Law school diversity, the compulsory way

The old carrot and stick routine. It works every time. Good article.

The ABA's demand that George Mason University's law school engage in racial quotas violates 42 U.S.C. 1981 and the Supreme Court’s ruling in Gratz v. Bollinger (2003).

The Gratz decision, which struck down the University of Michigan's race-conscious undergraduate admissions policy, held in footnote 23 that racial quotas violate 42 U.S.C. 1981 (which bans both private and public discrimination), not just the Fourteenth Amendment (which bans only governmental discrimination).

Moreover, the American Bar Association and its accreditors are liable for pressuring GMU to engage in racial discrimination under 42 U.S.C. 1981, which allows not only employers and other institutions to be held liable for racial discrimination, but also individual discriminators.

GMU (whose president and law school dean were personally summoned to appear before the ABA in order for them to be pressured to maximize GMU’s racial quotas) and its administrators have standing to sue over the ABA's pressure to adopt racial quotas under Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod v. FCC, 141 F.3d 344 (D.C. Cir. 1998), which held that the Lutheran Church had standing to sue the FCC to keep the FCC from pressuring it to take race into account in hiring employees for its religious radio stations in order to satisfy a ”diversity” mandate.

Ted Frank's employer, AEI, sheds some light on this topic:

http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.25452,filter.all/pub_detail.asp