL has previously challenged similar initiatives, asserting that they may lead to racial discrimination.

This ongoing debate mirrors national trends, particularly following the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in 2023 that prohibited the consideration of race in college admissions. Since that ruling, several states have reevaluated their diversity-related programs. For instance, the Florida Supreme Court recently halted funding for diversity initiatives within the legal community and removed “bias elimination” from the list of eligible CLE topics.

A Shift in the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Composition

This latest development in Wisconsin comes after a notable shift in the state’s judicial landscape. The Wisconsin Supreme Court, which previously held a Republican majority, now operates with a Democrat-majority bench. In 2023, the Court rejected a similar proposal for CLE credits on diversity courses, with Justice Rebecca Grassl Bradley vocalizing her opposition by labeling terms such as “diversity” and “equity” as divisive political tools. However, with the Court’s makeup now changed, the outcome of this new petition is uncertain.

Voluntary Credits and National Context

One key aspect of the current proposal is that the new CLE credits would be voluntary, rather than mandatory. This distinction has been emphasized by the State Bar of Wisconsin, which has worked to reassure those who may feel uncomfortable with the idea of mandatory diversity training. Under the proposed framework, attorneys would have the option to choose whether they wish to participate in cultural competency and bias reduction courses.

For context, several other states, including California, New York, Minnesota, and New Jersey, already mandate that lawyers complete CLE credits related to diversity and inclusion, or the elimination of bias. This growing trend reflects the broader movement within the legal profession to address issues of fairness and representation.

Looking Ahead: The Future of CLE Credits in Wisconsin

The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision could set a precedent for other states grappling with similar issues. If the proposal is approved, it could pave the way for further integration of diversity and inclusion principles into the legal profession’s ongoing education. However, opposition from groups like WILL suggests that this issue will continue to be a source of contention.

With a shifting political landscape and an evolving public discourse on diversity, it remains to be seen how Wisconsin lawyers will respond to the possibility of earning CLE credits for cultural competency and bias reduction training.

The post Wisconsin Lawyers Could Soon Earn CLE Credits for Cultural Competency and Bias Reduction Training first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Efforts to revise diversity standards for law schools accredited by the American Bar Association (ABA) are facing significant pushback from attorneys general in Republican-controlled states. A recent letter, signed by 21 attorneys general, argues that proposed changes to Standard 206 could violate constitutional principles and perpetuate unlawful discrimination.

Background: ABA’s Standard 206 and the Supreme Court Decision

The controversy centers on Standard 206, a rule that mandates law schools to actively demonstrate diversity among students, faculty, and staff, particularly in terms of gender, race, and ethnicity. This standard aims to foster inclusion in legal education and the broader profession. However, following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, which invalidated race-conscious admissions policies, the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar initiated efforts to revise the standard to ensure compliance with the law.

The section first proposed a revision in August 2024, focusing on expanding access to legal education without explicitly mentioning diversity categories like gender or race. After receiving mixed feedback, a second revision was released in November 2024, restoring references to diversity and inclusion while attempting to align with legal obligations.

Key Points of the Proposed Revisions

First Revision: Focus on Access Over Diversity

The initial revision reframed the standard’s title from “Diversity and Inclusion” to “Access to Legal Education and the Profession.” It shifted the language to emphasize creating opportunities for historically disadvantaged groups without specifying characteristics like race or gender.

Second Revision: Balancing Diversity with Legal Compliance

Responding to criticism that the first draft overlooked essential aspects of diversity, the second revision reinstated references to inclusion and added a list of identity characteristics, including race, gender identity, sexual orientation, military status, and socioeconomic background. The proposal also emphasized creating a supportive learning environment that fosters professionalism, respect, and belonging.

Council member Carla D. Pratt clarified the intent of these changes, stating, “We wanted to make it clear that we were not seeking to abandon the values of diversity and inclusion.”

Republican Attorneys General Push Back

In a January 6 letter to the ABA Section, attorneys general from 21 states expressed strong objections to the second proposal. They argued that the revisions impose race-based admissions and hiring practices, which could conflict with the Supreme Court’s ruling and leave law schools uncertain about their legal obligations.

The letter states, “The proposed revision appears to perpetuate unlawful racial discrimination,” and raises concerns that the ABA’s approach could pressure law schools into adopting policies that may not withstand legal scrutiny. Signatories include attorneys general from Alabama, Florida, Texas, and other Republican-led states.

Support for the Revisions

Despite criticism, the proposed revisions have received support from organizations like the ABA Center for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and the Law School Admission Council. Proponents argue that the changes strike a reasonable balance, promoting diversity within the framework of the law. The ABA Center described the second proposal as “a positive improvement,” while other commenters suggested further refinements, such as redefining diversity commitments to value individual experiences beyond immutable characteristics.

The Path Ahead for Standard 206

Jennifer Rosato Perea, managing director of ABA accreditation and legal education, emphasized that the council will carefully review all public comments, including those from the attorneys general, before making a final decision. “The council will consider the AGs’ letter and all other comments received on the proposed revisions to Standard 206 before it determines how to proceed,” she said.

As the only accrediting body for JD programs recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, the ABA’s decisions hold significant weight. Whether the revisions to Standard 206 will move forward or undergo further modifications remains uncertain.

Implications for Legal Education

The debate surrounding Standard 206 highlights the challenges of balancing diversity, inclusion, and legal compliance in a politically divided environment. The outcome of this process will likely influence how law schools approach admissions and hiring practices in the years to come, shaping the future of legal education in the United States.

The post Republican Attorneys General Challenge ABA Diversity Standards for Law Schools first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Recent changes proposed by the American Bar Association (ABA) to its diversity and inclusion standards for law schools have sparked strong opposition. Numerous legal education organizations and experts argue that these revisions could potentially undermine the progress made in promoting diversity within law schools. The debate comes after a public comment period ended on September 30, following last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling against affirmative action policies.

Legal Groups Push Back Against Standard 206 Revisions

Among the critics of the proposed changes are 44 law school deans, the ABA’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Center, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and other legal bodies. They have expressed concerns over the revisions to Standard 206, which is currently titled “Diversity and Inclusion.” The new proposal aims to rename it “Access to Legal Education and the Profession,” with substantial changes to its language. Critics argue that the proposal threatens to reverse the ABA’s long-standing commitment to ensuring diverse student bodies in U.S. law schools.

Want to know if you’re earning what you deserve? Find out with LawCrossing’s salary surveys.

Current vs. Proposed Language

Presently, Standard 206 mandates that law schools provide full opportunities for racial and ethnic minorities while maintaining diversity in terms of gender, race, and ethnicity. The proposed version, however, eliminates this specific language, instead emphasizing access for “persons including those with identities that historically have been disadvantaged or excluded from the legal profession.” Critics worry that this shift waters down existing commitments to diversity and inclusion, potentially making it easier for law schools to move away from those values.

Whether you’re a recent law school grad or an experienced attorney, BCG Attorney Search has the job for you.

Law Deans and Professors Express Concern

In their response to the ABA’s proposal, the group of deans stated that the changes “go further than the law requires” and pose a significant risk to efforts in diversifying the legal profession. They argue that law schools could abandon their commitments to diversity under the new standard. A separate group of 74 law professors echoed this sentiment, stating that the proposal “overreacts” to the Supreme Court decision and could hinder ongoing efforts toward creating more inclusive legal education environments.

Some Support the ABA’s Changes

While opposition is strong, not all commentators disagree with the revisions. The Ohio State Bar Association, for instance, expressed support for the ABA’s efforts to align with the Supreme Court’s ruling while still promoting increased access to the legal profession for historically underrepresented groups.

Call for Compromise on Language

On the other hand, a group of 19 attorneys general from Democratic-led states offered conditional support for the changes. While they back the revisions, they urged the ABA to retain the word “diversity” in the name of the standard. This, they argue, would preserve a focus on diversity without contradicting the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Conclusion: A Heated Debate on Diversity in Legal Education

As the ABA considers these proposed changes to its diversity standard, the legal community remains deeply divided. Many fear that the revisions could undo years of progress toward making the legal profession more inclusive, while others see the changes as a necessary step in complying with legal precedent. The council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar faces a challenging decision as it balances these competing perspectives.

Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.

The post ABA's Proposed Diversity Standard Changes Face Opposition from Legal Education Groups first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Law schools across the United States are grappling with the effects of recent anti-DEI laws, which challenge the foundations of inclusion and equity in legal education. These laws often defund DEI offices at public universities, ban discussions on divisive concepts related to race, gender, or sexuality, and impose penalties on institutions that do not comply.

Significant Legislative Changes

Key legislative changes include Florida’s Stop WOKE Act, effective since 2022, which restricts how race and social justice issues can be included in public school curricula, and Texas’ SB 17, passed in 2023, which bans public universities from maintaining inclusion offices and curtails scholarship related to race, gender, and sexual identity. These laws have set a precedent, leading to sweeping changes in university policies nationwide.

Challenges to DEI Efforts

Kerii Landry-Thomas, JD, associate vice chancellor of equity, inclusion, and Title IX at Southern University Law Center, emphasizes the hostile environment these laws create for DEI efforts. According to Landry-Thomas, such legislation effectively ends DEI work in states like Texas and Florida and burdens efforts across the country as more state legislators challenge DEI initiatives.

Want to know if you’re earning what you deserve? Find out with LawCrossing’s salary surveys.

Supreme Court’s Decision and Its Implications

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision to ban race-conscious college admissions practices has heightened concerns among law schools about maintaining racially diverse student bodies. A survey by Kaplan, involving 85 law schools, revealed significant anxiety among admissions officers about the ban’s impact on diversity. The majority expressed concerns, with only a small fraction remaining unconcerned.

Decrease in Racial Diversity

A study by law professors from Yale University, New York University, and Northwestern University found substantial declines in racial diversity at law schools in states with race-conscious admissions bans. Minority enrollment at these schools dropped by 10 points to 17%, with top-ranked institutions experiencing even greater declines.

Adapting to New Admissions Frameworks

Despite these challenges, there is a silver lining. Data from the Law School Admission Council indicates that over 43% of the current national applicant pool includes people of color, the highest percentage on record. However, maintaining this trend under the new legal framework will be challenging. Law schools are broadening personal statement criteria and adjusting application evaluations to adhere to the Supreme Court’s ruling while striving to maintain diversity.

Whether you’re a recent law school grad or an experienced attorney, BCG Attorney Search has the job for you.

Impact on Scholarships and Financial Aid

Legal challenges to DEI efforts extend to scholarships, internships, and other related programs. In Wisconsin, the Institute for Law & Liberty sued the State Bar over its Diversity Clerkship Program, resulting in a settlement that opened the program to all first-year law students, regardless of race.

Disparities in Scholarship Distribution

Statistics from the American Bar Association (ABA) reveal disparities in scholarship distribution, with White law students receiving a disproportionately high percentage of full-ride scholarships. Conversely, students of color, who make up nearly 32% of the student population, receive a much smaller share of these scholarships. This contributes to higher debt levels for underrepresented students.

Teaching and Curricula Adjustments

Anti-DEI legislation significantly impacts teaching and curricula in law schools. Traditional equity initiatives aimed at incorporating discussions on implicit bias, racism, equity, and cultural competency face severe restrictions. The ABA had mandated law schools to educate students on these topics, but new legislative constraints curtail explicit discussions.

Integrating Equity Work Subtly

Kerii Landry-Thomas suggests that the hostile legislative environment may push institutions to integrate equity work more subtly and pervasively into their curricula. By focusing on substantive equity work without explicitly using DEI language, law schools can ensure students understand crucial concepts without violating restrictive state laws.

Moving Forward: Strategies for Resilience

Despite the challenges posed by new legislation, some experts believe it may force law schools to adopt more substantial and effective diversity strategies. This involves diversifying faculty and administration, broadening recruitment and admissions policies, and creating accessible environments for all students.

Embracing a New Beginning

Landry-Thomas asserts that growing hostility towards DEI necessitates a shift from programmatic to institutional frameworks. By embedding the principles of equity and belonging into the core operations of institutions, law schools can continue to advance diversity and inclusion in ways that comply with restrictive laws. This shift represents not an end but a new beginning for DEI efforts in legal education.

Looking Ahead

Law schools must develop integrated and effective approaches to DEI to ensure these principles remain a vital part of legal education. The resilience and adaptability of law schools and their commitment to diversity and inclusion will be crucial in navigating the complex legislative landscape. Law firms and organizations hiring graduates still expect an understanding and appreciation of DEI principles, underscoring the importance of maintaining these efforts.

Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.

The post Impact of Recent Legislation on Law Schools first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Invoking the First Amendment to defend initiatives aimed at boosting workplace diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) has the potential to set a precedent that may ultimately undermine other civil rights objectives.

Federal Appeals Court Ruling

In a recent legal development, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit rejected the First Amendment defense put forth by Fearless Fund Management LLC in a lawsuit challenging its grant contest for Black women entrepreneurs. The court ruled that the fund’s actions violated Section 1981 of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits race discrimination in contracts, and fell outside the protections afforded by the First Amendment.

Want to know if you’re earning what you deserve? Find out with LawCrossing’s salary surveys.

Implications for Workplace Diversity Efforts

Despite the setback for DEI proponents, employment attorneys noted a potential upside for diversity efforts in workplaces. Lauren Parris Watts, a partner at Seyfarth Shaw LLP, emphasized the slippery slope of using the First Amendment as a defense for exclusionary programs. She warned that such a defense could be exploited by racist or anti-LGBTQ+ groups to justify discrimination.

The Creative Argument for First Amendment Defense

Ishan Bhabha, co-chair of Jenner & Block LLP’s DEI protection task force, expressed concern about the broader implications of upholding a First Amendment defense in this context. He pointed out that such defenses are typically reserved for expressive conduct closely tied to specific organizational actions, similar to symbolic speech.

Fearless Fund’s Position

Fearless Fund argued that its grant contest was a form of charitable giving protected as expressive conduct under the First Amendment, aimed at highlighting the significance of Black-women-owned businesses. However, the court rejected this argument, likening the grant process to discriminatory hiring practices.

Balancing Free Speech and Civil Rights

Defending diversity initiatives on First Amendment grounds is complex, as it involves balancing free speech with anti-discrimination laws. Derick Dailey of Crowell & Moring LLP highlighted this tension, noting the intricate interplay between these legal principles.

Stay up-to-date without the overwhelming noise. Subscribe to JDJournal for a curated selection of the most relevant legal news.

Textualism and Legal Interpretations

The Fearless Fund case, like other challenges to DEI efforts, hinges on the interpretation of Reconstruction-era laws designed to dismantle racial barriers. Advocates argue that such initiatives are remedial measures to address systemic racial disparities. A textualist interpretation by the Supreme Court, focusing on the original meaning of Section 1981, could potentially support the legality of such grant programs.

Adjusting DEI Strategies

As courts scrutinize DEI initiatives more closely, employers must develop legally sound policies. Recent rulings, such as the Tenth Circuit’s dismissal of a lawsuit against Colorado’s DEI training program and the Fourth Circuit’s affirmation of a biased verdict in favor of a White male employee, underscore the importance of adhering to anti-discrimination laws.

Future of DEI Efforts

Investors and companies committed to DEI may need to refine their strategies to withstand legal challenges. This could involve removing explicit references to racial minorities from eligibility criteria while focusing on supporting diversity. However, the ongoing legal challenges may hinder corporate America’s efforts to promote inclusivity.

Parris Watts expressed concern that cases like the Fearless Fund ruling could deter corporations from supporting DEI initiatives, ultimately affecting the progress made in fostering diverse and inclusive work environments.

Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.

The post Legal Precedent and DEI Initiatives: Navigating the Complex Terrain of Civil Rights first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Expansion of von Briesen & Roper, s.c. in Milwaukee

• New Additions: Steven R. Beckham and Alexandra N. Don join the Litigation & Risk Management Practice Group and the Real Estate Section, respectively.
• Expertise: Beckham specializes in commercial and business litigation, while Don focuses on transactional real estate and business law.
• Background: Beckham holds a J.D. from the University of Wisconsin, and Don earned her J.D. from Marquette University.

Whether you’re a recent law school grad or an experienced attorney, BCG Attorney Search has the job for you.

Addition of Rebecca J. Bernhard at Barnes & Thornburg in Minneapolis

• Appointment: Rebecca J. Bernhard joins as a partner in the Labor and Employment Department.
• Experience: With over two decades of experience, Bernhard resolves labor and employment issues and advises on business immigration.
• Welcome: Kenneth J. Yerkes, chair of Barnes & Thornburg’s Labor and Employment Department, and Connie A. Lahn, managing partner of the Minneapolis office, extend a warm welcome.

Uncover exclusive insights and strategic approaches through the State of the Lateral Law Firm Legal Market 2024—an in-depth report delving into the intricate patterns and current trends within the lateral law firm market.

Mike Piazza’s Partnership with Lathrop GPM LLP in Dallas

• New Partner: Mike Piazza brings his expertise in white-collar defense and commercial litigation to the Litigation & Dispute Resolution practice group.
• Credentials: Piazza holds a J.D. from the University of Minnesota Law School and is recognized nationally for his legal acumen.
• Strategic Growth: Charlie Maier, Litigation & Dispute Resolution practice group chair, emphasizes Piazza’s role in the firm’s strategic growth.

Want to stay ahead of the competition? Here’s what you need to do.

Amy Kossak’s Joining Ropes & Gray LLP in Washington, D.C.

• New Partner: Amy Kossak strengthens the government enforcement group with her experience from the Fraud Section of the U.S. Department of Justice.
• Expertise: Kossak specializes in government enforcement, particularly in False Claims Act matters.
• Leadership: Chair Julie Jones highlights Kossak’s leadership and understanding of complex legal issues.

Legal Industry Awards and Recognition

Influence Magazine’s Recognition of Jordyn S. Ferguson

• 30 Under 30 Rising Star: Jordyn S. Ferguson recognized for her impact in Florida politics by Influence Magazine.
• Advocacy: Ferguson’s work at Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP focuses on lobbying strategies and relationship-building in politics.
• Gratitude: Ferguson expresses gratitude for the recognition and acknowledges support from colleagues and mentors.

Want to know if you’re earning what you deserve? Find out with LawCrossing’s salary surveys.

Christopher A. Bowles Elected Fellow of American College of Real Estate Lawyers (ACREL)

• Distinguished Recognition: Christopher A. Bowles elected as a fellow of ACREL for his contributions to commercial real estate law.
• Leadership: Bowles serves as co-chair of Bradley’s Solar Energy team and contributes to the energy and infrastructure sectors.
• Impact: Bowles’ election underscores his commitment to client service and professional excellence.

GLS Capital’s Investment Professionals Recognized by Lawdragon

• Global Leaders in Litigation Finance: Jeffery Lula, Joel Merkin, Adam Gill, Jamison Lynch, and David Spiegel recognized for their leadership in litigation finance.
• Acknowledgment: The recognition reflects GLS Capital’s dedication to excellence in the legal profession.
• Appreciation: GLS Capital expresses pride in the recognition and emphasizes its commitment to clients.

Whether you’re a recent law school grad or an experienced attorney, BCG Attorney Search has the job for you.

Women’s History Month Feature on Women in Law

Leadership Updates at Womble Bond Dickinson (U.S.) LLP

• Diversity Leadership: Lisa Moyles appointed Chair of the DEI Committee, and Tara Cho named Vice Chair.
• Women’s Advocacy: Amy Clayton appointed WOW Chair, focusing on supporting women lawyers in their professional growth.
• Commitment: Womble Bond Dickinson emphasizes its dedication to diversity, equity, and inclusion under new leadership.

Stay up-to-date without the overwhelming noise. Subscribe to JDJournal for a curated selection of the most relevant legal news.

Roy Prather Joins International Association of Defense Counsel (IADC)

• Membership: Roy Prather accepted an invitation to join the IADC, a prestigious legal organization for corporate and insurance attorneys.
• Expertise: Prather specializes in complex commercial and environmental litigation and brings his insights to the association.
• Honored: Prather expresses gratitude for the invitation and looks forward to contributing to the organization’s goals.

GlobeSt. Recognition of Jennifer C. Johnson at Hopkins & Carley

• Woman of Influence: Jennifer C. Johnson named a “2024 Woman of Influence” in the CRE Legal Counsel category by GlobeSt.
• Leadership: Johnson’s recognition highlights her contributions to the commercial real estate market.
• Accolades: Hopkins & Carley congratulates Johnson on her achievement and nomination for Woman of the Year.

The post Law Firm Hiring and Expansion first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

A recent study sheds light on the perspectives of junior associates regarding the preparedness provided by law schools for the demands of legal practice. Titled Beyond Tradition: Gen-Z’s Approach to BigLaw, the survey conducted by recruiting firm Major, Lindsey & Africa and Leopard Solutions, a legal data intelligence provider, unveils critical insights into the experiences of 546 junior associates.

Want to know if you’re earning what you deserve? Find out with LawCrossing’s salary surveys.

Law School Education Gap

Among the key findings, almost half of the respondents, accounting for 45%, expressed dissatisfaction with the practical training offered by law schools, citing a lack of preparation for their current roles. Furthermore, 31% of respondents reported that their experiences at law firms failed to align with their initial expectations post-law school.

Whether you’re a recent law school grad or an experienced attorney, BCG Attorney Search has the job for you.

Emphasis on Litigation Over Transactional Skills

Junior associates, primarily belonging to Generation Z, highlighted a predominant emphasis on litigation within law school curriculums. Many felt ill-equipped in transactional lawyering areas, such as corporate law, real estate tax, and mergers and acquisitions, crucial for modern legal practice.

Stay up-to-date without the overwhelming noise. Subscribe to JDJournal for a curated selection of the most relevant legal news.

Pursuit of Practice Readiness

The discourse around “practice readiness” gains momentum in legal education circles. Oregon’s recent shift towards experiential education for bar admission, along with the upcoming launch of the NextGen bar exam in 2026, underscores a growing need for practical legal skills acquisition.

Knowledge is power, and knowing your earning potential is no exception. Check out LawCrossing’s salary surveys to gain valuable insights.

Work-Life Balance Priorities

The survey also uncovered a significant emphasis on work-life balance among junior associates. A notable 52% expressed a willingness to trade a portion of their compensation for reduced billable hours, reflecting a desire for more time off and flexible work schedules.

Make informed decisions in real-time. Subscribe to JDJournal and be in the know with the latest legal updates.

Diversity and Firm Satisfaction

Diversity and inclusion emerged as focal points for junior associates, with 39% expressing dissatisfaction with the level of racial diversity within their firms. Despite this, 83% of respondents expressed a willingness to choose their current firms again, citing factors such as firm culture, reputation, compensation, and job satisfaction.

Whether you’re a recent law school grad or an experienced attorney, BCG Attorney Search has the job for you.

Conclusion

The survey offers valuable insights into the evolving expectations and priorities of junior associates within the legal profession. As law schools and firms adapt to meet the demands of a new generation, the emphasis on practical skills development and work-life balance emerges as crucial considerations for legal education and professional development.

The post Call for Practical Legal Skills in Law Schools first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

The State Department, by President Biden’s executive order, has introduced a policy that links eligibility for promotions to an employee’s ability to pass a loyalty test in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices. This move, aimed at fostering a more inclusive work environment, has stirred both support and criticism.

Make informed decisions in real-time. Subscribe to JDJournal and be in the know with the latest legal updates.

Appointment of Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley

Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley, former ambassador to Malta under the Obama administration, was appointed as the Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer for the State Department in April 2021. During her tenure until June 2023, she spearheaded efforts to promote diversity within the department.

Whether you’re a recent law school grad or an experienced attorney, BCG Attorney Search has the job for you.

Policy Implementation and Impact

Under President Biden’s directive, Abercrombie-Winstanley explained that promotions within the State Department now require documented evidence of active involvement in DEI initiatives. This policy shift aims to evaluate candidates based on their contributions to fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Abercrombie-Winstanley emphasized that the new policy extends beyond minority groups, encouraging all employees to engage in DEI efforts. The objective is to create a more inclusive environment where diverse perspectives are valued and promoted.

Uncover exclusive insights and strategic approaches through the State of the Lateral Law Firm Legal Market 2024—an in-depth report delving into the intricate patterns and current trends within the lateral law firm market.

Strategic Plan and Leadership Vision

The Biden administration’s “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Strategic Plan 2022 – 2026” serves as a roadmap for advancing DEI goals within the federal workforce. This plan emphasizes the integration of DEI principles into job performance criteria, career advancement opportunities, and senior performance evaluations.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken affirmed the department’s commitment to this plan, highlighting its role in strengthening the organization’s ability to serve the American people effectively.

Want to stay ahead of the competition? Here’s what you need to do.

Response and Future Direction

While the State Department declined to provide further comment on the DEI plan, the implementation of such initiatives underscores the administration’s dedication to promoting diversity and inclusion in government agencies.

The appointment of Zakiya Carr Johnson as the new State Department diversity chief signifies a continuation of this commitment. Despite past controversies surrounding her remarks, the department expressed confidence in her leadership abilities.

Want to know if you’re earning what you deserve? Find out with LawCrossing’s salary surveys.

Controversies and Challenges

However, not all appointments under the Biden administration have been met without criticism. Kelisa Wing, another diversity chief appointed by Biden, faced backlash over her comments on White individuals. Such controversies highlight the complexities and challenges associated with navigating DEI initiatives in government institutions.

In conclusion, the State Department’s adoption of DEI-focused promotion criteria reflects a broader societal shift towards inclusivity and equity. While commendable in its intent, the policy also underscores the need for ongoing dialogue and sensitivity to diverse perspectives.

The post State Department's New Promotion Policy Raises Controversy first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Harvard University is gearing up for its 2024 commencement ceremonies, and this year’s celebrations promise to be more diverse and inclusive than ever before. According to documents obtained by National Review, the university’s Office for Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging has unveiled plans to host a series of “affinity celebrations” alongside the traditional graduation events. These affinity celebrations aim to recognize and honor the achievements of graduates from various marginalized and underrepresented communities.

Want to know if you’re earning what you deserve? Find out with LawCrossing’s salary surveys.

Celebrating Diversity: The Affinity Celebrations

The affinity celebrations, as outlined in the documents, will encompass a wide range of groups, including individuals with disabilities, global indigenous communities, Asian American, Pacific Islander, and Desi-American (APIDA) communities, first-generation and low-income students, Jewish, Latinx, LGBT (referred to as Lavender Celebration), Black, Veterans, and Arab communities. Additionally, Harvard will hold a central commencement ceremony that is open to students from all backgrounds.

Whether you’re a recent law school grad or an experienced attorney, BCG Attorney Search has the job for you.

Addressing Past Criticisms and Controversies

Harvard’s decision to introduce these affinity celebrations follows previous criticisms and controversies surrounding the inclusivity of its commencement events. In 2023, concerns were raised when it was observed that white and Jewish students were the only two groups without dedicated celebrations. In response to these concerns, Harvard has now included Jewish students in the list of recognized affinity groups.

Stay up-to-date without the overwhelming noise. Subscribe to JDJournal for a curated selection of the most relevant legal news.

Challenges and Concerns

While the introduction of affinity celebrations reflects Harvard’s commitment to diversity and inclusion, some individuals have raised concerns about the potential implications of these events. Critics argue that segregating celebrations along racial or identity lines could further exacerbate divisions within the student body.

Shabbos Kestenbaum, a student at Harvard Divinity School, expressed apprehension that segregating celebrations may perpetuate underlying dynamics driving discrimination and antisemitism on campus. He highlighted instances of antisemitic rhetoric and threats experienced by Jewish students, suggesting that Harvard’s approach to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) may inadvertently contribute to such issues.

Moreover, questions have been raised about Harvard’s DEI office’s handling of discrimination complaints. Kestenbaum reported that when he sought assistance from the DEI office regarding incidents of antisemitism, he was told that his experiences fell outside their purview.

Knowledge is power, and knowing your earning potential is no exception. Check out LawCrossing’s salary surveys to gain valuable insights.

Navigating Controversies and Scrutiny

Harvard’s commitment to DEI has faced additional scrutiny in light of allegations of plagiarism against Sherri Ann Charleston, the university’s chief DEI officer. These controversies underscore broader debates surrounding the role of DEI initiatives within academic institutions.

Knowledge is power, and knowing your earning potential is no exception. Check out LawCrossing’s salary surveys to gain valuable insights.

Looking Ahead: Challenges and Opportunities

While some, like Harvard student Gabriel Kelvin, acknowledge the importance of affinity gatherings for individuals of shared backgrounds, concerns remain about the potential politicization of such events. Representative Virginia Foxx criticized the affinity celebrations as divisive, arguing that graduation ceremonies should unite rather than further divide students.

Make informed decisions in real time. Subscribe to JDJournal and be in the know with the latest legal updates.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Harvard’s decision to incorporate affinity celebrations into its 2024 commencement reflects ongoing efforts to promote diversity and inclusion within the university community. However, questions persist about the potential impact of these celebrations on campus dynamics and the efficacy of DEI initiatives in addressing discrimination and fostering a truly inclusive environment. As Harvard moves forward with its plans, it faces the challenge of balancing inclusivity with the need to maintain a sense of unity and belonging among its diverse student body.

The post Harvard University's 2024 Commencement to Feature Diverse Affinity Celebrations first appeared on JDJournal Blog.