{"id":149868,"date":"2026-04-29T13:33:55","date_gmt":"2026-04-29T21:33:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/04\/29\/aba-settlement-over-legal-opportunity-scholarship-fund-goes-about-how-youd-expect-it-to\/"},"modified":"2026-04-29T13:33:55","modified_gmt":"2026-04-29T21:33:55","slug":"aba-settlement-over-legal-opportunity-scholarship-fund-goes-about-how-youd-expect-it-to","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/04\/29\/aba-settlement-over-legal-opportunity-scholarship-fund-goes-about-how-youd-expect-it-to\/","title":{"rendered":"ABA Settlement Over Legal Opportunity Scholarship Fund Goes About How You\u2019d Expect It To"},"content":{"rendered":"

Surprise, surprise, another ABA diversity loss. Right after SFFA v. Harvard<\/em>, the timer started ticking against structural attempts to correct racial disparities in the legal profession. Rules like \u201cHey, we should make sure that underserved communities are aware of the opportunities we\u2019re offering\u201d or suggestions like \u201cMaybe the profession shouldn\u2019t look like a Hanson concert<\/a>\u201d became even more suspect than usual. The ABA tried to wiggle out of being sued for some of their pro-diversity, equity, and inclusion offerings by changing some of the wording<\/a>, but they weren\u2019t prepared to go to bat in the long run. They\u2019ve recently settled a case about who is eligible for one of their scholarships. Law.com<\/a> has coverage:<\/p>\n

\n

The American Bar Association has settled a lawsuit brought forth last year by the American Alliance for Equal Rights (AAER) over the ABA\u2019s Legal Opportunity Scholarship Fund (LOSF), agreeing to offer the scholarship on a \u201crace\/ethnicity-neutral\u201d basis.<\/p>\n

The ABA agreed to \u201crefrain from including any eligibility requirement for LOSF based on particular group identities, including race or ethnicity,\u201d according to the Joint Stipulation of Dismissal filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division on Monday.<\/p>\n

The ABA also agreed to \u201capply the eligibility requirements for LOSF on a race\/ethnicity-neutral basis\u201d and to clarify that demographic information in the LOSF application is \u201csolely for data-tracking purposes and will not be considered as part of the eligibility for the scholarship,\u201d according to court records.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The LOSF is now reserved for first years \u201ccommitted to enhancing the diversity, equity, and inclusion of the legal profession.\u201d Great, now the money can go to the law school equivalent of this guy:<\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

Appeals to inclusion without a historical basis for why that inclusion matters<\/a> are just excuses to parade mainstream dogma. There\u2019s nothing particularly new or enhancing about Amy Wax platforming White supremacists or minimizing Asian and Black law students, but the discursive justification that she or FedSoc bros parroting PragerU talking points are \u201cencouraging debate\u201d or \u201cpromoting the free exchange of ideas\u201d ignores that these ideas have been circulating for a very<\/em> long time. Debates on if Black people are as intelligent as their White peers (\u201cpeople\u201d and \u201cpeers\u201d are of course stretches of the historical imagination<\/a> in this context) go back centuries \u2014 there\u2019s a well-documented example of Thomas Jefferson shitting on an award-winning, formerly enslaved poet for only being capable of mimicry<\/a>. What\u2019s so novel about a professor evenhandedly assuming poorly of them despite the evidence to the contrary<\/a>?<\/p>\n

Will the next round of LOSF recipients include some equivalent of the student who sued his school over removing his Charlie Kirk flyers? Because if not, there will suits alleging that the scholarships discriminate against the real<\/em> minority: conservative viewpoints. It is very popular for conservatives to argue that their viewpoints are in the minority and that their shoehorning Ayn Rand quotes in Con Law are the classroom discussions needed to balance out the overwhelming liberalism, even if the data shows that the nation skewed rightward in 2019<\/a>, and stayed about the same in 2020<\/a>. More up-to-date polling shows opinions are changing<\/a>, but 1) they aren\u2019t drastic changes and 2) it is naive to pretend that all the conservatives on speaking tours about how they\u2019re being silenced comport with reality. Conservative viewpoints are always present in these classrooms \u2014 they\u2019re the damn case book.<\/p>\n

Whoever gets the money, I hope they actually need it. Double points if they aren\u2019t some grifter. <\/p>\n

ABA Settles Lawsuit Over Diversity Scholarship <\/a>[Law.com]<\/p>\n

Earlier<\/strong>: ABA Diversity And Inclusion Standard Looks Like It\u2019s On Its Last Legs<\/a><\/p>\n

ABA Committee Decides To Diversify Diversity. It Should Come With A Clear Reason For Why That\u2019s Important.<\/a><\/p>\n

Law Professors Argue Abandoning The Diversity Rule Will Hurt The ABA\u2019s Reputation<\/a><\/p>\n

\n
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Chris Williams became a social media manager and assistant editor for Above the Law in June 2021. Prior to joining the staff, he moonlighted as a minor Memelord\u2122 in the Facebook group\u00a0Law School Memes for Edgy T14s . \u00a0He endured Missouri long enough to graduate from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. He is a former boat builder who is learning to swim and is interested in rhetoric, Spinozists and humor. Getting back in to cycling wouldn\u2019t hurt either. You can reach him by email at christopherrashadwilliams@gmail.com<\/a> and by Tweet\/Bluesky at\u00a0@WritesForRent<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The post ABA Settlement Over Legal Opportunity Scholarship Fund Goes About How You\u2019d Expect It To<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n

Surprise, surprise, another ABA diversity loss. Right after SFFA v. Harvard<\/em>, the timer started ticking against structural attempts to correct racial disparities in the legal profession. Rules like \u201cHey, we should make sure that underserved communities are aware of the opportunities we\u2019re offering\u201d or suggestions like \u201cMaybe the profession shouldn\u2019t look like a Hanson concert<\/a>\u201d became even more suspect than usual. The ABA tried to wiggle out of being sued for some of their pro-diversity, equity, and inclusion offerings by changing some of the wording<\/a>, but they weren\u2019t prepared to go to bat in the long run. They\u2019ve recently settled a case about who is eligible for one of their scholarships. Law.com<\/a> has coverage:<\/p>\n

\n

The American Bar Association has settled a lawsuit brought forth last year by the American Alliance for Equal Rights (AAER) over the ABA\u2019s Legal Opportunity Scholarship Fund (LOSF), agreeing to offer the scholarship on a \u201crace\/ethnicity-neutral\u201d basis.<\/p>\n

The ABA agreed to \u201crefrain from including any eligibility requirement for LOSF based on particular group identities, including race or ethnicity,\u201d according to the Joint Stipulation of Dismissal filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division on Monday.<\/p>\n

The ABA also agreed to \u201capply the eligibility requirements for LOSF on a race\/ethnicity-neutral basis\u201d and to clarify that demographic information in the LOSF application is \u201csolely for data-tracking purposes and will not be considered as part of the eligibility for the scholarship,\u201d according to court records.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The LOSF is now reserved for first years \u201ccommitted to enhancing the diversity, equity, and inclusion of the legal profession.\u201d Great, now the money can go to the law school equivalent of this guy:<\/p>\n