Law firms update diversity programs due to legal pressure
Winston & Strawn and Susman Godfrey Eliminate Racial Criteria and Revamp Diversity Programs
Two prominent law firms have recently made significant changes to their diversity programs in response to legal threats from conservatives. These modifications involve the removal of race-based eligibility criteria and other provisions that experts argue violated civil rights laws.
Winston & Strawn, known for offering a $50,000 “scholarship” exclusively to minority summer associates, has decided to eliminate the program’s racial criteria. This decision came after the American Alliance for Equal Rights, a conservative nonprofit, filed a discrimination lawsuit against the firm. Similarly, Susman Godfrey, which operated a diversity fellowship for “underrepresented groups,” made the same changes due to legal threats.
Susman Godfrey also made alterations to the Susman Godfrey Prize, a separate program that awarded “students of color” with a $3,500 cash prize and a job offer. While the prize remains exclusive to minorities, it no longer includes a job offer, making it compliant with laws prohibiting race discrimination in contracting. These changes were prompted by the American Alliance for Equal Rights, founded by anti-affirmative-action activist Edward Blum, who threatened to sue the firm unless both programs were revised.
“We wish you would have complied with the law by eliminating the racial discrimination (instead of the contract),” stated Adam Mortara and Thomas McCarthy, representing Blum’s group in a letter to Susman Godfrey. “But your revised program—handing out money based on skin color—appears to be just demeaning virtue-signaling, not a violation of [the law].”
These programs, initially exposed by the Washington Free Beacon and widely criticized by legal experts as illegal, are now casualties of conservatives’ campaign against racial preferences. Perkins Coie and Morrison Foerster, two other law firms facing lawsuits from Blum’s group, have opened their race-based fellowships to all applicants. Blum’s group has also sued Fearless Fund, a venture capital firm that exclusively invests in black-run companies. In response, Gibson Dunn, one of the law firms representing Fearless Fund, has adjusted the criteria for its own diversity fellowship.
Initially, several of these firms vowed to defend their programs in court but eventually backtracked. Winston Strawn, for instance, asserted in October that its fellowship was “appropriate, legal, and compliant” and would continue, enlisting attorneys from Jenner & Block to defend against Blum’s lawsuit. Perkins Coie also initially declared it would “defend this lawsuit vigorously” but later folded, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which banned racial preferences in college admissions.
The American Alliance for Equal Rights dropped its case against Winston & Strawn, expressing satisfaction with the firm’s changes. However, Blum, who also organized the lawsuit against Harvard, remains determined.
In a press release, Blum stated, “The alliance is committed to challenging race-based policies at any corporation, law firm, institution, or government agency. We encourage anyone with knowledge of these unlawful programs to contact us.”
How do the changes made by Winston & Strawn and Susman Godfrey align their diversity programs with legal requirements and promote the principles of meritocracy?
Ome to this decision on your own, but we are glad that you have finally recognized the discriminatory nature of these programs,” said Edward Blum in a statement. ”No one should be denied opportunities based on their race, and we will continue to fight against such practices.”
The decision by Winston & Strawn and Susman Godfrey to eliminate race-based criteria and revamp their diversity programs is a step in the right direction towards creating a more inclusive and equal work environment. By removing these discriminatory practices, both firms are showing their commitment to promoting diversity and equality within the legal profession.
Diversity programs are designed to address historical disparities and provide opportunities for underrepresented groups in the legal field. However, when these programs are based solely on race, they can inadvertently perpetuate racial stereotypes and discrimination. This is why it is crucial for firms to assess the impact of their diversity initiatives and ensure that they are in compliance with civil rights laws.
The changes made by Winston & Strawn and Susman Godfrey not only align their programs with legal requirements but also support the principles of meritocracy. By focusing on merit and talent rather than race, these firms are recognizing that diversity and excellence are not mutually exclusive. They are acknowledging that individuals should be judged based on their qualifications, skills, and abilities, rather than their racial background.
It is worth noting that addressing racial disparities in the legal profession requires more than just eliminating race-based criteria from diversity programs. The legal industry as a whole must invest in promoting diversity and inclusivity at every level, from recruitment to career advancement. This includes creating mentoring and sponsorship programs, providing equal access to training and professional development opportunities, and implementing transparent and unbiased evaluation processes.
While the changes made by Winston & Strawn and Susman Godfrey are a positive step forward, they should serve as the catalyst for broader initiatives within the legal profession. The fight against discrimination and the pursuit of equality and justice should be at the core of every law firm’s mission. Only by creating an environment that fosters diversity and equal representation can the legal profession truly live up to its responsibilities and serve society as a whole.
In conclusion, the decision by Winston & Strawn and Susman Godfrey to eliminate race-based criteria and revamp their diversity programs demonstrates a commitment to equality and inclusivity. These changes not only ensure compliance with civil rights laws but also promote the principles of meritocracy. However, it is important for the legal industry as a whole to continue working towards creating a more diverse and inclusive profession. By doing so, we can create a legal system that truly represents and serves all members of society, regardless of their racial background.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...