When Indiana University began to teach law school students DEI requirements, Professor John Lawrence Hill warned the state government about “extreme idealogues” trying to “indoctrinate kids” that “fly in the face” of America’s legitimate bases.
addressed to the Indiana State Senators. Jeff Raatz and John Crane, Hill’s notice challenges the university’s new required “responsible lawyering” course for primary- year law students, introduced to cooperate with the American Bar Association’s ( ABA )” cross- social skills” needs. According to Hill, this action politicizes constitutional knowledge.
In his notice, Hill wrote that” this group is guaranteed to further polarize and politicize the law school setting and represents yet another attempt by the scientific Left to provide a system for extreme idealogues to indoctrinate students who are essentially educational hostages.” “ DE I is now’ in’ at the McKinney school …”.
In an interview with The Federalist, Hill, a professor at Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law ( IU McKinney ) says that issues with the ABA’s DEI requirements are long- standing.
A New ABA Requirement
In February 2022, the ABA introduced a new standard for legal education. Standard 303 ( c ) reads,” A law school shall provide education to law students on bias, cross- cultural competency, and racism: ( 1 ) at the start of the program of legal education, and ( 2 ) at least once again before graduation”.
This is the first law school curriculum requirement that includes non-legal coursework.
Hill was a member of the law school’s academic affairs committee, which was in charge of implementing curricular reform, when he became aware of the new ABA requirement. At the time, Hill chalked it up to an “unnecessary” addition to students ‘ legal education.
Once Hill departed from the committee, however, the university faculty capitalized on the new ABA instructions. Although standard 303 ( c ) can be satisfied through orientation sessions, lectures, or “other educational experiences”, the faculty at IU McKinney opted to create a mandatory DEI course.
” ]As ] things developed, and I saw the way it was going … it was n’t just unnecessary. It’s been baleful”, Hill says. ” I mean, it’s really been … used as a predicate to make other changes”.
DEI at the expense of constitutional law
In order to introduce new DEI coursework, the committee gave three proposals to the faculty. In two of them, constitutional law was moved to the second year, a significant change from the traditional law school curriculum. Hill claims that this led to a “huge faculty fight.”
” Everyone of us embraced constitutional law in our first year. Con Law was taught by every law student in its first year for a century, Hill recalls telling the faculty. Why is it that our students are suddenly unable to do this?
Hill urged the faculty in a memo to reject the first-year students ‘ abandonment of the constitutional education. Hill says he suggested a number of alternatives, including reducing the hours of one of his own classes, civil procedure.  ,
” People freaked out at the memo”, Hill remembers. ” There was a lot of anger”.
Hill, a professor of constitutional law himself, found the proposals to be particularly outrageous.
In his letter to state senators, Hill wrote,” I think the real reason for kicking out Constitutional Law in the first year is obviously ideological.” ” Our Constitution enshrines and projects the values of liberty, individuality, and equality under the law.  , These values, which have served our nation for over 235 years, fly in the face of the DEI paradigm”.
The faculty agreed in April to include the “responsible lawyering” course in the first year curriculum while keeping constitutional law in the first-year curriculum.  , The new curriculum will take effect this fall.
” The law school has not considered or approved a 1- hour Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion ( DEI ) course”, a spokeswoman for IU McKinney said in a statement to The Federalist. ” A new 1L course, Responsible Lawyering, will include professional identity formation, consistent with ABA Standard 303, among other professionalism topics”.
However, “responsible lawyering” was added in direct response to the ABA‘s DEI agenda. This kind of coursework, according to the ABA, will “enforce the legal profession’s commitment to combating racism in the workplace and strengthen their cultural competency.” Hill sees this curriculum as a sign of further leftist change.
” In law, sometimes a case is called a signal. Although it may be more modest about what it actually imposes, it demonstrates a change in perspective and a new way of doing things. The ABA requirement was cover, and it was a signal that … law schools can make changes, including pretty dramatic changes”, Hill says. ” Many people in our faculty said this is a cover,” she said. The ABA has given us cover. That phrase was specifically used by other faculty members.
These changes, in Hill’s opinion, are more extensive than some might think.  ,
There is an ideological agenda, the “whatties everything together” theory suggests. Some people understand that consciously. They embraced it. They continue to pursue it. A lot of other people just sort of go along, understanding the current. People can sense political currents changing or moving, and they move along with it, without actually pursuing the desired outcome. But I think that this was something that came down from on high]that is ] ideological, deeply ideological”.
In an interview with The Federalist, Raatz confirmed he is investigating the matter personally.  ,
” We can all be sensitive to one another, but to mandate diversity, equity, inclusion … what does that really mean”? Raatz, a recipient of Hill’s letter, told The Federalist. ” To just be frank about it, I’m not a proponent of DEI, honestly, and I’m going to determine just what their parameters are, and we’ll go from there”.
Fighting a DEI Agenda
On Saturday afternoon, Hill wrote his letter to Raatz and Crane. The senators are members of the Indiana Senate Education and Career Development Committee, and Hill hopes that taking action upon them would be a result of their information.  ,
” I have taught at McKinney for 21 years. I love this school and I love our students”, Hill wrote. ” I hope that there might be something you and your colleagues in the Indiana House and Senate might be able to do in response to these developments.”
In the meantime, his concern is primarily for the quality of education at IU McKinney.  ,
” When I started teaching, I was  , middle of the road. I was n’t, you know, a wild- eyed progressive, but I was n’t a libertarian or a conservative, either. I tried to kind of find the middle way, but I started to see the extent to which our textbooks, the way people teach classes, who gets tenure, who’s elevated — I mean, there’s so much of politics in it”.
Today, Hill says he still has hope for the law school — and for Americans.
” The most important thing is that you get everything accurate”, Hill told The Federalist. Once people are aware,” I believe it makes it harder for the powers that be to continue supporting these causes.” I mean, everyone is aware of what’s going on. People are smart. Americans are smart. Once they’re aware of what’s going on, how it’s going on, it removes the cover for people who are trying to essentially push these values, these courses”.
Monroe Harless is a summer intern at The Federalist. She recently earned degrees in political science and journalism from the University of Georgia.
