Columbia Law School initially demanded ‘video statements’ from applicants after the affirmative action ban, but later reversed its decision.

Columbia Law School Requires Video Statements from Applicants

Columbia ‌Law School has announced a new requirement for all applicants⁣ in response to the⁤ Supreme Court’s ban on race-based⁤ college admissions. According‌ to the school’s admissions page, applicants will now​ need to submit a 90-second​ “video statement” to provide‌ additional insight into ‌their personal strengths.

“Critics have accused Columbia of using this video statement as a way to practice affirmative action‌ by other means, ​using appearance as a proxy for ‌race,” said Edward Blum, founder of Students for Fair Admissions. “What can a 90-second video ⁤convey that a written⁤ statement cannot?”

However, a spokesperson for the law school clarified that it ⁤was all a misunderstanding. By ⁣6:00⁣ PM Monday evening, Columbia ‍had removed the language⁢ from its website.

The law school confirmed that video statements‌ will not be required ⁣for the Fall 2024 J.D.⁢ application. The requirement was‍ mistakenly listed on the website and has since been corrected.

While video statements were previously required for transfer applicants as part ⁤of a pilot program, the broader requirement for all applicants was added after the Supreme Court’s ‌ruling in ⁢late June.

“The timing of this change raises suspicions. It’s clear they were trying to ⁤hide‌ their intentions,” said a‌ current Columbia Law student before the requirement was taken down.

Columbia has not indicated whether video statements will be optional in future ​application ⁢cycles.

This reversal follows Columbia’s​ affirmative action ban, but later reversed its decision.”>law journals delaying masthead acceptances in ⁤response to the affirmative action ban. The journals stated​ that they have an ⁤”obligation”​ to ensure ‌their selection process aligns with the⁣ law.

While some law schools conducted optional interviews before​ the Supreme Court’s decision, none⁢ implemented a requirement ‍like Columbia’s short-lived video statement.

“Law schools should not base their selection ‌process on personal appearance,” said a graduate of ‍Columbia Law School, who is now a partner at a prominent New York law firm. “This was ‍an obvious attempt to circumvent the Supreme Court’s ruling and the Civil Rights Act.”

David Bernstein, a professor at George​ Mason ⁣Law School, suggested that videos may‌ become a way for schools to collect and consider data on race, which they are officially barred from ​using.

“This requirement seems like an insurance policy in case schools are not allowed to ask about race,” Bernstein explained. “Requiring video statements ‍is unprecedented in law schools.”

Although the Supreme Court prohibits universities from considering race, they can still consider an applicant’s ⁣discussion of how race affected their life. This carve-out⁤ is expected to increase ⁤schools’ reliance on interviews and essays.

According to Dan Morenoff, executive director of the⁢ American Civil Rights Project, video statements may be on shakier legal ⁢ground and ‌could potentially‌ lead to litigation. Morenoff pointed out that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission advises against asking for photographs of applicants.