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.

Texas’s bid to establish a new business court by 2024 faces hurdles as Governor Greg Abbott grapples with hiring judges amidst stagnant salaries.

Compensation Woes for Texas Judges

In a state where judges rank among the lowest paid in the nation, Texas is encountering obstacles in filling the benches of its newly sanctioned business court, set to commence operations in September 2024. Governor Abbott, tasked with appointing 16 judges for this specialized court, confronts the dilemma of attracting experienced candidates willing to accept a meager starting salary of $140,000.

A Looming Recruitment Challenge

As Texas seeks judges with a decade or more experience in complex civil business litigation, the paltry compensation becomes a major stumbling block. Supreme Court Chief Justice Nathan Hecht expressed concern, emphasizing the unattractiveness of the pay scale for accomplished lawyers capable of handling significant cases.

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

National Disparities in Judicial Compensation

While Texas grapples with its salary dilemma, other states like New York and Kansas have opted for increased compensation to lure and retain top-tier judicial talent. However, Texas lawmakers failed to address this issue in the recent legislative session, leaving the starting annual base pay for state court judges unchanged for a decade.

Legislative Efforts and Roadblocks

Efforts to address the salary discrepancy have been sporadic, with Texas increasing base pay for judges only significantly in the last 25 years. A recent bill proposing a 22% pay increase over two years successfully passed in the House but faltered in the Senate. The proposal, championed by Rep. Jeff Leach, aimed to raise the base salary for district court judges to $155,400 in 2024 and $172,494 in 2025. However, Senate Committee Chair Sen. Joan Huffman countered with a more modest pay increase, leading to a legislative impasse.

Unique Compensation Structure and Regional Disparities

Texas employs a three-tiered experience-based pay system for its judges, ranging from $140,000 for newcomers to $168,000 for those with eight-plus years of service. Concerns about legislators’ discomfort with judicial pay raises due to their tied retirement pay have historically hindered salary adjustments. Unlike some states, Texas allows individual counties to provide a salary supplement capped at $18,000.

Performance Concerns and Legislative Dynamics

Notably, concerns about the performance of judges, particularly regarding bail decisions and docket backlogs post-COVID-19, were cited by Sen. Huffman. However, Supreme Court Chief Justice Hecht disputed these concerns, asserting that clearance rates have returned to pre-pandemic levels. The failed legislative effort aimed to detach lawmakers’ retirement pay from judicial salary increases, signaling a shift in addressing these long-standing concerns.

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

Looking Ahead

With the next legislative session scheduled for January 2025, the fate of Texas judges’ salaries and the success of the new business court hang in the balance. As the Lone Star State endeavors to compete with other jurisdictions in attracting top legal talent, the need for a comprehensive solution to the compensation issue becomes increasingly urgent.

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

The post Challenges Mount for Texas Business Court as Judges’ Salaries Remain Unchanged first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

The laws provide a solid framework to follow, and according to the Governor the bills were “common sense” legislation as “recreational marijuana really is new territory.”

One of the strictest laws governing pot production awards celebrity status to each seed of pot and ensures the establishment of a separate agency for seed-to-sale video surveillance. We can expect the movie team for the next box office blockbuster “Life of Pot” to hit Colorado anytime next year.

Jokes aside, the new laws do seem to be very common sense measures that can alleviate the concerns of most critics and opponents and at the same time provide order to what is really a new territory.

The highlights of the new marijuana laws in Colorado and their effects are as follows:

Limits of possessing marijuana for recreational use remain one ounce for all.

People growing marijuana for recreational use at their homes would be allowed to grow only up to six plants with only three plants flowering at any given time.

Residents who are 21 years and older will be allowed to purchase up to one ounce of marijuana.

Visitors to Colorado will be able to purchase only a quarter-ounce of recreational marijuana per transaction. Out-of-state visitors will not be allowed to carry back marijuana when they leave Colorado.

Blood levels of marijuana during driving have been established and the legal limit for drivers will be 5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood.

Things that remain illegal include purchasing marijuana from unlicensed vendors, selling marijuana without license, and public use of marijuana.

For the first few months or until proper surveillance methods are established, selling recreational pot would be carried on by individuals and establishments already licensed to sell medical marijuana.

Growth of the recreational marijuana industry, besides being controlled by video surveillance, will be subject to residency requirements – only people who have been residents of Colorado for at least two years may apply for license to grow and sell, and any investors in the industry would also have to meet the same requirements.

According to Denver Post, the first sellers of recreational marijuana would be limited to selling marijuana they have grown themselves, and by October 2014, standalone growers and retailers could start business.

The new framework also recognizes the rights of local governments to ban retail sales of recreational marijuana in their jurisdictions, if they choose to do so.

The post Colorado Passes Potent Pot Laws first appeared on JDJournal Blog.