The American Bar Association (ABA) has voted to extend its suspension of a long-standing diversity requirement for law schools, signaling a dramatic shift in how legal education may be governed amid escalating political pressure from President Donald Trump and Republican-led states.
On May 9, the ABA’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar unanimously agreed to keep Standard 206—which requires law schools to demonstrate a commitment to diversity in student recruitment, hiring, and programming—on hold through August 31, 2026. The rule was initially suspended earlier this year following a barrage of federal directives aimed at dismantling DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) initiatives across American institutions.
“In light of these developments, the council determined that extraordinary circumstances exist in which compliance with [the diversity standard] would constitute extreme hardship for multiple law schools,” the council said in its official statement.
The ABA’s decision comes as Trump intensifies his crackdown on DEI efforts. In January, he issued a series of executive orders directing the Department of Education to reassess accreditation bodies, including the ABA, for allegedly promoting race- and sex-based standards. One of those orders specifically called for prioritizing “intellectual diversity” and warned that accreditors using demographic data could lose federal recognition.
Attorney General Pam Bondi followed suit in March, warning that the ABA could have its role as the federally recognized accreditor of law schools revoked unless it rescinded Standard 206.
“Any requirement that law schools demonstrate ‘a commitment to diversity’ is deeply problematic,” Bondi wrote in a letter to ABA leadership. “The standard must be repealed in its entirety.”
For decades, the ABA’s accreditation status has been crucial; in most states, students must graduate from an ABA-accredited law school to sit for the bar exam. Now, that once-stable authority is facing both federal scrutiny and legal threats from multiple states. High courts in Texas and Florida have recently announced reviews as to their state’s requirements that bar applicants must graduate from ABA-accredited schools, citing the now-suspended diversity requirement.
This campaign against the ABA’s inclusion of DEI in its accreditation policies is part of a broader political strategy targeting all of higher education. Trump’s April executive order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to reevaluate accreditors’ recognition cited the ABA by name. In the weeks that followed, 21 Republican attorneys general joined the fray, asserting that Standard 206 violated constitutional protections by favoring race- and gender-based metrics.
Originally adopted to address historical exclusion in the legal profession, Standard 206 called on law schools to “demonstrate by concrete action a commitment to diversity and inclusion” among students, faculty, and staff. The ABA has long argued that a diverse academic environment “promotes cross-cultural understanding, helps break down stereotypes, and enables students to better understand persons of different backgrounds.”
Yet the political and legal headwinds have proven too strong for the association to ignore. A February resolution issued by the ABA urged the Trump administration to amend its DEI directives, arguing that the executive orders infringed on the organization’s First Amendment rights. But rather than softening its stance, the administration doubled down. The Department of Education has since issued guidance barring colleges from considering race in any decision-making, a directive that is already the subject of multiple lawsuits.
For aspiring attorneys—particularly those from underrepresented backgrounds—the rule’s continued suspension raises concerns about access and representation in the legal field. Many worry that the rollback of diversity efforts may limit pathways into law school and, by extension, into the profession itself.
Still, the ABA maintains that its core mission has not changed. “The Council’s commitment to ensuring access to legal education for all people, including those who have been historically excluded from the legal profession, has not changed,” the organization said in a February 22 statement.
Looking ahead, the ABA is expected to revise Standard 206 and reintroduce it under a new title: “Access to Legal Education and the Profession.” The proposed revision would maintain the goal of promoting diversity, but also include explicit language clarifying that compliance would not require law schools to use race or identity in individual admissions or employment decisions.
Whether this revised standard will be enough to satisfy both federal authorities and critics of DEI—while preserving a commitment to broad access for all parties—remains to be seen. For now, legal education finds itself squarely at the center of a national battle over the future of diversity in the field of law in America.
