H.Hrg.119

1[House Hearing, 119 Congress]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                           THE FUTURE OF DEI5                      IN LAW SCHOOL ACCREDITATION6                        AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION7=======================================================================89                                 HEARING1011                               BEFORE THE1213                   TASK FORCE ON DEFENDING CONSTITUTIONAL14                 RIGHTS AND EXPOSING INSTITUTIONAL ABUSES1516                                 OF THE1718              COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM1920                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES2122                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2324                             SECOND SESSION2526                               __________2728                             JULY 22, 20262930                               __________3132                           Serial No. 119-723334                               __________3536Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform3738[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3940    Available on: govinfo.gov, oversight.house.gov or docs.house.gov41                               __________4243                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE4464-273 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 202645=======================================================================4647              COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM4849                    JAMES COMER, Kentucky, Chairman5051Jim Jordan, Ohio                     Robert Garcia, California, Ranking52Mike Turner, Ohio                        Minority Member53Paul Gosar, Arizona                  Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of54Virginia Foxx, North Carolina            Columbia55Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin            Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts56Michael Cloud, Texas                 Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois57Gary Palmer, Alabama                 Ro Khanna, California58Clay Higgins, Louisiana              Kweisi Mfume, Maryland59Pete Sessions, Texas                 Shontel Brown, Ohio60Andy Biggs, Arizona                  Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico61Nancy Mace, South Carolina           Maxwell Frost, Florida62Pat Fallon, Texas                    Greg Casar, Texas63Byron Donalds, Florida               Jasmine Crockett, Texas64Scott Perry, Pennsylvania            Emily Randall, Washington65William Timmons, South Carolina      Suhas Subramanyam, Virginia66Tim Burchett, Tennessee              Yassamin Ansari, Arizona67Lauren Boebert, Colorado             Wesley Bell, Missouri68Anna Paulina Luna, Florida           Lateefah Simon, California69Nick Langworthy, New York            Dave Min, California70Eric Burlison, Missouri              James Walkinshaw, Virginia71Elijah Crane, Arizona                Christian Menefee, Texas72Brian Jack, Georgia                  Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts73John McGuire, Virginia               Rashida Tlaib, Michigan74Brandon Gill, Texas75Richard McCormick, Georgia7677                                 ------7879                       Mark Marin, Staff Director80                   James Rust, Deputy Staff Director81                     Ryan Giachetti, Chief Counsel82              Karl Keyzer-Andre, Professional Staff Member83                          Rodney Rios, Counsel84         Mallory Cogar, Director of Operations and Chief Clerk8586                      Contact Number: 202-225-50748788                Robert Edmonson, Minority Staff Director89                      Contact Number: 202-225-505190                                 ------9192      Task Force on Defending Constitutional Rights and Exposing93                          Institutional Abuses9495                     Brandon Gill, Texas, Chairman9697Jim Jordan, Ohio                     Lateefah Simon, California,98Michael Cloud, Texas                     Ranking Member99Andy Biggs, Arizona                  Dave Min, California100Byron Donalds, Florida               James Walkinshaw, Virginia101Brian Jack, Georgia                  Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts102103                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S104105                              ----------106107                           OPENING STATEMENTS108109                                                                   Page110111Hon. Brandon Gill, U.S. Representative, Chairman.................     1112113Hon. Lateefah Simon, U.S. Representative, Ranking Member.........     3114115                               WITNESSES116117Ms. Michelle A. Behnke, President, American Bar Association118Oral Statement...................................................     5119120Mr. Zack Smith, Senior Legal Fellow, Courts and the Constitution,121  Legal Policy Center, The Heritage Foundation122Oral Statement...................................................     7123124Mr. David Blackman, Former Law Student, Penn State Dickinson Law,125  Texas State Guard Veteran126Oral Statement...................................................     8127128Written opening statements and bios are available on the U.S.129  House of Representatives Document Repository at:130  docs.house.gov.131132                           INDEX OF DOCUMENTS133134  * Article, KERA, ``North Texas Families--And Summer Food135  Programs They Rely On--Feeling Sting of Inflation''; submitted136  by Rep. Simon.137138  * Article, ABA, ``ABA President Michelle A. Behnke calls Equity139  Summit 2026 `a step towards action' ''; submitted by Rep. Gill.140141  * Article, Above the Law, ``ABA's Defunct Diversity In Law142  School Standard Moves Toward Getting Repealed''; submitted by143  Rep. Gill.144145  * Article, Washington Times, ``ABA's Evaluation of Judicial146  Nominees Tarnished by Liberal Bias''; submitted by Rep. Gill.147148  * Article, Zack Smith, ``Accreditation and the American Bar149  Association''; submitted by Rep. Gill.150151  * Article, Bloomberg, ``Big Law Leans Left--and Is Moving152  Further Left, Research Shows''; submitted by Rep. Gill.153154  * Article, Bloomberg, ``Trump Pressure Forces ABA Weakening of155  Law School DEI Standard''; submitted by Rep. Gill.156157  * Article, Washington Free Beacon, ``TX Mil Vet Dropped Out of158  Penn State Law Rather Than Submit to Anti-Racism Course'';159  submitted by Rep. Gill.160161  * Article, National Review, ``Yes, the ABA Is Still a Left-Wing162  Advocacy Group''; submitted by Rep. Gill.163164  * Letter to Dean Conway; submitted by Rep. Gill.165166  * Letter to DOE re: ABA; submitted by Rep. Gill.167168  * Report, Heritage Foundation, ``ABA's `Diversity' Agenda169  Endangers the Integrity of the Legal Profession''; submitted by170  Rep. Gill.171172The documents listed above are available at: docs.house.gov.173174                           THE FUTURE OF DEI175                      IN LAW SCHOOL ACCREDITATION176                        AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION177178                              ----------179180                        WEDNESDAY, JULY 22, 2026181182                     U.S. House of Representatives183184              Committee on Oversight and Government Reform185186      Task Force on Defending Constitutional Rights and Exposing187                          Institutional Abuses188189                                                   Washington, D.C.190191    The Task Force met, pursuant to notice, at 2:28 p.m., in192room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Brandon Gill,193[Chairman of the Task Force] presiding.194    Present: Representatives Gill, Jordan, Cloud, Jack, Simon,195Min, and Walkinshaw.196    Mr. Gill. This hearing of the Task Force on Defending197Constitutional Rights and Exposing Institutional Abuses will198come to order. Welcome everybody. Thank you all for being here.199Without objection, the Chair may declare a recess at any time.200I now recognize myself for the purpose of making an opening201statement.202203           OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BRANDON GILL204205                   REPRESENTATIVE FROM TEXAS206207    The rule of law and equal access to justice for Americans208are bedrock principles enshrined in the Constitution. Access to209our legal system and the rights and freedoms we enjoy as210Americans as a result of the rule of law are fundamental211components of the success of our Nation as we celebrate the212250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. So, it213should concern all Americans that these principles are eroded214by discriminatory Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)215practices and concerned them even more that these DEI policies216have been promoted by attorneys with the legal training to know217better.218    The American Bar Association (ABA), as an institution,219plays an outsized role in American law and the legal220profession. Ever since it was founded in 1878, the ABA has221grown to be the entity that sets the accreditation standards222for American law schools. Since 1952, the ABA has been223recognized by the Federal Government as the only law school224accreditor. Those states' supreme courts have the power to225regulate the conduct of legal professionals within those226states. Many states also recognize the ABA as the accreditor227for their law schools.228    Furthermore, the ABA evaluates judicial nominees,229promulgates model rules of professional conduct for attorneys,230and speaks for many people as a voice for attorneys in the231United States. So, what has the ABA done with this impressive232accumulation of power and prestige?233    Unfortunately, it appears that the ABA, ideologically234captured by radical leftists, has continuously pursued235discriminatory DEI practices. This included requiring law236schools to consider race as a factor for admissions, and to237evaluate racial discrimination over a merit in order to238diversify the profession. This was not done in secret.239    The ABA published an accreditation standard to enforce it.240That is Standard 206, and the implementing guidance for241Standard 206 says that even if those DEI practices are illegal242under a constitutional provision or statute, that illegality243is, quote, ``not a justification for a school's noncompliance244with Standard 206,'' end quote.245    Even after the Supreme Court held in 2023 that race-based246admissions practices violate the equal protection clause of the24714th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the ABA did not248voluntarily reverse course. Instead, it double-downed and told249law schools it would continue to enforce its DEI standards in250the accreditation process.251    Through accreditation Standard 206 and Standard 303(c), the252ABA used its institutional power to bully law schools to also253require mandatory DEI-related courses in addition to race-based254policies in admissions. As we heard from witnesses during our255hearing on July 14, discriminatory DEI policies, in addition to256being illegal, seek to pit Americans against one another on a257count of their immutable characteristics, and at their core258fundamentally reject the American ideal of equal justice, and259of achieving success based on one's merit.260    The ABA, an organization made up of attorneys who should261know better, persisted in promoting DEI practices even though262race-based admissions forced speech in considering race in263employment considerations clearly violate the law. Those264practices violate Federal civil rights statutes passed by265Congress more than 60 years ago, in addition to violating the266U.S. Constitution.267    It was not until President Trump issued executive orders268and threatened the ABA's accreditation monopoly at the Federal269level that the ABA begrudgingly started to assess whether to270get rid of those DEI requirements. Enforcement of Standard 206271on DEI in admissions is currently suspended, and although the272ABA standards committee recently recommended that it be273repealed, it received numerous comments still supporting274keeping DEI in full force, and the full repeal has not yet275taken effect.276    Standard 303(c) on DEI-related mandatory coursework remains277in force. And although the accreditation committee is reviewing278that standard as well, no final decision has been made.279Meanwhile, the ABA devotes entire pages on its public facing280website to promoting DEI in the legal profession leaving me,281for one, skeptical that it has learned the error of its ways282and will make a clean break from its racist DEI policies.283    ABA President Behnke even stated in February this year,284when speaking to the ABA delegates, that, quote, ``We will not285abandon our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion,''286end quote. Given this reality, it is no surprise that many287states like Florida, Texas, Alabama, and Tennessee, are moving288away, or considering moving away, from the traditional monopoly289in law school accreditations exercised by the ABA.290    Our purpose today, is to examine the role and future of an291institution like the ABA and law school accreditation, and in292the legal profession in our country. The harm that DEI has293caused to the legal profession and to Americans who deserve294equal access to justice and competent representation from their295legal professionals is extensive. We must ensure a course of296action that will restore merit and integrity to American law297and the legal profession.298    And with that, I yield to Ranking Member Simon for her299opening statement.300301              OPENING STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER302303                         LATEEFAH SIMON304305                 REPRESENTATIVE FROM CALIFORNIA306307    Ms. Simon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to the308witnesses and to the public who have joined us today for this309conversation. You know, before the witnesses begin, I want to310talk to this room about what you are going to hear in the next311hour because the script is not new.312    We will hear that a private, independent association of313attorneys is the great racial menace of our age. We will hear314the word, ``merit,'' spoken as if opportunity has ever truly315been distributed by merit in this country, and we will hear316that a diversity standard already suspended and repealed317somehow still threatens the republic.318    The Majority has convened the machinery of the U.S.319Congress to prosecute a rule that no longer is in question at320an institution that has already capitulated to the President of321the United States, and they call this exercise oversight.322    It is not oversight. It is theater. Because, let us be323clear, you read the bylaws of said organization, if we look at324organizational charts of said organization, the council that325sets up accreditation standards is separate from the ABA326professional organization here today. It exists to ensure that327lawyers are qualified and ethical, but we all know that328qualified and ethical attorneys and judges are often on the329front lines, the front lines of protecting Americans, of330preventing the Trump Administration from violating American's331rights and the rule of law. So, I ask, and I think it is an332important question, is this conversation helping Americans?333    Last year fewer than one in 10,000 Americans applied to an334ABA accredited law school. That is .02 percent of the335population, yet this is what the Majority chooses to336investigate today. While ten million Americans will lose their337health insurance because of the law that the Majority wrote,338just last year, which made the deepest cuts in Medicaid in our339country's history.340    The American Bar Association casts no vote on that bill,341but 209 Republicans did. Four million people have already lost342their food assistance faster than the Congressional Budget343Office predicted. This Congress ordered a 64-year-old woman to344prove her work hours before she could keep groceries on the345table, and ended exceptions for our veterans, people346experiencing homelessness, and children aging out of foster347care. No bar association wrote a word of it, but the348Republicans did.349    5,843 National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants have been350terminated or frozen; 383 clinical trials--and we all know who351are in clinical trials--were stopped midstream by this352Administration and more than 74,000 people enrolled were sent353home. Those are folks fighting cancer, Amyotrophic lateral354sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig's disease, children355struggling and waiting for another call of a possible clinical356trial, only again to be turned away because of this357Administration's actions and the Trump Administration decided358with all of those 74,000 people that their lives were not worth359it, more than 100 schoolgirls are buried underneath the rubble360from American munitions in a war that no Americans asked for,361but no lawyer's association put those babies in the ground. My362colleagues, however, financed it.363    So, if the American Bar Association did none of those364things, why is the American Bar Association on deck? I will365tell you why. Because they sued the President. When lawyers366were stripped of their security clearances for representing his367critics, when law firms were pressed into nearly a billion368dollars in tribute to our President, the ABA went to Federal369court, and judge after judge ruled that the Administration's370actions were unconstitutional.371    The government lawyers argued only that no one had standing372to sue so the hearing that you are in today is an answer to373that lawsuit. A task force with the word constitutional in its374title has been a symbol to collect a political debt for the375President--a President that the courts keep ruling against.376    And since the Majority insists on talking about racism, let377us consult the record. In 1912, the ABA expelled three Black378lawyers and had admitted by mistake, including William H.379Lewis, then the Assistant General Attorney, Assistant General380Attorney of the United States, because of its settled practice381to only admit White men. After public outrage the ABA382reinstated them, then it amended its application process so383that every future applicant had to declare their race. It384knowingly admitted no other Black lawyers for another three385decades.386    So, the diversity standard on trial today was a part of the387ABA's effort to reckon with that history. The Majority arrives388a century late, silent about the discrimination, yet furious389about its repair. The Constitution is not endangered because390more Americans entered the legal profession. It is endangered391when power is used to punish those who challenge it. When392oversight becomes retaliation and when Congress mistakes393grievance for governance, history will remember which side that394choice we stood on.395    And I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.396    Mr. Gill. Thank you, Ranking Member Simon.397    And now, I would like to welcome our witnesses. Once again,398thank you all for being here. First, we have Michelle Behnke,399president of the American Bar Association. President Behnke has400held her position since 2024, and prior to that, served in401various other leadership positions within the ABA, including402serving as chair of the ABA Commission on Racial and Ethnic403Diversity in the profession.404    Second, we have Zack Smith, Senior Legal Fellow of Courts405and the Constitution at the Heritage Foundation's Legal Policy406Center. Next, we have David Blackman, a Texas State Guard407veteran and former student from Penn State University Law408School who is directly affected by DEI radicalism in his law409school.410    Thank you all for joining us, and I look forward to your411testimony. Pursuant to Committee Rule 9(g), the witnesses will412please stand and raise their right hands.413    Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony that you414are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing415but the truth, so help you, God?416    [Chorus of ayes.]417    Mr. Gill. Let the record show that the witnesses answered418in the affirmative. Thank you, you could take a seat.419    We appreciate you being here today and look forward to your420testimony. Let me remind the witnesses that we will have read421your written statements, and it will appear in full in the422hearing record. Please limit your oral statement to 5 minutes.423As a reminder, please press the button on the microphone in424front of you so that it is on and the Members can hear you.425When you begin to speak the light in front of you will turn426green, after 4 minutes the light will turn yellow. When the red427light comes on, your 5 minutes have expired and we would ask428that you please wrap up.429    I now recognize President Behnke for her opening statement.430431              STATEMENT OF MS. MICHELLE A. BEHNKE432433                           PRESIDENT434435                    AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION436437    Ms. Behnke. Good afternoon, Chairman Gill, Ranking Member438Simon, and distinguished Members of the Task Force. Thank you439for the opportunity to be here today.440    My name is Michelle Behnke and I am serving as the441president of the American Bar Association, a nonpartisan442membership organization opened to all American lawyers. I443practice law in Madison, Wisconsin where my husband and I have444raised our two, now adult, children. I have been a lawyer for445almost 40 years, focusing on real estate, business, and estate446planning.447    I began my one-year term as president of the ABA last448August. Each and every day, I put on this pin, and I am proud449to represent our 250,000 members from every state across the450country in all walks of life. Our members come from red states451and blue states. They range from solo practitioners to lawyers452in big firms, and their practices include everything from453family law, to criminal defense, to commercial contracts, and454litigation.455    When the ABA, as an organization, takes a position it456reflects the considered judgment of this diverse membership.457The ABA has been carrying out its mission to serve and458strengthen the American legal system for nearly 150 years. As459the national representative and voice of the legal profession,460we are dedicated to serving the legal community, and the461public, by defending liberty and pursuing justice.462    The rule of law does not defend itself. Lawyers do, and463that is why I have chosen to serve. It is also the reason I464would like to address the subject of today's hearing. The ABA465is deeply committed to fostering a justice system that everyone466in America can have access to and confidence in. When our467practice is open, and inclusive, and unbiased, we attract a468wider range of talent and perspectives.469    Diversity and excellence are not mutually exclusive. In470fact, the opposite is true. Diversity, equity, and inclusion471initiatives enhance merit within the legal profession. When we472have diverse teams, our profession is stronger. It enhances our473ability to solve our client's problems, when we can tap into474the varied experiences and perspectives of people from every475background and every community.476    When someone asks me whether we have arrived at a truly477open profession, I think back to my parents. When Brown v.478Board of Education was decided in 1954, the decision that479dismantled the legal framework of separate by equal, my mom and480dad were just 12 years old living in Mississippi.481    Segregation and legalized racial discrimination shaped the482world they grew up in. Their daughter later became the first483Black woman elected to serve as president of the State Bar of484Wisconsin, and now I sit before you as the President of the485American Bar Association.486    Our story is proof that there has been progress, but the487numbers tell us that there is still more work to do. The data488shows that women, lawyers of color, and other groups remain489drastically underrepresented in the American legal community.490Barriers still remain. Barriers that prevent talented491individuals from pursuing legal careers and rising within the492profession once they enter it.493    Working to identify and reduce those barriers enhances494merit within the profession, itself, by ensuring everyone has495the opportunity to bring their capabilities to the practice of496law. That is what true meritocracy looks like, and that is what497the ABA strives toward.498    Next, I would like to talk about the importance of a499national law school accreditation to the American legal system.500The Council of the ABA's Section on Legal Education and501Admission to the Bar has been recognized by the Department of502Education as the national accrediting body for Juris Doctor503(JD) programs for more than 70 years. The Council is separate504and independent from the ABA, and this separation is legally505required by the Department of Education.506    So, while I cannot speak for the Council, I can tell you507what the Council's work means for the American public and508potential law students. When someone enters a lawyer's office509facing divorce, or criminal charge, or a business dispute, they510do not have the opportunity to audit the lawyer's legal511education. They have to trust that the lawyer received a512quality education. The accreditation system is what makes that513trust possible.514    The Council's accreditation system is also a promise to515every law student that their degree will be portable, and that516they will have the opportunity to practice in any state, not517just where they went to law school.518    In closing, I would like to underscore, at the ABA, we519believe in a legal profession that is open to anyone with the520talent and drive to serve, and we believe in the rule of law521that guarantees the fundamental rights of every American. Thank522you again for the opportunity to appear.523    Mr. Gill. Thank you.524    And I now recognize Zack Smith for his opening statement.525526                  STATEMENT OF MR. ZACK SMITH527528                      SENIOR LEGAL FELLOW529530        COURTS AND THE CONSTITUTION, LEGAL POLICY CENTER531532                    THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION533534    Mr. Smith. Thank you, Chairman Gill, Ranking Member Simon,535Members of the Committee [sic], for this opportunity to testify536before you today.537    The American Bar Association has abandoned its mission to538provide best practices for the legal profession. Instead, it539has opted to push a partisan program for radical policies. For540example, the ABA has weighed in on hot button cultural issues541by supporting nationwide abortion and racial discrimination at542American universities. It has opposed Second Amendment rights,543and it has attacked states that refuse to let children cutoff544their genitals if they feel they were born in the wrong body.545    Even more egregiously for an organization supposedly546dedicated to the rule of law, it has taken the absurd and547patently incorrect position that our Constitution has 28548instead of 27 Amendments.549    This position that the Equal Rights Amendment has become550part of our Constitution is so egregious that even the Biden-551appointed Archivist of the United States, the official that552certifies newly enacted constitutional amendments rejected it553out of hand.554    As a private organization, the ABA is free to adopt almost555any policy it wishes, but the Federal Government recognizes the556ABA's Council of the Section of Legal Education and admissions557to the Bar as the sole federally recognized law school558accreditor. And when this entity, which is not only under the559auspices of the ABA, exercises government-sanctioned authority,560it must comport with the Constitution, but it does not.561    In fact, as current president, Michelle Behnke, made clear562in a February 2026 speech, the ABA will not abandon its563commitment to diversity, equity, inclusion because now is not564the time to take back the progress that we have made. And she565delivered introductory remarks at the ABA's 2026 Equity Summit566which the ABA diversity, equity, and inclusion center hosted in567coordination with the ABA's DEI advisory council.568    The summit included panels with titles like ``Disparate569Impact Liability,'' an old innovation that remains570advantageous; ``Beyond Rainbow Logos,'' centering lesbian, gay,571bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning (LGBTQ+) voices who572fuel innovation, equity, and better lawyering; and573``Professional Conduct in a Fractured Climate,'' model rule5748.4(g), DEI challenges and ethical lawyering.575    Now for those unfamiliar with the ABA's model rule 8.4(g)576it is a chilling speech code put forward by the ABA under the577guise of policing the professionalism of lawyers, but it is578drawing condemnation from across the political spectrum. And579one Pennsylvania Federal court found that Pennsylvania's580version of this professional conduct rule, which was based on581the ABA's model, was unconstitutional, though that case was582later dismissed for other reasons.583    While the Council is supposed to be nominally independent584from the larger ABA, there are very real reasons to question585just how independent the Council really is, given the co-586branding and Byzantine relationship between the two entities.587Even setting aside that overlap, the Council, itself, has taken588a number of controversial actions including targeting law589schools such as George Mason or St. Thomas for not implementing590its radical DEI and other progressive policies aggressively591enough.592    Now that it is facing an existential crisis and the loss of593its monopoly on law school accreditation, the Council seeks to594back away from some of its most egregious positions. Consider,595as we heard, that it now seeks to repeal accreditation Standard596206 which requires law schools to demonstrate, by concrete597action, a commitment to diversity and inclusion which it598interpreted as requiring law schools to treat students,599faculty, and staff differently based on their race.600    But the Council is not making this move having reevaluated601its position, or even after having reevaluated the proper role602of an accreditor. It is making this move out of crass self-603preservation. When it perceived the political winds to be604blowing in a different direction several years ago, the Council605demanded that law schools comply with Standard 206 even if606constitutional or statutory provisions required otherwise.607    In other words, the Council said its rules trump the608Constitution. That is shocking. So, what is to be done? First609Congress and the executive branch should build on the good work610that has been done and eliminate the ABA as the sole law school611accreditor. Congress should update relevant statutory612provisions to prohibit the recognition of any accreditor that613imposes DEI requirements, and Congress should build on the work614of states that have eliminated the ABA as the gatekeeper to615state bar exams.616    If other states continue to rely solely on the ABA for this617function, Congress should strip those states of relevant618Federal funds. As Justice John Marshall Harlan had the619foresight and fortitude to make clear 130 years ago, our620Constitution is colorblind and neither knows nor tolerates621classes among citizens. But the ABA has been using its622accrediting authority to undermine these constitutional623commitments to equal treatment regardless of race.624    In closing, the Federal Government and states must continue625to take actions to end the ABA's monopolistic status as a law626school accreditor. Thank you.627    Mr. Gill. Thank you.628    And I now recognize David Blackman for his opening629statement.630631                STATEMENT OF MR. DAVID BLACKMAN632633          FORMER LAW STUDENT, PENN STATE DICKINSON LAW634635                   TEXAS STATE GUARD VETERAN636637    Mr. Blackman. Chairman Gill, Ranking Member Simon, honored638Task Force Members, I thank you for the honor of speaking639before you today and the ability to tell my story. I will not640spend much time on the specifics of my departure from Dickinson641Law, seeing as those events are well in the public record.642However, I want to be clear about who I am, and why I walked643away.644    When I served as a 911 dispatcher in Texas, I operated645under a system of objective rules and clear standards. I went646to law school believing the legal profession held that same647reverence for objective truth. I was wrong.648    I did not leave because the coursework was too difficult. I649left and pivoted my career because I realized the institution650was demanding ideological conformity over objective legal651analysis. In the world of business school, we deal in facts,652concrete frameworks, and strict compliance, but at our law653schools, this framework has been replaced by a political litmus654test.655    The American Bar Association has done more damage to the656neutral administration of our laws than any other institution657in modern America. The impact of Standards 206 and 303(c) will658be felt for a generation. This is without a doubt the biggest659implementation of mandatory DEI in higher education across our660Nation, touching the lives of every law student who chooses to661walk the path of Abraham Lincoln and Thurgood Marshall.662    Make no mistake, Members of Congress, DEI does not care for663the opinions of the police officer, nor the letter of the law.664DEI does not care for the principles on which our republic was665founded. DEI does not consider the violent felon, nor does it666comfort the victim of an attack. Instead, it looks to determine667if the perpetrator is a minority, or what in their background668drove them to commit the crime.669    DEI does not care for the frustration of the veteran judge,670who is now being pressured by activist lawyers to abandon blind671justice in the name of equity. DEI is not only incompatible672with Americanism, but it is incompatible with the study of law673itself because DEI seeks to break down the laws, framing as674inherently racist.675    Because of Standard 303(c) law students around our country676are being taught that they must consider the law as an677oppressive tool. This will inevitably lead to judicial678activism, where judges rule not based on the laws of our679Nation, but based on their own opinions of fairness.680    You might ask how an unelected organization forces every681law school in America to adopt this world view. The answer is682extortion. The ABA leverages its monopoly over accreditation as683a weapon. If the university does not bend to these diversity684standards, they risk their accreditation and their students685risk the ability to sit for the bar exam.686    The ABA is acting as a cartel, enforcing an ideological tax687on every future lawyer and every university that accepts688Federal funds. The American Bar Association has much to answer689for, and it is high time that this monopoly be held accountable690for the implosion of blind justice it has caused.691    They know they are in legal peril. They have quietly tried692to backtrack on these radical standards since the Supreme Court693struck down race-based admissions. But make no mistake, even694though they scrubbed the language, the activist programs they695created remain. We must work together to ensure that the696standards of viewpoint discrimination, DEI, and critical race697theories are removed from our law schools before it is too698late. Thank you.699    Mr. Gill. Thank you.700    And I want to once again thank the witnesses for being701here. We are now going to move on to the question and answer702portion of our hearing, and we will begin with Chairman Jordan.703    I now recognize----704    Mr. Jordan. Thank you.705    Mr. Gill. Chairman Jordan for 5 minutes.706    Mr. Jordan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.707    Ms. Behnke, a press statement, November 30, 2023, headline708reads, ``American Bar Association Withdraws Two Statements on709Israel Hamas War.'' Why did the ABA withdraw those statements?710    Ms. Behnke. Congressman, I am the president and became the711president last August. The process for either making statements712or withdrawing statements, those particular statements happened713outside of my time in presidency.714    Mr. Jordan. I understand that, but why did they do it? The715president of the same association who withdrew the statement716should know why they did it.717    Ms. Behnke. Each year, when the ABA takes positions, they718do so based on policy that has been adopted by our----719    Mr. Jordan. Who are the good guys in the Israel Hamas war,720Ms. Behnke?721    Ms. Behnke. When we adopt policy----722    Mr. Jordan. No, that was not my question. I just asked you723a new question. Who are the good guys in the Israel Hamas war?724    Ms. Behnke. I have nothing to add other than we adopted725policy----726    Mr. Jordan. Simple question. Israel is our ally, one of our727best friends. They were attacked on October 7th. One of these728statements that was withdrawn by the ABA came out on October7299th, two days after women and children were killed and raped730and taken hostage, villages destroyed. Israel is fighting a731terrorist organization. I am asking you a simple question. Who732are the good guys? Israel or the terrorist organization?733    Ms. Behnke. The ABA adopted policy, and when the ABA adopts734policy, then statements are issued, and those are the decisions735that are made.736    Mr. Jordan. I am not asking about the statements right now.737Forget the statements for a second. I am asking you a simple738question. Who do you want to win, Israel or the terrorist739organization?740    Ms. Behnke. I have nothing further to add. My personal741opinion is not relevant. I am here as the president of the742American Bar Association.743    Mr. Jordan. You took statements down, statements that were744issued two days after Israel was attacked. The statements were745taken down because they were deeply flawed because they746suggested Israel was guilty of war crimes. That was ridiculous,747and you took those statement down. Now I am asking you, as the748head of the Bar association, who are the good guys in this749conflict, our friend and ally, Israel, or the terrorist750organization, Hamas? This is not a trick question. It is751actually a simple question.752    Ms. Behnke. I have nothing further to add.753    Mr. Jordan. You will not answer. Third sentence of your754written testimony you said that the American Bar Association is755a nonpartisan organization. Is that really true?756    Ms. Behnke. Yes, sir, it is.757    Mr. Jordan. Really? Do you take any partisan positions as758the American Bar Association?759    Ms. Behnke. The ABA takes position when our house of760delegates----761    Mr. Jordan. The Association opposes any law that restricts762abortion. This came out after the Dobbs decision. That is763pretty partisan. The American Bar Association opposes detention764of individuals who are here illegally. Any migrants who break765our immigration laws, you oppose detention. Those sound pretty766partisan positions to me. Would you agree?767    Ms. Behnke. The ABA takes positions by our house of768delegates, which is made up of 600 lawyers from across the769country. When we take positions, we do so based on the770information that we believe is important to the----771    Mr. Jordan. How about men in women's sports. Do you have a772position on that?773    Ms. Behnke. I do not have a list of all of our----774    Mr. Jordan. I will read from the American Bar Association,775adopted by the House of Delegates August 9, 2021 resolution.776The American Bar Association opposes any Federal, state, local,777territorial, Tribal regulation or policy that prohibits778transgender students from participating in athletics in779accordance with their gender identity. Sounds like you are for780men in women's sports to me.781    Ms. Behnke. Our house delegates adopted a resolution based782on the discussion and debate of our 600-member, our house of783delegates.784    Mr. Jordan. I never heard of a nonpartisan organization785that is for unrestricted abortion, no detention for people who786break our immigration law, and who want men in women sports. I787never heard a nonpartisan organization adopt those positions.788Do you still say you are nonpartisan?789    Ms. Behnke. I do, sir.790    Mr. Jordan. Wow. That is amazing. Nonpartisan and will not791tell us who you want to win the war, our ally, or a terrorist792organization.793    Mr. Smith, the marketplace has a way of speaking. How many794lawyers do we have in the United States of America?795    Mr. Smith. Several million.796    Mr. Jordan. Several million. Do you know how many are in797the American Bar Association? I think it is like 1.5 million798lawyers in the country. Some people might think that is too799many. I do not know that that is or is not, but 1.5 million, I800think. How many do you know are in the Bar Association?801    Mr. Smith. Members of the ABA, I do not know that number802off the top of my head.803    Mr. Jordan. Like 200-and-some thousand. When most lawyers804say, ``I do not want to join this nonpartisan organization,''805do you think, maybe, it has something to do with their806partisanship why they do not want to join?807    Mr. Smith. Well, I think that is the reason you are seeing808states' supreme courts moving away from having the ABA act as809the gatekeeper for lawyers to be able to sit for their state's810bar exam.811    Mr. Jordan. Several states are doing that, right?812Tennessee, Texas, Florida--saying we do not want these guys,813who cannot even tell us that they want our ally to win a war,814who take all kinds of left-wing positions and then pretend to815be nonpartisan. We do not want them doing the accreditation for816our law schools in our----817    Mr. Smith. Correct.818    Mr. Jordan [continuing]. Respective state. Is that819accurate?820    Mr. Smith. That is accurate.821    Mr. Jordan. Yes. And I think it is the marketplace822speaking. The American people, American lawyers are saying, no,823no, no. We are tired of this left-wing operation.824    Mr. Smith. Yes, I think that is accurate, Congressman.825    Mr. Jordan. I yield back to the Chair.826    Mr. Gill. Thank you, Chairman Jordan.827    And I now recognize Mr. Min for 5 minutes for the purpose828of asking questions.829    Mr. Min. Thank you, Chair Gill, Ranking Member Simon, for830hosting what appears to be a rerun of last week's hearing.831    Before I get into the substance of this hearing, I did want832to just note again something that I think goes to the heart of833the credibility of this particular hearing. This Task Force was834created to defend constitutional rights and expose835institutional abuses. We have myriad examples of this happening836right now. The issues that my constituents are calling me837about, whether it is the illegal war in Iran, whether it is the838illegal abuses by ICE, real constitutional abuses, and instead839of focusing on any of these actual constitutional abuses by840President Trump, we are, once again, focused on DEI--diversity,841equity, and inclusion.842    I also want to just note something, just to show how843unserious this hearing is. Ms. Behnke, I just want to clarify,844you are the president of the American Bar Association. The845primary professional organization of lawyers in the United846States. Is that correct?847    Ms. Behnke. That is correct.848    Mr. Min. Does the ABA accredit law schools?849    Ms. Behnke. The Council of Accreditation and Admissions to850the Bar does the accreditation work, but that is separate and851apart from the Association as is required by the Department of852Education.853    Mr. Min. So, the Council of the ABA's Section of Legal854Education Admissions, the Council is responsible for855accreditation. And that, as you noted, is a separate entity as856required by the Department of Education. I want to apologize on857behalf of this entire Committee for wasting your time and858inviting you here because this is not supposed to be you, but859someone from the Council that should be addressing our860Committee. Is that correct?861    Ms. Behnke. The Council is responsible for accreditation,862so I cannot speak on behalf of the Council.863    Mr. Min. That is fair, and I think this is a failure of864this Committee showing how unserious this is, because we do not865even understand, apparently, the basic structure of legal866education. We are inviting the wrong witness to testify before867this Committee. This is not a minor failure. This is something868that goes to the heart of this, this is a bunch of mistruths,869half-truths trying to create a smear campaign against the ABA870and against law schools.871    Now, I was a law professor myself once upon a time. I872actually served on our admission's committee at one point, and873I have some familiarity with what happened here. And I just874want to address--Mr. Blackman, I had a chance to read your875testimony, and I will just note, I do not know what the876policies at Penn State Dickinson are, but at my law school and877every law school I am aware of, it would be extremely878inappropriate for a 1L student to write a message to every879single person on the law school email list, probably prohibited880at my school.881    So, I am not sure why you think that is a suppression of882your free speech. It really has nothing to do with the content883of what you are saying. I would suspect that that is a policy884matter. We do not want 1Ls addressing the entire law school885community.886    Another point I would make to you, in regards to your887testimony, you make a great deal about how you were forced to888take a class on race and equal protection clause. You889understand--I know you did not finish law school. You maybe890finished a semester. That is a core part of the 14th Amendment891that is something that is taught in every Con. Law class in892every law school in America, right?893    I do not know why you thought that was so offensive, why894that forced you to drop out of law school, but part of the law895school pedagogy is addressing topics that we may not agree896with. The idea here is to accustom us with understanding the897other side's position, an integral part of being a lawyer. I898wish you would have taken more classes.899    I taught many conservative students. Some of them were900among my best students precisely because they challenged the901orthodoxy of other students. They made other students902uncomfortable. But in that process, they also learned to903understand and empathize with opposing arguments. And that is a904core part of the pedagogy here.905    Now I want to just point out another problem here with this906entire line of questioning and some of the testimony that we907have read today, including from you, Mr. Smith, with one of the908relevant cases that has governed basically my entire life on909affirmative action, 1978 Supreme Court decision Regents UC v.910Bakke.911    As we all know, I think we all know, the Supreme Court, in912this decision, prohibited universities from using strict race-913based quotas during the college or other admissions processes.914They allowed race and other protected classes to be factors.915But when I was on the admissions committee--this is before the916decision in Harvard, we were allowed to use race as a factor.917We were not allowed to actually have any kind of quotas. We918could not say, for example, we do not have enough Black919students. We need to admit more. That would have been exactly920illegal.921    Ms. Behnke, I want to ask you. You are aware of the 2023922Supreme Court decision, Students for Fair Admissions v.923Harvard. Is that right?924    Ms. Behnke. Yes, I am.925    Mr. Min. And you know that in that decision, they held that926University of North Carolina School of Law (UNC)'s and927Harvard's race-conscience admissions practices were928unconstitutional under the equal protection clause and Title929VI. While I would note that this ended race-based admissions,930but did not actually eliminate all DEI practices, and what is931still allowed to be quotas or to be factors in admissions,932geographic diversity, something we know universities and law933schools take great pride in. We could say we have people from934rural Alabama, as well as California.935    We also know that they are allowed to take ideological936diversity into consideration. That is something that my law937school took very seriously. We hired more conservatives. It was938definitely a factor. People that needed a little bump up we939said we do not have enough conservatives here on our faculty.940We do not have enough conservatives in our study body. We941admitted those students. We bumped up the faculty for that942reason.943    And I would just note, just to close, that these practices944of geographic and ideological diversity actually benefit kids,945say, from rural Alabama, conservatives, much more than they do,946say, Asian kids from Irvine. I do not know why we are focused947on race and not on----948    Mr. Gill. The gentleman's time has expired.949    Mr. Min [continuing]. Ideological and geographical950diversity.951    And with that, I yield back.952    Mr. Gill. The gentleman's time.953    All right. I now recognize myself for 5 minutes for the954purpose of asking questions. And thank you to all the witnesses955again for taking the time to come for this hearing, which I956think is incredibly important.957    Ms. Behnke, according to the ABA's website, quote, ``all of958us have implicit biases.'' Would you agree with that statement?959    Ms. Behnke. The ABA believes that diversity, equity, and960inclusion improves----961    Mr. Gill. Would you agree with the statement that, quote,962``all of us have implicit biases,'' from the ABA's website?963    Ms. Behnke. The ABA believes that diversity in all of its964policies is important.965    Mr. Gill. Is that a yes? Can I take that--it is a yes or no966question. Do you believe that all of us have implicit biases as967your website says?968    Ms. Behnke. The ABA looks to remove barriers and we969examine----970    Mr. Gill. That is not any question, ma'am. Do you believe971that all of us have implicit biases?972    Ms. Behnke. I have expressed----973    Mr. Gill. You do.974    Ms. Behnke. I have expressed what the----975    Mr. Gill. You do.976    Ms. Behnke [continuing]. ABA is doing----977    Mr. Gill. That is the ABA's position as expressed by their978website. Against which groups do you have implicit biases?979    Ms. Behnke. The ABA believes that it is important to always980examine----981    Mr. Gill. Are you going to filibuster? Because it does not982make you sound very good. I am going to ask you again. Against983which groups do you have implicit biases?984    Ms. Behnke. It is important to always examine everyone's985point of view and where they may need to consider----986    Mr. Gill. It is. What about your point of view?987    Ms. Behnke. I am here as the president of the American Bar988Association.989    Mr. Gill. And I am asking you what your implicit biases990are.991    Ms. Behnke. The ABA as an entity----992    Mr. Gill. Have you reflected on your implicit biases?993    Ms. Behnke. I think about how I operate in the world----994    Mr. Gill. What are they?995    Ms. Behnke [continuing]. Constantly.996    Mr. Gill. Would you like to explain to us what they are?997    Ms. Behnke. I am here speaking on behalf of the ABA and the998ABA's----999    Mr. Gill. All right. We are going to move on. Was race a1000factor in Ketanji Brown Jackson's Supreme Court nomination?1001    Ms. Behnke. I have no idea how that process works. I am a1002real estate lawyer.1003    Mr. Gill. President Biden stated, quote, ``I made no1004decision except one, and that is that person will be the first1005Black woman ever nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court.'' So, I1006think it is fair to say that race was a--and gender were1007factors in that nomination process. Wouldn't you agree?1008    Ms. Behnke. You would have to have a conversation----1009    Mr. Gill. He explicitly stated that, so I think it is fair1010to say--you are a lawyer. I think that is fair to say. Do you1011think that it is just or righteous that Joe Biden explicitly1012excluded Black men in the nomination process for the Supreme1013Court vacancy?1014    Ms. Behnke. The ABA does not support discrimination of any1015sort.1016    Mr. Gill. So, you do not--so, you do not think that it was1017proper for Joe Biden to exclude every group other than Black1018women in deciding who should fill that Supreme Court vacancy.1019Is that your testimony?1020    Ms. Behnke. The ABA relishes diversity, equity, and1021inclusion in bringing----1022    Mr. Gill. Right. Is it acceptable for Joe Biden to exclude1023Black men in the nomination pool for the Supreme Court?1024    Ms. Behnke. The ABA never supports discrimination.1025    Mr. Gill. That is good to hear. You believe, I think--tell1026me if--that the Supreme Court should roughly resemble the1027racial diversity of the country?1028    Ms. Behnke. The ABA does not believe that quotas are1029appropriate. It is----1030    Mr. Gill. According to the ABA's mission statement on its1031website, it states that judges--it increases the quality of our1032judicial system whenever judges resemble the vast racial1033diversity of our society. Would you say it is helpful, it is1034beneficial if our Supreme Court resembles the racial diversity1035of America?1036    Ms. Behnke. The ABA believes that diversity in all of its1037forms is important.1038    Mr. Gill. It is a good thing.1039    Ms. Behnke. We want people to bring all of who they are----1040    Mr. Gill. Yep.1041    Ms. Behnke [continuing]. Whether they be from small1042practice or large practice.1043    Mr. Gill. Diversity, can you define diversity here? You1044want it to--should the Supreme Court resemble America's racial1045makeup, roughly? It is a yes-or-no question.1046    Ms. Behnke. The ABA does not support quotas. We----1047    Mr. Gill. I am not asking about quotas. I am asking if it1048should roughly resemble America's racial makeup.1049    Ms. Behnke. It should represent----1050    Mr. Gill. Represent.1051    Ms. Behnke. All of what people are, and all of their1052experiences.1053    Mr. Gill. Of what people are. Okay. So, right now there are1054about two of nine Supreme Court Justices are Black. That is1055about 22 percent of the Supreme Court. According to your1056testimony, about 13 percent of America's population is Black.1057If the Supreme Court should roughly resemble America's1058demographic makeup, as the ABA states is proper, in your1059opinion, regardless of qualifications should the Senate refuse1060to confirm a third Black Supreme Court Justice?1061    Ms. Behnke. The ABA supports and encourages diversity in1062all of its forms.1063    Mr. Gill. That was not my question. My question was, if a1064Supreme Court vacancy opens up should the Senate refuse to1065confirm a third Black Supreme Court nominee based on his race1066or her race?1067    Ms. Behnke. The ABA does not support quotas and so----1068    Mr. Gill. The ABA does----1069    Ms. Behnke. But that----1070    Mr. Gill. Support some sort of--and we are going to,1071hopefully, we will get into that. The ABA does support making1072sure the ethnic makeup has a specific amount. But my time is1073up, so we will move on.1074    And with that I yield.1075    I recognize Mr. Walkinshaw for 5 minutes.1076    Mr. Walkinshaw. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1077    Constance Baker Motley, she was a Columbia law school1078graduate, the first Black woman to argue before the Supreme1079Court, the first female attorney at the NAACP Legal Defense and1080Education Fund where she became a lead trial attorney. And1081consequential early civil rights cases, she represented Dr.1082Martin Luther King, Jr. She wrote the original complaint in1083Brown v. Board of Education. In Meredith v. Fair she won the1084case that resulted in James Meredith becoming the first Black1085student to attend the University of Mississippi. She was later1086an elected official, a Federal district court judge.1087    Ms. Behnke, you have dedicated your career both to the1088legal profession and to expanding access to that profession. I1089want to thank you for your service and for being here today.1090The supposed purpose of our Task Force here is to defend1091constitutional rights and expose institutional abuses. Your1092testimony emphasizes the ABA is deeply committed both to1093ensuring diversity within the legal profession and to1094preserving the rule of law. And I could think of no better1095example than Judge Motley to demonstrate why those commitments1096are closely connected, and how together they could help us1097defend our constitutional rights and expose institutional1098abuses. What this Task Force is supposed to do.1099    Because diversity in the legal profession is not just about1100who is president, or who gets admitted to a law school1101classroom, or hired at a law firm. It is about ensuring that1102people from every background, liberal, conservative, urban,1103rural, male, female, every background, have a seat at the1104table, an opportunity to use the law to identify and challenge1105abuses of power, because people who have witnessed1106institutional abuse, or experienced it, have come from1107communities whose rights have historically been denied might1108recognize an injustice that others overlook.1109    And a legal education can give them the tools to challenge1110those injustices, hold those institutions accountable and1111prevent abuses from continuing. I think that is a concept that1112this Administration and some of my colleagues are terrified by,1113quite frankly.1114    Judge Motley broke barriers. She strengthened the1115profession. She forced powerful institutions to abide by the1116rule of law in the Constitution. She made our country greater.1117That is exactly why diversity in the legal profession matters.1118A system that draws its lawyers, judges, public officials from1119every background is better equipped to recognize institutional1120abuses and to end them.1121    So, unfortunately, I do not think this hearing is about1122defending constitutional rights or exposing institutional1123abuses. I think it is about making it harder for women and1124people of color to pursue a legal education, making it harder1125for them to get the tools required to protect their own rights,1126to protect all of our rights. And expose abuse.1127    Ms. Behnke, from your experience as a law student, a1128lawyer, the president of the State Bar of Wisconsin, if I have1129that right, and now the president of the ABA, can you speak to1130how diversity in all its forms in the legal profession can help1131defend Americans' constitutional rights and prevent1132institutional abuses. How can diversity help us to accomplish1133those really important goals?1134    Ms. Behnke. When you have a diverse group, people who have1135different experiences, people who have looked at the issue from1136different ways, that helps expand the problem-solving. There1137are studies that have been done by McKinsey and Harvard1138Business Review who indicate that the more diverse a team is,1139the better the solutions are.1140    And at the end of the day, lawyers are there to solve their1141clients' problems, to solve the issues that face our society in1142the way of legal issues. And so, when you have a diverse group,1143you have better outcomes, and when you have better outcomes,1144then the public, as well as the particular clients, have1145greater confidence in the system.1146    Mr. Walkinshaw. Yes, I could not agree more. Look, I have1147been on a lot of teams in my life--sports teams, professional1148offices, organizations, boards, committees, commissions--in1149every single case, I have found that those teams are stronger1150when there is a diversity of perspectives, and backgrounds, and1151views, and I do not understand how we got to a point in this1152country where there are people in very high positions of power1153so terrified by that.1154    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.1155    Mr. Gill. Thank you, Mr. Walkinshaw.1156    And I now recognize Mr. Cloud for 5 minutes for the purpose1157of asking questions.1158    Mr. Cloud. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you for holding1159this hearing.1160    You say that the American Bar Association is nonpartisan.1161And that is correct? You maintain that as your testimony today?1162    Ms. Behnke. Yes, sir.1163    Mr. Cloud. Yet, when we look at amicus briefs filed over1164the last ten years by the ABA, 87 briefs have been filed, 801165percent of the organizations filing advocated for liberal and1166progressive outcomes, only 21 percent of the ABA's briefs1167concern matters directly related to the legal profession.1168    Of 87 briefs filed over the ten-year period, 70 favor1169liberal progressive outcomes, 17 were generally neutral in1170nature, and zero can be characterized as conservative-aligned.1171Why is that?1172    Ms. Behnke. When the ABA files an amicus, we can only do so1173when two factors are in existence.1174    First, the ABA has to have policy. That policy is developed1175by our house of delegates, which is made up of 600 members from1176across this country. Every state in the union, red states and1177blue states. So, first, we have to have policy. Then, if we are1178requested to file an amicus, we have to determine that we have1179something unique to offer the court in assisting it in making1180its decision.1181    When we file an amicus then, we are doing so based on the1182existing policy. We do not line them up based on liberal or1183conservative----1184    Mr. Cloud. It seems like whether you are intending to or1185not, the net result is the fact that your work product is very1186much liberal leaning, if not progressively imposing, or working1187toward those advances. It is not at all any sort of1188nonpartisan, or in a way, a gatekeeper of making sure that the1189legal profession is respected and protected.1190    Ms. Behnke. Our policies are the issues that are raised by1191our members. Anyone within the house of delegates can raise an1192issue, can speak to and debate an issue, and bring resolutions.1193So, when we decide----1194    Mr. Cloud. Do you think transgender surgery for minors is a1195nonpartisan issue?1196    Ms. Behnke. The ABA developed policy on that issue and,1197therefore, going through that process.1198    Mr. Cloud. That is one issue where I think there is a--it1199crosses, maybe, not here in Congress, but the American people1200are very much against transgender surgeries for minors, yet the1201ABA is supportive of that.1202    Ms. Behnke. Our policy is developed by our house of1203delegates with those members from each and every state, sir.1204    Mr. Cloud. It does not concern you that you are that far1205off from the American people.1206    Ms. Behnke. The policy that is developed in our house of1207delegates is done through a very deliberative process, and when1208those issues come up and are voted on, that is what sets our1209policy.1210    Mr. Cloud. Okay. The ABA supported the disbarment of a1211number of lawyers who defended President Trump. Yet, we had1212other lawyers who actually campaigned in going after the1213President--kind of invented new and novel legal parameters to1214create a prosecution case against him. We have seen no1215disciplinary action taken against those individuals. We have1216not seen the American Bar Association support the disbarring of1217them. You know, again, we are seeing kind of like a left-1218leaning approach by the ABA.1219    Ms. Behnke. I am not aware of what you are speaking about1220in terms of disbarring lawyers. The ABA is an association----1221    Mr. Cloud. You are not aware.1222    Ms. Behnke. We are not--we do not actually control the1223barring of lawyers. Each individual----1224    Mr. Cloud. No, but you put out statements supporting it.1225    Ms. Behnke. I am not aware of any statements that support1226disbarring particular lawyers.1227    Mr. Cloud. Okay. Mr. Smith, you have done some work and1228study on this. The ABA, in a sense, acts as a gatekeeper. Yes,1229there is a little bit of a divide between the accreditation1230Council but, you know, there is a lot of overlap there as well1231in so far as how the members of that Council are selected.1232Could you speak to that? And really, should we have one1233organization kind of being the gatekeeper, or should the1234Department of Ed look at multiple institutions, or would it be1235better left to the states?1236    Mr. Smith. Thank you for that question, Congressman. The1237Department of Education absolutely should authorize more law1238school accreditors than one monopolistic entity. Now, when it1239comes to the Council of the ABA Section of Legal Education1240there is a lot of overlap. The Council would not exist without1241the ABA. In order to be a member of the Council, you first have1242to be a member of the ABA, except for a few public members. The1243officers of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions1244to the Bar automatically are members of the Council, the1245accrediting entity.1246    And so, as I mentioned in my opening statement there is a1247lot of overlap between the big ABA and the Council that does1248the accrediting.1249    Mr. Cloud. So, sitting here and saying, ``Oh, there is no1250overlap. I cannot speak to that,'' that is probably not exactly1251accurate.1252    Mr. Smith. There is more overlap than I think that1253statement reflects.1254    Mr. Gill. The gentleman's time has expired.1255    I now recognize Ranking Member Simon for 5 minutes for the1256purpose of asking questions.1257    Ms. Simon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, again, thank you1258to our witnesses.1259    Today, you know the Task Force has decided to hold yet1260another hearing on diversity and the horrors of inclusion, the1261horrors of equity. You know, after we had this same hearing1262last week, we also know that the DOGE Subcommittee just had a1263hearing on this exact topic just yesterday. And I think the1264American people deserve to know why the Majority is so1265concerned about inclusion and equity that we need to have back-1266to-back hearings on the issue.1267    At last week's Task Force meeting, each witness testified1268in no uncertain terms that the so-called DEI crisis are the1269reasons for American families suffering, paying more for1270groceries and gas under the current Administration's policies.1271They were all very clear about that. This is why the Task Force1272is dead set on ignoring the challenges of what is affecting1273Americans who are hurting the most.1274    I know in my state, in my district, one of the largest1275states in the country. I think the Chairman's state is also--1276actually the largest. We have real issues in both of our1277states. In my district alone, there are over a 1,000 veterans1278that are sleeping on the street. I do not care what party you1279belong to, we know that that is wrong.1280    I know that in my colleague's district, Texas has led the1281Nation in hunger--the Nation in hunger--over the past two years1282with more than five million Texans unable to afford enough to1283eat. In the Dallas area alone, gas prices have risen by almost1284a dollar. Over the past year, from Texas to California, our1285constituents are worried about how they are going to pay for1286gas and groceries, and healthcare, and are worried about how1287they are going to pick up their kids from the daycare that they1288cannot afford, and use that gas, and hustle it to get to work1289the same day.1290    But we are here today, here, hours, people flew in, we are1291here to talk about law school accreditation, and today's1292hearing is not also about restoring merit to the law school1293accreditation process. We know that.1294    Mr. Smith, I gave you a quick hint in my opening statement,1295but do you know how many people applied to ABA accredited law1296schools last academic year?1297    Mr. Smith. Well, I would imagine the majority of applicants1298applied to ABA accredited law schools because historically the1299ABA has been the only law school accreditor, and historically1300states have required----1301    Ms. Simon. My time is so limited. My time is so limited. It1302is about 77,000 people. Do you know--77,000. Remember that1303number. Do you know what the percentage of the American1304population that is?1305    Mr. Smith. I do not, Congresswoman.1306    Ms. Simon. It is about .02 percent. Mr. Smith, do you know1307the percentage of law school applicants that are people of1308color of that 77,000?1309    Mr. Smith. The process, Congresswoman, should be open1310equally to all.1311    Ms. Simon. I will reclaim my time. I will reclaim my time.1312It is important to know because we are talking about de-1313diversifying, challenging inclusion, and challenging equity.1314Half of the law school applications for the last academic year1315were people of color. So, do you know what percentage of the1316American population that is?1317    Mr. Smith. Congresswoman----1318    Ms. Simon. Point--I will answer it. .01 percent. .011319percent. So, let us bring this issue home. We are here at a1320hearing on law school accreditation, and the Republicans have1321invited the ABA president, and thank you for your presence1322today, knowing, knowing, they had to know, that her position1323does not play a role in law school accreditation. Maybe the1324Majority just made an honest mistake, but I am still trying to1325figure out what we are doing here.1326    So, why has President Trump consistently attacked the legal1327profession since he has returned to office? We know why. This1328is an unprecedented executive order spree, that we have seen,1329retaliating against specific lawyers and law firms.1330    I yield back.1331    Mr. Gill. Thank you, Ranking Member Simon.1332    And I now yield 5 minutes to Mr. Jack from Georgia.1333    Mr. Jack. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you1334convening this Task Force today. And I, myself, as well as many1335of my constituents who are watching, reached out to let me know1336how impressed they were with your line of questioning. So, with1337that having been said, I would like to yield the remainder of1338my time to our distinguished Chairman, Mr. Gill.1339    Mr. Gill. Well, thank you. I appreciate that.1340    Ms. Behnke, let us pick off before we left off before. The1341mission statement on the ABA's website states that our legal1342profession is enhanced when judges resemble the cultural groups1343that make up American society. How many Supreme Court justices1344have we had in American history?1345    Ms. Behnke. I could not tell you over the----1346    Mr. Gill. It is about 116. Do you know of those 116, how1347many of them have been transgender?1348    Ms. Behnke. I have no idea.1349    Mr. Gill. Do you think there might have been one?1350    Ms. Behnke. I have no idea.1351    Mr. Gill. Is it fair to say that there have been no1352transgender Supreme Court justices in American history?1353    Ms. Behnke. I honestly have no idea.1354    Mr. Gill. You do not know?1355    Ms. Behnke. I have no idea.1356    Mr. Gill. You study the law, don't you?1357    Ms. Behnke. We do not study the personal attributes of1358individual justices.1359    Mr. Gill. Is there a Supreme Court justice in American1360history that you think might have been transgender?1361    Ms. Behnke. I have no idea.1362    Mr. Gill. You have no idea? Well, I think most people can1363assume that there have not been any transgender Supreme Court1364justices. I hope that we can agree, at least on that basis.1365Would that be okay to proceed under that assumption?1366    [No verbal response.]1367    Mr. Gill. Okay. I appreciate that. So, transgenders have1368not been represented on the Supreme Court. Do you think that it1369is important that the next Supreme Court justice be1370transgender?1371    Ms. Behnke. The ABA does not subscribe to any particular1372quotas----1373    Mr. Gill. I am not asking about a quota. I am asking about1374representation, diversity, equity, and inclusion.1375    Ms. Behnke. The ABA supports diversity in all of its forms1376and----1377    Mr. Gill. Have transgenders been included on the U.S.1378Supreme Court?1379    Ms. Behnke. The ABA supports the full spectrum of1380diversity----1381    Mr. Gill. Do you think that it is a problem that the1382transgender community has never had representation on the U.S.1383Supreme Court?1384    Ms. Behnke. The ABA believes in diversity, equity, and1385inclusion----1386    Mr. Gill. I am asking you about diversity, equity,1387inclusion. I am asking you about inclusion of the transgender1388community.1389    Ms. Behnke. We believe that people ought to bring their1390entire self to whatever role they are serving----1391    Mr. Gill. You are refusing to answer my question. Do you1392think that it is important that we have a transgender Supreme1393Court justice?1394    Ms. Behnke. I believe that it is important----1395    Mr. Gill. In order to include that community?1396    Ms. Behnke. I believe that it is always important, the ABA1397believes that it is always important to support and encourage1398diversity, equity----1399    Mr. Gill. So, we should have a transgender Supreme Court1400justice?1401    Ms. Behnke. Diversity has many forms, and we believe that1402each----1403    Mr. Gill. Do you think that--you are not answering in a1404straightforward way. Do you think that is because of your own1405implicit bias?1406    Ms. Behnke. I believe that I am trying to explain that the1407ABA does not set quotas and does not believe in any one----1408    Mr. Gill. Do you have implicit transphobia?1409    Ms. Behnke. The ABA believes that diversity in all of its1410forms is important, and helps the profession more globally.1411    Mr. Gill. Okay. We are going to move on. Should Americans1412be judged by the color of their skin, or the content of their1413character?1414    Ms. Behnke. Discrimination is never appropriate, sir.1415    Mr. Gill. So, do you agree that Americans should be judged1416by the content of their character, and not by the color of1417their skin?1418    Ms. Behnke. Yes, I would agree.1419    Mr. Gill. You would agree with that? Should a law school1420consider an applicant's race when making admissions decisions?1421    Ms. Behnke. The Supreme Court has indicated that----1422    Mr. Gill. I am asking you if they should. It is a normative1423question.1424    Ms. Behnke. Discrimination is never appropriate and----1425    Mr. Gill. So, is it your testimony that law school should1426not consider applicant's race when making admissions decisions?1427    Ms. Behnke. The Supreme Court has said that you may not1428take race into account.1429    Mr. Gill. So, you do not believe that race should have any1430role, yes or no, in a law school's admissions decisions?1431    Ms. Behnke. Law school----1432    Mr. Gill. Is that the position of the ABA?1433    Ms. Behnke. The ABA is not responsible for admissions.1434    Mr. Gill. I did not say it was. I am asking you if you, if1435you believe, and if it is the position of the ABA, that race1436should not be a factor at all in a law school's admissions1437decisions?1438    Ms. Behnke. The ABA takes compliance with the law1439seriously.1440    Mr. Gill. I did not ask you that. I asked--it is a really1441simple question. I am asking you should--let me just ask you,1442in your own personal capacity, should race be a factor in law1443school admissions decisions? The question is a yes-or-no1444question.1445    Ms. Behnke. I am here in my capacity----1446    Mr. Gill. Yes or no, should race be a factor in law school1447admissions decisions?1448    Ms. Behnke. I am here in my capacity----1449    Mr. Gill. Because according to the ABA it should. The ABA1450has said explicitly that they have a long history of supporting1451consideration of race in law school admissions. Is that your1452testimony, that law schools should continue taking into account1453race?1454    Ms. Behnke. The Supreme Court indicated that diversity is a1455laudable goal, and the ABA supports diversity in all its forms.1456    Mr. Gill. This is embarrassing for you. You ought to be1457able to answer this in a very straightforward way. And with1458that, the time is up.1459    Ms. Simon. I have three UC requests.1460    Mr. Gill. Go for it.1461    Ms. Simon. Thank you. I ask unanimous consent to enter into1462the record a July 2026 article from KERA News, ``North Texas1463Families--And The Summer Food Programs They Rely On''----1464    Mr. Gill. Without objection.1465    Ms. Simon [continuing]. ``Are Feeling the Sting of1466Inflation.''1467    Mr. Gill. Without objection. All right. And we are going to1468skip closing, because we have got votes now. So, in closing I1469want to thank the witnesses, once again, for their testimony1470today, and appreciate it. Thank you all for coming.1471    [Whereupon, at 3:34 p.m., the Task Force was adjourned.]14721473                                 [all]