Statement of Dean Steven C. Bahls Regarding the Affirmative Action, Law School Admissions Case of Grutter V. Bollinger

As a dean of a law school that cherishes its diversity, I am proud to join with the Association of American Law Schools, the Law School Admissions Council, the American Law Deans Association and the American Bar Association in supporting the right of the University of Michigan Law School to consider race and ethnicity in admitting a diverse class. At issue in the Grutter v. Bollinger case, currently pending before the United States Supreme Court, is whether the United States Constitution prohibits a university from admitting the racially diverse class of students it believes advances its educational mission.

My experience as both a dean and law professor leads me to believe that a racially diverse classroom makes for better learning for both majority and minority students. I wholeheartedly agree with Justice Powell's opinion in Bakke issued 25 years ago:

"A great deal of learning occurs. . . through interactions
among students of both sexes[,] of different races, religions
and backgrounds . . who are able, directly or indirectly, to
learn from their differences and to stimulate one another
to reexamine even their most deeply held assumptions
about themselves and their world."

Justice Powell correctly concluded that a diverse student body is necessary to maintaining an environment conducive to learning. Promoting diversity among our students is a goal that is central to achieving the mission of Capital University Law School. The Law School's mission statement identifies six core values:

. student-centered teaching;
. cutting-edge academic programs;
. quality scholarship;
. service to the legal profession;
. commitment to diversity; and
. commitment to improving our legal system.

It would be inappropriate for the U.S. Supreme Court to mandate that public law schools, and at least by implication private schools like Capital, must ignore diversity factors when selecting a class. Diversity is particularly important to all law schools because the critical analytical skills demanded of today's lawyers are best developed in a classroom made up of students from different backgrounds. Diversity is also important to Capital's mission of inclusiveness and service to the legal profession, by preparing graduates who reflect the racial composition of the country and who will be more likely to serve underrepresented segments of society.

In 1999, Capital University Law School conducted a national survey of law professors to identify whether a diverse classroom, in fact, yields the educational advantages that proponents of affirmative action claim. More than 800 law professors responded to Capital's survey. Ninety-two percent of law professors agreed that learning to respect diversity is essential to becoming a successful member of the legal profession. Eighty-nine percent agreed that a diverse classroom helps students learn to respect individual differences. More than 80 percent of law professors agreed both that attorneys must be able to address their potential for bias to be successful in the legal profession, and that a diverse classroom teaches students to address their potential for bias. Importantly, more than 70 percent of law professors believe students are more comfortable sharing opinions in class when the faculty is diverse. The benefits of diversity in legal education are self evident to the large majority of law professors, who have the best vantage point from which to form an opinion as to the benefits of diversity.

I am fond of observing that the greatest lawyers are those who know how to "turn the crystal." By this I mean that great lawyers look at complex legal problems from not only their own vantage point, but also through the eyes of their opponent and those of juries and judges. Diversity in the classroom undoubtedly helps law students learn to look at problems through the eyes of others.

Church-related law schools, like Capital, often have a special commitment to ensuring diversity. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, for example, has made a commitment to pay special attention to the inclusion of individuals from all races and cultures in its seminaries and colleges.

We would do well to heed the advice of James Madison: "It is essential to [a republican] government that it be derived from the great body of society, not from a favored class of it .." The Federalist No. 39, at 251.

Until law schools started to admit diverse classes, there was a racial divide in the legal profession. Virtually all judges and lawyers were white and male. Deleterious and lingering impacts of these past exclusionary policies remain with us. In Columbus, Ohio, for example, only 2 percent of attorneys in major law firms are African-American and only 0.3 percent are Hispanic. In response, Capital University Law School teamed up with The Ohio State University College of Law, the Columbus Bar Association and the managing partners of twenty of Columbus' largest law firms to establish a profession-wide "affirmative action" plan to correct this imbalance in Central Ohio. Both law schools have committed to "consistent with sound educational policy, maintain by concrete action a commitment to provide full opportunities for the study of law to students of color, including a special concern for determining the potential of these applicants through the admissions process and special recruiting and retention efforts." It would, indeed, be unfortunate for the United States Supreme Court to undermine efforts like ours aimed at correcting the imbalance in the legal profession, by outlawing all consideration of race in admission decisions.

Capital University Law School was founded one hundred years ago with the mission to democratize the law by making legal education more broadly available. That mission continues today. Part of that mission is doing our part to help increase racial diversity in the profession. We do not do so, however, through inflexible quotas or point systems. We do so by considering an applicant's entire file, not merely an applicant's undergraduate GPA and LSAT. This enlightened admissions philosophy has produced many of the leading attorneys, including minority attorneys, in the region. If diversity can no longer be considered in admitting a class of law students, our legal profession and system of justice will surely suffer.

This Dean's Statement represents the view of Dean Steven C. Bahls and does not purport to speak for the law faculty or university on this issue. If you wish to share your views on this issue with Dean Bahls, please contact him at sbahls@law.capital.edu.

-end-