In a recent legal development, the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty has taken action against the State Bar of Wisconsin, asserting that the bar’s diversity fellowship program for law students infringes upon the free speech rights of its members who financially contribute to it.
The litigation, initiated on behalf of Wisconsin attorney Daniel Suhr, contends that Suhr should not be compelled to support the state bar’s fellowship program as it allegedly violates constitutional principles and is unrelated to the core functions of the bar. The lawsuit argues that allocating Suhr’s mandatory dues to what he deems an unlawful initiative constitutes a violation of his First Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution.
The State Bar of Wisconsin, led by executive director Larry Martin, issued a robust defense of its diversity program, emphasizing that eligibility is not contingent upon race or ethnicity. Martin asserted, “Neither race nor ethnicity is an eligibility factor or requirement for purposes of participation.”
The diversity fellowship, outlined on the bar’s website, is designed for first-year students at Marquette University Law School and the University of Wisconsin Law School who exhibit a “commitment to diversity” and a track record of academic excellence. Successful applicants are awarded 10-week paid summer positions at law firms, corporate legal departments, and government agencies.
The complaint highlights that despite the bar’s attempt to revise program criteria with race-neutral language, the fundamental issues persist. The lawsuit contends that the program’s origins were rooted in discriminatory intent, and this bias continues to influence its administration.
Suhr seeks a court injunction to prevent the state bar from implementing the program in a manner that allegedly violates the rights of law students. Additionally, he aims to prohibit the use of his dues for the program and seeks damages.
This legal challenge follows a broader trend of scrutiny against diversity programs, particularly in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that colleges and universities cannot consider race in admissions. Earlier this year, another group, led by anti-affirmative action activist Edward Blum, targeted law firms Winston & Strawn, Perkins Coie, and Morrison & Foerster over their diversity fellowship programs. Blum dropped the lawsuits after the firms adjusted their application criteria.
As the legal landscape surrounding diversity initiatives evolves, the Wisconsin case adds another chapter to the ongoing debate over the intersection of free speech rights and diversity programs.
