Law schools urged to oppose Trump administration’s overreach more strongly than other areas of higher education.
In recent months, law schools across the United States, notably under the Trump administration’s influence, have been compelled to navigate complex dilemmas surrounding free speech, diversity, equity, and inclusion. These core issues have been brought to the forefront, prompting institutions to re-evaluate their guiding principles, often in light of political pressures and potential funding consequences.
The ramifications of not aligning with the administration’s political agenda extend beyond mere ideology. Law schools, as critical stewards in the development of legal talent, bear an essential responsibility in maintaining and advancing the progress achieved through historical legal battles. This commitment is particularly vital as attorneys have historically acted as advocates for the rights of their communities, especially during pivotal moments in U.S. history, such as the civil rights movement.
A significant figure in this legacy is Sadie T.M. Alexander, who made history in 1927 as the first Black woman to graduate from the University of Pennsylvania Law School. President Harry S. Truman later recognized her contributions by appointing her to his Commission on Civil Rights. Alexander also co-founded the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations, reinforcing her status as a champion of equality. In recent ceremonies, Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle L. Parker acknowledged her remarkable legacy with plans to erect a statue in her honor near the Philadelphia Municipal Services Building.
However, under recent pressures from the administration, Penn Carey Law School decided in August to halt applications for a scholarship named after Alexander, designed to support law students focusing on civil rights. This decision indicates a concerning trend where law schools may prioritize institutional protection over their foundational commitments to social justice.
Contrastingly, Georgetown University Law Center has taken a different stance. When faced with similar challenges, Georgetown Law Dean William M. Treanor rebuffed external threats aimed at its diversity and inclusion initiatives, reinforcing its dedication to academic freedom and institutional values. This divergence highlights the varying responses of law schools to political pressure, raising critical questions about the implications for continuing legal education and social responsibility.
In light of public backlash regarding the suspension of the Alexander Scholarship, Penn Law has recently announced the creation of a two-year Sadie T.M. Alexander Post-Graduate Fellowship, alongside new full tuition scholarships for high-need students. However, critics argue that this move, described as damage control, does not effectively replace the original scholarship’s value, which encompassed funding and professional development opportunities over a three-year period.
As advocates for justice and equality, law schools like Penn must critically assess their decisions in light of America’s historical struggles for civil rights. The recent choices made by Penn Law, particularly regarding the Alexander Scholarship, serve as a poignant reminder of the challenges institutions face in balancing financial stability with their core ethical responsibilities. Graduates of Penn Law are calling upon the institution to reconsider these recent changes, emphasizing the need to honor the legacy of pioneers like Alexander, whose dedication to civil rights should inspire ongoing commitment to equity and justice for all.
Media News Source
