<p>The 4% is not a total number (i.e. it's not 4% minority, 96% Caucasian), but rather no non-white group represents more than 4% of the industry.</p>
<p>I'm going to start a war with this, but I really don't want to... just try to take it for what it is.
-Affirmative action is much more important in law school than in undergrad - i.e. the "boost" to applicants is much larger. The stats that I've seen have quoted the boost as approximately 15 LSAT points. </p>
<p>African-Americans who graduate from college are more likely than their Caucasian peers to apply to law school, but, in the aggregate, have lower stats, hence AA.</p>
<p>The problem with this is that, unlike in undergrad, grades in law school are extremely important (unless you are in HYS). Passing the bar is also extremely important. After undergrad, no one cares what your grades were - they just want to see the B.S. Not so much in law school. Many journals are decided, at least in part, based on grades. Some half of African-American law students end up in the bottom 10% of their class at the end of their first year; overall, about half of black matriculants to law school will never pass the bar. This is despite the fact that they come in, on the average, expecting higher grades than their Caucasian peers expect. (Note that there is a bill going through Congress which would demand much more transparency in this issue.)</p>
<p>Consider that law schools will still charge students $50,000/year, whether or not they pass the bar. It is frightening to be in that much debt but not have what it takes to be an attorney. </p>
<p>Now, I don't want to start a war with this - I am just saying that this all shows that the system, as currently practised, is completely dysfunctional. I am not against having a diverse legal profession - in fact, I think that a lot of the problem with the law is how insulated it is. There are very few, if any, external checks on the system. I fully support opening the entire system up to a group that better represents society as a whole.</p>
<p>In my ideal world, law schools won't try to put Band-aids on problems that K-12 and college have handed to them. In my world, law schools would admit all types of people who have the potential to be successful attorneys, but lack the preparation, skills, and habits to be successful law students. The law schools, however (and some do this) should make such acceptances conditional upon completion of a pre-law school boot camp - get the pre-1Ls into shape before they have to compete in the classroom. It isn't a racial thing - there are plenty of students who simply have lacked the rigour in undergrad college, the writing skills, or the research skills to be successful students, despite having the intellect to do so if properly trained. I also think that, before you take $150,000 of someone's money, you ought to inform him that he needs a lot of help to be a successful student.</p>
<p>My two cents. Just because there is a tremendous amount of value in something does not mean that the methods used to achieve it are good or even justifiable.</p>