Become a Patreon!
Abstract
Excerpted From: Atinuke O. Adediran, Racial Allies, 90 Fordham Law Review 2151 (April, 2022) (382 Footnotes) (Full Document)
Racial allies are committed to questioning perceived equality and are invested in addressing racial inequality. In theory, a racial ally can be anyone from any racial group, but given existing power structures and distribution of resources, racial allies in America are often white individuals and predominantly white institutions. A racial ally “must recognize the power and privilege conferred by White identity,” actively work to dismantle systems of oppression, and “be willing to both confer and share power with members of subjugated groups.”
There is no other segment of the legal profession that is more focused on addressing racial inequality and that endeavors to be allies for racial justice than individuals and institutions within the public interest law sector. The public interest law sector has played an important role in American social and legal change. Abolitionist lawyers litigated fugitive slave cases that led to the formal end of slavery. Lawyers were important in the progressive movement of the late eighteenth and early twentieth centuries, the civil rights movement, and the War on Poverty. Public interest lawyers have also been key in contemporary struggles for social change, including challenges to economic inequality, employment discrimination, racial discrimination, education inequality, the eviction crises, voter suppression, and the implications of poverty. These social and legal problems disproportionately impact communities of color. Yet, the public interest law sector appears not to share power with members of subjugated groups. These racial allies seem to harbor the same inequalities as other sectors of the legal profession and society at large.
While scholars have conducted research on racial diversity in other sectors of the legal profession, including among judges, in law firms, in the criminal justice system, and in legal academia, there has been very little research on racial and ethnic diversity in the public interest law sector. The limited available scholarship has focused mostly on the impact of race on the attorney-client relationship specifically in legal aid. This is a critical omission. This Article makes the gravity of this omission plain by making a number of moves.
The first is to show--with empirical data--the racial and ethnic diversity problem in public interest law leadership. This work is long overdue and has been called for in scholarship, as there is no real way to systematically show the negative impact of the lack of diversity or to address racialinequality without confronting data that indicates that there is, first and foremost, a diversity problem in the sector. As such, this study sets the stage for future studies to further recognize the impact of the lack of racial diversity on the public interest law sector and its institutions.
The public interest law sector encompasses both the nonprofit and private sectors of the legal profession through a network of public interest legal organizations (PILOs) and law firms engaged in pro bono work. The network is involved in law reform efforts through impact litigation and policy advocacy measures and in the provision of free legal services to underprivileged individuals and groups that are often racial and ethnic minorities. PILOs are the primary organizations that provide free legal services and engage in law reform efforts to address societal ills, but they are not the only institutions that do so. Law firms are also providers of legal services and advocacy to underprivileged groups. This Article focuses on the leaders in the public interest sector. These leaders include the executive directors or CEOs of PILOs, PILO boards of directors, and pro bono partners and counsel in large law firms. This Article focuses on these groups because they shape the legal and organizational strategies that PILOs and law firm pro bono departments employ in addressing societal problems that disproportionately impact communities of color.
Second, this Article adduces five possible theories of why racial and ethnic diversity is lacking in public interest law leadership. This Article also makes recommendations for how to address the racial and ethnic diversity problem in public interest law leadership.
While this Article centers on those in charge of the public interest sector, it is important to acknowledge the general lack of data and knowledge on race and ethnicity among the lawyers who represent clients and engage in legal and policy reform. I have, however, made the choice to focus on the leaders in the public interest sector because of the important role they occupy in shaping institutional policies and strategies that can have sweeping effects on the legal representation provided by the lawyers within their institutions. Moreover, increasing racial and ethnic diversity is not simply a function of the lawyers who enter into public interest law. “It is also a function of who holds power within the profession and how that power is used when hiring [lawyers], providing them with development and promotion opportunities and, in turn, providing them with opportunities to use power to hire and develop [other lawyers].”
Research in other segments of society--criminal justice, the judiciary, and the private sector--has shown that racial diversity in white institutions benefits marginalized groups. Much like the criminal justice system--as in public interest law, where clients are disproportionally racial and ethnic minorities--it is conceivable that increasing racial and ethnic diversity in leadership would benefit clients. The perspectives of diverse leaders would not only help unveil the complex realities of racial dynamics that impact legal representation but also raise awareness about racialinequality and discrimination.
This Article proceeds in four parts. Part I discusses three important bodies of literature. The first is research on the impact of diversity-- including among leaders--on outcomes that impact communities of color in a number of segments of society. The second is the important link between race and poverty. The third situates public interest lawyering in historical context. Part II first describes the data and methods used. It then provides an overview of PILO executive directors, PILO boards of directors, and law firm pro bono partners and counsel, systematically showing the lack of diversity among each group. Part III puts forth five theories for why diversity may be lacking in public interest law leadership, including whether there is a pipeline problem, whether low wages in public interest law is a contributing factor, the lack of racial and ethnic diversity in large law firms and its impact on public interest law leadership, implicit bias and its impact on race, and the concept of homophily. Part IV provides policy considerations for improving diversity in public interest law leadership with a focus on each type of leadership position. It also makes suggestions for integrating race into anti-poverty law and bias training and addressing homophily in professional relationships. Finally, it provides an agenda for further research to better recognize the impact of racial diversity on institutional processes and decision-making.
[. . .]
There is racial reckoning happening across multiple spheres of society except, oddly enough, in public interest law, which is the area of law most associated with addressing structural inequality. Ironically, it is also an area affected by unacknowledged inequalities. Racial Allies addresses this issue in a thoughtful and systematic way by using both theory and social science evidence to diagnose and solve the problem. The public interest law sector is comprised of PILOs and law firms through pro bono and philanthropy, among other constituents. This Article focuses on leaders--executives/CEOs, boards of directors, and pro bono partners and counsel in large law firms. These categories of leaders are tasked with establishing the strategies, policies, and management processes involved in providing legal services and advocacy through law reform to both clients and causes that disproportionally impact racial and ethnic minority clients and non-clients. Yet, public interest law leadership comprises mostly white lawyers. This Article uses demographic and interview data to show the prevalence of the lack of racial and ethnic diversity in public interest law leadership, theorizes about why racial and ethnic diversity is lacking in the sector, and provides policy considerations to begin to address the problem. This Article also notes further studies that would examine the impact of racial and ethnic inequality on outcomes in public interest law.
Associate Professor of Law, Fordham University School of Law; J.D., Columbia Law School; Ph.D., M.A., Sociology, Northwestern University.
Become a Patreon!
