BigLaw's reliance on law-school rankings discriminates against the disabled, 3L's suit alleges
A third-year student at Drexel University’s law school claims in a lawsuit against Dechert that its reliance on higher-ranked law schools in hiring discriminates against the disabled.
The pro se plaintiff, William Joseph Hanrahan, has been diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome. Temple law professor Dave Hoffman writes about the suit (PDF) at Concurring Opinions in a post noted by TaxProf Blog.
Hanrahan sets out the chain of causation this way: BigLaw firms hire from higher-ranked law schools, which rely on the Law School Admission Test in admissions and scholarship offers. And many disabled applicants taking the LSAT were, in the past, at a disadvantage because they were denied accommodations or, if accommodated, the fact was noted when the scores were provided to law schools.
The Law School Admission Council agreed to expand accommodations and to stop flagging the LSAT scores of students granted accommodations in a settlement with the U.S. Justice Department in May.
Hanrahan was a second-year student and fourth in his class when he applied for a summer associate position at Dechert’s Philadelphia office, according to the lawsuit. Hanrahan didn’t get the position, nor has any other Drexel graduate ever been hired as a summer associate or associate at the law firm, the complaint says.
The suit says 14 law students were disabled out of 420 law students at Drexel during the 2013-14 school year, while at the University of Pennsylvania—one of the Dechert feeder schools–only one out of 774 law students was disabled.
Commenting on the suit, Hoffman said he’s not an expert in this area of law, but “it’s hard to imagine a judge forcing firms to discount rankings (which, after all, aren’t entirely or even mostly based on student credentials) when making hiring decisions.”
A Dechert spokesperson declined to comment on the suit.
