Republicans call for Trump to cut off American Bar Association
OVER DEI
Rachel Wolf
Sat, March 8, 2025
Signage is seen outside the American Bar Association (ABA) in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 10, 2021.
The lawmakers also criticized the ABA’s March 3 statement in which the group slams purported "efforts to undermine the courts." In their letter, the lawmakers note that the association did not issue any statements against former President Joe Biden when he defied the Supreme Court on student loan forgiveness.
In their letter, the senators call out the ABA’s implementation of diversity, equity and inclusion policies, which the Trump administration has been working to root out of the government.
Original article source: Republicans call for Trump to cut off American Bar Association
Opinion | Pam Bondi distorts John Roberts’ opinion to strong-arm law schools
Jessica Levinson
Sun, March 9, 2025
Rachel Wolf
Sat, March 8, 2025
FOX NEWS
Republicans call for Trump to cut off American Bar Association
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways
Several Republican senators have taken issue with the American Bar Association (ABA) and are calling for President Donald Trump to take drastic action against the group. In a letter to ABA President William Bay, lawmakers said the group, which plays a key role in judicial nominations, had become "biased and ideologically captured." Now, those lawmakers want President Trump to "remove the ABA from the judicial nomination process entirely."
Sen. Eric Schmitt, Sen. Ted Cruz, Sen. Marsha Blackburn, Sen. Josh Hawley, Sen. Bernie Moreno and Sen. Mike Lee are also calling on their fellow senators to "disregard the ABA’s recommendations."
In the explosive letter there are allegations, including that the ABA has taken political stances against the Trump administration and that the group has been quiet about its taking funds from USAID. The federal aid group has been a target of the Trump administration, something the ABA has criticized.
"The ABA states, ‘Americans expect better.’ But President Trump won both electoral and popular votes. It seems Americans expect — and want — the Trump administration," the senators’ letter reads.
Sen. Schmitt tweeted out the letter along with several criticisms of the ABA’s recent actions and statements. In particular, Schmitt took issue with statements the ABA published on Feb. 10 and March 3, both of which were critical of the Trump administration.
"It has been three weeks since Inauguration Day. Most Americans recognize that newly elected leaders bring change. That is expected. But most Americans also expect that changes will take place in accordance with the rule of law," the ABA wrote in its Feb. 10 statement. Additionally, the Feb. 10 statement condemns the "dismantling of USAID."
The senators reference this statement in their letter, saying that the ABA made "inflammatory claims" against the Trump administration "without citing legal reasoning for those arguments." One of these claims is that the "dismantling of USAID" is illegal, but the senators note that the ABA does not explain why these actions are not permitted under the law.
"It is questionable whether the ABA is committed to defending liberty or its own sources of funding," the senators wrote, referring to the organization’s defense of USAID.
Republicans call for Trump to cut off American Bar Association
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways
Several Republican senators have taken issue with the American Bar Association (ABA) and are calling for President Donald Trump to take drastic action against the group. In a letter to ABA President William Bay, lawmakers said the group, which plays a key role in judicial nominations, had become "biased and ideologically captured." Now, those lawmakers want President Trump to "remove the ABA from the judicial nomination process entirely."
Sen. Eric Schmitt, Sen. Ted Cruz, Sen. Marsha Blackburn, Sen. Josh Hawley, Sen. Bernie Moreno and Sen. Mike Lee are also calling on their fellow senators to "disregard the ABA’s recommendations."
In the explosive letter there are allegations, including that the ABA has taken political stances against the Trump administration and that the group has been quiet about its taking funds from USAID. The federal aid group has been a target of the Trump administration, something the ABA has criticized.
"The ABA states, ‘Americans expect better.’ But President Trump won both electoral and popular votes. It seems Americans expect — and want — the Trump administration," the senators’ letter reads.
Sen. Schmitt tweeted out the letter along with several criticisms of the ABA’s recent actions and statements. In particular, Schmitt took issue with statements the ABA published on Feb. 10 and March 3, both of which were critical of the Trump administration.
"It has been three weeks since Inauguration Day. Most Americans recognize that newly elected leaders bring change. That is expected. But most Americans also expect that changes will take place in accordance with the rule of law," the ABA wrote in its Feb. 10 statement. Additionally, the Feb. 10 statement condemns the "dismantling of USAID."
The senators reference this statement in their letter, saying that the ABA made "inflammatory claims" against the Trump administration "without citing legal reasoning for those arguments." One of these claims is that the "dismantling of USAID" is illegal, but the senators note that the ABA does not explain why these actions are not permitted under the law.
"It is questionable whether the ABA is committed to defending liberty or its own sources of funding," the senators wrote, referring to the organization’s defense of USAID.
Signage is seen outside the American Bar Association (ABA) in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 10, 2021.
The lawmakers also criticized the ABA’s March 3 statement in which the group slams purported "efforts to undermine the courts." In their letter, the lawmakers note that the association did not issue any statements against former President Joe Biden when he defied the Supreme Court on student loan forgiveness.
In their letter, the senators call out the ABA’s implementation of diversity, equity and inclusion policies, which the Trump administration has been working to root out of the government.
Original article source: Republicans call for Trump to cut off American Bar Association
Opinion | Pam Bondi distorts John Roberts’ opinion to strong-arm law schools
Jessica Levinson
Sun, March 9, 2025
MSNBC
Pam Bondi, US attorney general, speaks during the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland, on Feb. 20, 2025.
From Day 1, the Trump administration has proudly placed diversity, equity and inclusion programs in its crosshairs. Last week, it turned its attention to the American Bar Association and, by extension, virtually every would-be lawyer in the country.
On Wednesday, Attorney General Pam Bondi demanded the American Bar Association repeal its requirement that law schools actively promote diversity efforts with respect to faculty and students. The Trump administration claims that a recent Supreme Court decision compels the ABA to eliminate efforts to increase access to legal education, but that argument misreads the case.
The ABA, founded in 1878, is the nation’s largest voluntary association of lawyers and law students. It sets academic standards for law schools, creates model ethical codes for the legal profession and determines which law schools obtain accreditation. Many states require that applicants demonstrate they graduated from an ABA-accredited law school before they take the bar examination.
The ABA’s diversity and inclusion standard for schools came under scrutiny after a 2023 Supreme Court decision declared that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions decisions. The high court concluded that using race as a factor in admissions decisions violates the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause (in the case of public universities) and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (in the case of private colleges and universities), by discriminating against applicants on the basis of race.
Eventually, more than a year after that decision, the ABA sought to update its diversity accreditation standard, known as Standard 206. One proposed revision, circulated last August, would require schools to provide access to “all persons including those with identities that historically have been disadvantaged or excluded from the legal profession” but eliminate references to specific categories such as race and ethnicity. A second revision would restore the references to those two categories. But as of Trump’s inauguration, the ABA had not yet settled on a final version of Standard 206.
After Trump’s second term began, the Department of Education ordered academic institutions to either eliminate DEI policies or lose their federal funding. The ABA realized it needed to grapple with not just new Supreme Court case law, but also a changing legal landscape with respect to Trump’s executive actions. The ABA tried to buy itself more time by suspending the enforcement of Standard 206 until Aug. 31, 2025. But Bondi’s letter directs the ABA to drop Standard 206 entirely or risk losing its ability to act as the sole accreditor for U.S. law schools. In doing so, the attorney general cuts off the ABA’s ability to promote access to a legal education while still complying with all applicable cases and orders.
Again, the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision held that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions decisions. But nowhere requires that law schools give up efforts to broaden the pool of law students and faculty to include people who have historically been excluded from law schools, such as people who are economically disadvantaged. The court’s decision can be fairly read as telling law schools that race cannot be considered as a stand-alone factor in admissions decisions. No more, and no less.
In the majority opinion in that case, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “as all parties agree, nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.” For example, Roberts said, students could write application essays about overcoming racial discrimination, as long as that was “tied to that student’s courage and determination.”
Simply put, there is a way for the ABA to draft an accreditation standard that promotes its goals and adheres to the law. It could seek to broaden its pool of students and faculty through efforts to ensure socioeconomic diversity. There is no doubt that maintaining its goal of increasing access to a legal education, while complying with the Supreme Court’s decision and applicable executive orders, will require the ABA to carefully draft a new standard. Given these competing questions, the organization understandably asked for a short timeout.
Pam Bondi, US attorney general, speaks during the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland, on Feb. 20, 2025.
From Day 1, the Trump administration has proudly placed diversity, equity and inclusion programs in its crosshairs. Last week, it turned its attention to the American Bar Association and, by extension, virtually every would-be lawyer in the country.
On Wednesday, Attorney General Pam Bondi demanded the American Bar Association repeal its requirement that law schools actively promote diversity efforts with respect to faculty and students. The Trump administration claims that a recent Supreme Court decision compels the ABA to eliminate efforts to increase access to legal education, but that argument misreads the case.
The ABA, founded in 1878, is the nation’s largest voluntary association of lawyers and law students. It sets academic standards for law schools, creates model ethical codes for the legal profession and determines which law schools obtain accreditation. Many states require that applicants demonstrate they graduated from an ABA-accredited law school before they take the bar examination.
The ABA’s diversity and inclusion standard for schools came under scrutiny after a 2023 Supreme Court decision declared that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions decisions. The high court concluded that using race as a factor in admissions decisions violates the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause (in the case of public universities) and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (in the case of private colleges and universities), by discriminating against applicants on the basis of race.
Eventually, more than a year after that decision, the ABA sought to update its diversity accreditation standard, known as Standard 206. One proposed revision, circulated last August, would require schools to provide access to “all persons including those with identities that historically have been disadvantaged or excluded from the legal profession” but eliminate references to specific categories such as race and ethnicity. A second revision would restore the references to those two categories. But as of Trump’s inauguration, the ABA had not yet settled on a final version of Standard 206.
After Trump’s second term began, the Department of Education ordered academic institutions to either eliminate DEI policies or lose their federal funding. The ABA realized it needed to grapple with not just new Supreme Court case law, but also a changing legal landscape with respect to Trump’s executive actions. The ABA tried to buy itself more time by suspending the enforcement of Standard 206 until Aug. 31, 2025. But Bondi’s letter directs the ABA to drop Standard 206 entirely or risk losing its ability to act as the sole accreditor for U.S. law schools. In doing so, the attorney general cuts off the ABA’s ability to promote access to a legal education while still complying with all applicable cases and orders.
Again, the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision held that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions decisions. But nowhere requires that law schools give up efforts to broaden the pool of law students and faculty to include people who have historically been excluded from law schools, such as people who are economically disadvantaged. The court’s decision can be fairly read as telling law schools that race cannot be considered as a stand-alone factor in admissions decisions. No more, and no less.
In the majority opinion in that case, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “as all parties agree, nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.” For example, Roberts said, students could write application essays about overcoming racial discrimination, as long as that was “tied to that student’s courage and determination.”
Simply put, there is a way for the ABA to draft an accreditation standard that promotes its goals and adheres to the law. It could seek to broaden its pool of students and faculty through efforts to ensure socioeconomic diversity. There is no doubt that maintaining its goal of increasing access to a legal education, while complying with the Supreme Court’s decision and applicable executive orders, will require the ABA to carefully draft a new standard. Given these competing questions, the organization understandably asked for a short timeout.
No comments:
Post a Comment