Results from a survey: Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual students' attitudes about law school

Journal of Legal Education

Volumn 48, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 157-174

  Austin, Janice L ^a   Cain, Patricia A ^b   Mack, Anton ^c   Strader, J Kelly ^d   Vaseleck, James ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^c LOYOLA LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

^d SOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e Law School Admission Council   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 22444453294     PISSN: 00222208     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. LSAC annually surveys admission professionals on a wide variety of issues. The 1995 questionnaire asked for contact information on GLB student organizations, and about 60 organizations were thus identified.
2. Law School Admission Council, Out and In: Information for Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Law School Applicants (Newtown, 1996).
3. Patricia A. Cain is the principal author of this section and occasionally speaks as "I."
4. See, e.g., Roberta M. Hall & Bernice R. Sandler, The Classroom Climate: A Chilly One for Women? (Washington, 1982) ;
5. Roberta M. Hall & Bernice R. Sandler, Out of the Classroom: A Chilly Campus Climate for Women? (Washington, 1984).
6. Scott N. Ihrig, Note, Sexual Orientation in Law School: Experiences of Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Law Students, 14 Law & Ineq. 555 (1996) ;
7. Judith D. Fischer, Portia Unbound: The Effects of a Supportive Law School Environment on Women and Minority Students, 7 UCLA Women's L. J. 81 (1996) ;
8. Lani Guinier et al., Becoming Gentlemen: Women's Experiences at One Ivy League Law School, 143 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1 (1994) ;
9. Frances Lee Ansley, Race and the Core Curriculum in Legal Education, 79 Cal. L. Rev. 1511 (1991) ;
10. Catherine Weiss & Louise Melling, The Legal Education of Twenty Women, 40 Stan. L. Rev. 1299 (1988).
11. Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U. S. 186 (1986) ;
12. Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston, 515 U. S. 557 (1995) ;
13. Romer v. Evans, 517 U. S. 620 (1996).
14. Of course, the number of responses from even the best-represented schools is still small as a statistical matter.
15. The question read: "Briefly describe why you are, or are not, comfortable discussing GLB issues in class."
16. The questionnaire asked: "Please briefly describe any homophobia you have experienced in law school including the nature of the incident (s), who was involved, and the outcome (s)."
17. J. Kelly Strader is the author of this section and occasionally speaks in the first person.
18. Seventy percent of organizational respondents said that the organization usually meets in the law school. One organization specifically noted that it occasionally holds meetings "in offcampus apartments so that we reach closeted members."
19. See, e.g., Deborah L. Rhode, Anti-Gay Prejudice Persists in Legal Workplace, Nat'l. L. J., Dec. 16, 1996, at A15 (detailing pervasive homophobia documented in studies undertaken by bar associations in Los Angeles, New York, and San Francisco).
20. Annual budgets for student organizations, as reported by the survey responses, range from zero to $4, 500, with an average of $832. Most of the funds are institutional, coming from the law schools, universities, or school-funded Student Bar Associations. About a third of the groups also engage in independent fundraising, such as special events and outreach to alumni and community organizations.
21. One response to the survey question "Please briefly describe any problems... the organization has encountered over the last three years...."
22. The first Solomon Amendment, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995, Pub. L. No. 103-337, § 558, 108 Stat. 2663, 2776 (1994)
23. now dubbed Solomon I, sought to cut off defense research contracts and grants, and defense loans and grants, to institutions that restricted military recruiting. Because few law schools receive such funds, the amendment had little practical effect. By extending the funding cut-off threats to federally funded financial aid programs, the revised Solomon Amendment, Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997, Pub. L. No. 104-208, § 514 (b), 110 Stat. 3009, 3009-271 (1996) (Solomon II), has the potential, according to the Association of American Law Schools, to affect nearly 90 percent of American law schools.
24. Memorandum 97-46 from Carl C. Monk, Executive Director, to Deans of Member and Fee-Paid Schools, at 2 (Aug. 13, 1997). As the dean of the Duke University School of Law recently wrote, "In passing the revised Solomon Amendment in 1996, Congress has put law schools in a terrible bind: Either go against school policies of nondiscrimination by allowing military recruiters to interview on their premises or lose hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal student aid."
25. Pamela B. Gann, No-Win Amendment Traps Law Schools, Nat'l. L. J., Oct. 13, 1997, at A23.
26. In 1990 the AALS added "sexual orientation" to its nondiscrimination provisions. To further that policy, AALS Executive Committee Regulation 6.19 requires law school career services offices to obtain from recruiters written assurance that the potential employer does not discriminate based on categories that include sexual orientation. The importance of the AALS policy was not lost on Justice Antonin Scalia, dissenting in Romer v. Evans, 517 U. S. 620 (1996) : The interviewer may refuse to offer a job because the applicant is a Republican; because he is an adulterer; because he went to the wrong prep school or belongs to the wrong country club; because he eats snails; because he is a womanizer; because she wears real-animal fur; or even because he hates the Chicago Cubs. But if the interviewer should wish not to be an associate or partner of an applicant because he disapproves of the applicant's homosexuality, then he will have violated the pledge which the Association of American Law Schools requires all its member-schools to exact from job interviewers: "assurance of the employer's willingness" to hire homosexuals.
27. Id. at 652-53 (Scalia, J., dissenting) (quoting Bylaws of the Association of American Law Schools, Inc. § 6-4 (b) ;
28. Executive Committee Regulations of the Association of American Law Schools § 6.19, in 1995 Handbook, Association of American Law Schools 50 (Washington, 1995)).
29. Memorandum 97-46, supra note 15, at 2-3. A copy of the memorandum was also sent to the chair of the AALS Section on Gay and Lesbian Legal Issues.
30. Id. at 3 (emphasis added).