The ABA has recently moved to require law schools to demonstrate the concrete steps they are taking to ensure that their student bodies, faculties, and staffs are racially and ethnically diverse. The revision requires a stronger and clearer commitment to diversity even from law schools in states, like California and Washington, that ban the consideration of race in admissions.
The ABA recognizes that this new standard is inconsistent with many state laws and has issued this guidance: "The requirements of a constitutional provision or statute that purports to prohibit consideration of gender, race, ethnicity or national origin in admissions or employment decisions is not a justification for a school's non-compliance with Standard 211."
Is this tantamount to the ABA instructing law schools to ignore state statutory and constitutional law?
There is certainly an interesting debate swirling around the blogosphere.
Crime and Federalism has this post.
Southern Appeal has this post.
The Volokh Conspiracy has this post.