Duke University School of Law: DOJ Alleges Racial Bias in Admissions

• The U.S. Department of Justice has accused Duke University School of Law of intentionally discriminating against applicants based on their race in its admissions decisions.
• The allegations stem from the law school's use of diversity-driven essay questions and adjustments to its mission statement, which the DOJ claims violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
• The case has significant implications for law schools across the country, potentially setting a precedent for changes in how they approach diversity and inclusion.

Using 'diversity' essay questions to identify preferred races for admission is still illegal discrimination based on race, and this department is committed to eliminating it everywhere we find it, including in our nation's law schools.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has accused Duke University School of Law of intentionally discriminating against applicants based on their race in its admissions decisions over the last three years. The allegations stem from the law school's use of diversity-driven essay questions and adjustments to its mission statement, which the DOJ claims violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision. According to a six-page letter signed by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon, Duke Law's mission statement was changed to emphasize its commitment to diversity and inclusion, while also listing essay questions that encourage applicants to discuss their diverse perspectives. However, the letter alleges that reviewers were instructed to tag responses related to diversity or if the applicant received a Pell Grant, which is often correlated with race. The DOJ claims that this practice resulted in lower admission rates for Asian and white applicants compared to Black and Hispanic applicants, despite similar LSAT scores.

The DOJ's allegations against Duke Law are significant because they highlight the ongoing debate over the use of race-conscious admissions programs at top-tier law schools. In 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Harvard University and the University of North Carolina's race-conscious admissions programs, citing concerns about unequal treatment based on race. However, the DOJ argues that Duke Law's practices are still discriminatory, even if they are intended to promote diversity. The case also raises questions about the role of Title VI in enforcing anti-discrimination laws in higher education. Title VI prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance. The DOJ claims that Duke Law's admissions practices violate this provision and seeks a voluntary resolution agreement to ensure compliance.

The DOJ's action against Duke Law has significant implications for law schools across the country. If the allegations are proven, it could set a precedent for other top-tier law schools to re-examine their admissions practices and potentially lead to changes in how they approach diversity and inclusion. The case also highlights the ongoing tension between promoting diversity and avoiding unequal treatment based on race. As the DOJ seeks to enter into a voluntary resolution agreement with Duke Law, lawyers and educators are watching closely for potential precedent-setting impact on admissions practices at other top-tier law schools.

Lawyers should watch for potential precedent-setting impact on admissions practices at other top-tier law schools, as the DOJ's action against Duke may signal a renewed focus on enforcing anti-discrimination laws in higher education.

Source: Original reporting via The Hill