Abandoning efforts to overcome our long history of racial discrimination that impoverished minorities.
The tone was set by the Chief Justice in Parents Involved vs. Seattle Community Schools when John Roberts remarked that the way to stop discrimination by race is to stop discriminating by race.
What the Justice - and today's EEOC - are blind to is that race blindness ratifies the status quo. It forbids any measures to make up for any historic disparities - unless they are the direct fesult of explicitly racially discriminatory practices such as are exemplified not simply by the notorious "Jim Crow" laws, but largely thorugh such long-tolerated or mandated practices as racially discriminatory covenants in deeds, or rqacial "redlining" , as recounted by Richard Rothstein in his history The Color of Law. And dramatically in Arc of Justice Northwestern historian Kevin Boyle's prise-winning history of the birth of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. - GWC
EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas Sends Letters to 20 Law Firms Requesting Information About DEI-Related Employment Practices:
Re: Review of Perkins Coie LLP’s Compliance with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Dear Mr. Butswinkas:
Based on public statements and court filings1
by Perkins Coie LLP (“Perkins Coie”), I am
seeking information about the firm’s employment practices. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. (Title VII) prohibits an employer from discriminating
against an individual because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.2
Under Title VII, an
employer initiative, policy, program, or practice may be unlawful if it involves an employer, or
other covered entity, taking an employment action motivated—in whole or in part—by race, sex,
or another protected characteristic.3
Title VII also bars employers from limiting, segregating, or
classifying employees based on race, sex, or other protected characteristics in a way that affects
their status or deprives them of employment opportunities, including in voluntary employee groups
and activities which are employer sponsored.4
It is the responsibility of the EEOC to enforce the
provisions of Title VII with respect to private employers.
Perkins Coie publicly has touted its hiring practices, including its diversity fellowships,
which have historically been limited to “students of color,”5 as “help[ing] create and foster one of the strongest and most diverse talent pipelines in the legal profession”6
and “designed to increase
the representation of racially diverse lawyers at the firm.”7
Merely five months ago, Perkins Coie
announced it had “achieved Mansfield 7.0 Certification Plus status for another year from Diversity
Lab, which measures how leading law firms have affirmatively considered women, lawyers of
color, [and] LGBTQ+ lawyers . . . for recruitment, partnership promotions, and management
positions, among other significant benchmarks.”8
In addition, in 2020, Microsoft’s Law Firm Diversity Program recognized Perkins Coie as
its “top performing law firm” when it came to meeting Microsoft’s diversity goals, demonstrating
a five year plan that “achieved impressive progress . . . growing diverse attorney hours on
Microsoft matters by 12.3 percentage points (from 56.7% to 69%);” a 10.3 point increase in overall
diverse partner representation at the firm (from 33.6% to 43.9%);” and “great progress in diverse
representation on its management committee, with over 64% of their committee members
identifying as women, minorities, LGBTQ+ people, people with disabilities and veterans.”9 In
fact, since at least 2012, Perkins Coie has been a leader in a third-party diversity scorecard that
scores law firms based on their “percentile ranking of the representation of underrepresented racial
and ethnic groups, gender and LBGTQ+ per level and the overall disclosure of DEI data versus
firms of a similar size.”10
***
...the strongest and most diverse talent pipelines in the legal profession”6
and “designed to increase
the representation of racially diverse lawyers at the firm.”7
Merely five months ago, Perkins Coie
announced it had “achieved Mansfield 7.0 Certification Plus status for another year from Diversity
Lab, which measures how leading law firms have affirmatively considered women, lawyers of
color, [and] LGBTQ+ lawyers . . . for recruitment, partnership promotions, and management
positions, among other significant benchmarks.”8
In addition, in 2020, Microsoft’s Law Firm Diversity Program recognized Perkins Coie as
its “top performing law firm” when it came to meeting Microsoft’s diversity goals, demonstrating
a five year plan that “achieved impressive progress . . . growing diverse attorney hours on
Microsoft matters by 12.3 percentage points (from 56.7% to 69%);” a 10.3 point increase in overall
diverse partner representation at the firm (from 33.6% to 43.9%);” and “great progress in diverse
representation on its management committee, with over 64% of their committee members
identifying as women, minorities, LGBTQ+ people, people with disabilities and veterans.”9
In
fact, since at least 2012, Perkins Coie has been a leader in a third-party diversity scorecard that
scores law firms based on their “percentile ranking of the representation of underrepresented racial
and ethnic groups, gender and LBGTQ+ per level and the overall disclosure of DEI data versus
firms of a similar size.”10 in part—on race, sex, or other protected characteristics, in violation of Title VII.
I believe you can
be of assistance in helping to identify all relevant information I might consider. As an initial
request, please provide responses to the questions outlined below. Please also preserve all relevant
records.
Internships, Fellowships, and Scholarships
In public statements and court filings, Perkins Coie has acknowledged that it has had a 1L Diversity
Fellowship Program since 1991 and a similar 2L Diversity Fellowship Program since 2021.
Perkins Coie also admitted in court filings that, at least until 2023, those hiring programs had a
“requirement that participants belong to a group historically underrepresented in the legal
profession” and appears to concede that those programs previously limited participation by race
and “asked or required [applicants] to identify their race when applying.”14
Perkins Coie also has
asserted in court filings that it changed the criteria for its diversity fellowship programs in 2023.15
1. Please describe the application and selection criteria used by Perkins Coie for its 1L Diversity Fellowship Program from: (a) 2015 to 2023; and (b) from 2023 to the present.
