I’m trying to get a handle on just how vulnerable law schools are to an adversarial presidential administration. Here’s my list of potential vulnerabilities so far:
- Federal grants. Because few, if any, law schools receive substantial federal grants, this lever is not very effective against law schools—directly. But see item 5 below.
- Foreign Students. Law schools vary in the percentage of foreign students they have. To the extent that law schools depend on foreign students for revenue, they are obviously vulnerable here. The administration claims the ability to block foreign students from attending Harvard, a claim that is being litigated. But even if Harvard ultimately prevails, foreign students may hesitate to apply to Harvard while the case is being litigated.
- Civil Rights Violations. The federal Health and Human Services Department has found Columbia University in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That could cost Columbia its federal grants. HHS’s predecessor department, Health Education and Welfare, made a similar finding against Columbia back in 1971. That resulted in a five-month freeze on federal funding to Columbia, prompting Columbia to make significant changes to various policies, including hiring. What will happen this time at Columbia remains to be seen. I don’t know enough about Title VI to shed additional light on this item.
- Accreditation/bar admission/student loans. The federal Department of Education recognizes the American Bar Association as an accreditor for law schools. In addition, law schools which are a part of a university, as most are, also receive the benefit of the university’s accreditation. This could matter for purposes of student loans and bar admission. Federal student loans and grants are available only to students attending accredited institutions so a loss of accreditation could be devastating to schools that depend on students being able to finance their education through federal student loans, which is probably true of every law school. Students might still be able to obtain private student loans, though those can be more expensive and lack the income-based repayment options available for federal loans. I’m not sure how much this matters to bar admission; if states concluded that the federal government had cancelled a law school’s accreditation for inappropriate reasons, I imagine they could change their rules to allow graduates of that school to be admitted. The federal budget bill as it stands at the moment would limit the amount of federal student loans available to students attending professional schools, which might also impact some students, and thus some schools.
- Impact of being part of a broader university. Even if law schools are not directly affected by the loss of federal aid, etc. they might be indirectly affected if they are part of a broader university. Universities that depend heavily on federal grants, for example, and that lose those grants, or get lower reimbursement rates on those grants will have less resources. That may affect their budgetary arrangement with their law school.
- State schools that depend on state budgets. States may try to increase spending on items the federal government cuts spending on, such as Medicaid. If that happens, they will probably need to cut elsewhere, and that could include at their universities.
- Name and shame. Some students and faculty members will be reluctant to attend or work at a law school they see as having drawn the administration’s ire. Some will probably feel just the opposite. I wonder if we would see other consequences of this practice. For example, would law firms that have entered into agreements with the administration refrain from hiring grads of targeted law schools? Some federal judges have already announced that they won’t hire as law clerks grads of some law schools.
- Follow-on acts by states. Some states might be emboldened by federal action against schools to adopt new laws, such as those we have already seen in some states limiting tenure rights.
Anything to add or correct? This is based more on what has already happened than unused federal powers; if the administration had not banned foreign students from attending Harvard this week, I wouldn’t have known to include it. That makes me wonder what other weapons they could use against schools that I simply don’t know about.
