• • •

I thank the Peoria County Bar for inviting me to share a few thoughts with you about diversity. I have to confess up front, this has not been the easiest speech to write. So much has been said and written about “diversity” that I have had a difficult time finding my own “hook” on the topic today.

For years, I have participated in Martin Luther King Day programs, celebrated Black History Month, and have written and delivered addresses about “diversity,” but I just couldn't find a new slant or a new angle, especially to a group who has been doing such a good job to improve diversity for years.

For everyone in this room, I suspect that this speech is hardly necessary. I am, truly, preaching to the choir. You are open-minded; you have come a long way in your own understanding of gender, race, racism and ethnicity; and, collectively, you try hard not to “see” race or ethnicity. I know that you work hard to treat women and men the same.

But I genuinely think that there is still more to be said, even to this group. I have titled my remarks today “Why Care,” which is shorthand for “why should we care.” Hopefully, I can remind everyone why continued programs, like this one, and scholarships and other outreach efforts are necessary and challenge you to do even more.

As understanding as you are, you are not entirely representative of society; not yet. I keep a folder of interesting stories, and one that I read in preparation for today reminded me why talking about diversity is still very, very important. I read an article from 2004 – obviously not that long ago – from the Washington Post.

The truly unbelievable part is that there was organized opposition to the repeal effort, including Roy Moore, the former Alabama Supreme Court justice who refused remove the Ten Commandments from the state judicial building. Mr. Moore was among those speaking out against the initiative to amend the state constitution. In the end, the initiative to amend the constitution sadly failed.

I stared at the article and found myself thinking that surely it's not this bad everywhere. And it isn't that bad everywhere. However, those of us who believe that diversity is important in a civilized society still have a lot of work to do. That's why we have to care.

Closer to home, at the very law school where I am the dean, in the spring of 2007, some of our students of color reported that they have not always felt that we provide a safe, welcoming environment. As a candidate for dean I experienced a very similar feeling.

We spend a lot of time talking to our students about ethics and professionalism, but I don't think we do as good a job as we could tying those topics to tolerance and respect for people whose backgrounds are different. That's why we have to care.

Justice O'Connor and the other justices in the two Michigan cases were telling us that, in about 21 more years, the U.S. Supreme Court expects to be done with racial justice in this country, at least in terms of higher education admission. That's why we have to care.

As a society, we have to confront an infrastructure that makes it hard for some people to succeed. We have to provide adequate funding for all school districts and be willing to pay for programs to educate all students. This will probably mean that we have to fund K-12 education in a different way.

So far, our elected officials have had neither the imagination nor the courage to rethink how schools are funded. Either their way of thinking must change or we must have the courage to change who represents us in the Legislature. We have to care.

We must also confront rules that say only people from a certain school or with certain test scores are “the best.” In law school admissions, the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) and undergraduate GPA are often the two main factors that are used to determine who is admitted to a law program.

The LSAT is supposed to predict success in law school, but the Law School Admissions Council, the organization that administers the test, has long counseled that it may not be an accurate predictor for all students. In fact, there are several national studies that suggest that LSAT performance may not be an adequate predictor for applicants of color.

Likewise, GPA may not accurately predict success. Is a 3.4 grade point average at Bradley University the same as a 3.4 at Southern Illinois? At the University of Chicago? I have no idea.

That's why, at our law school, we actually use more than a dozen factors to determine admission. We use LSAT performance and GPA, but they help us sort applications into different groups requiring different levels of additional scrutiny.

We also consider how well one writes, whether you have an advanced degree, leadership ability, extra-curricular involvement, whether you have overcome personal or family hardship, and several other factors when making admissions decisions.

Our efforts have helped us increase the number of women and students of color in our more recent entering classes. We have a long way to go, but we are headed in the right direction. We care.

Our gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered students also realize that we care. At SIU, there is a training program called “Safe Zone,” and it is available for all caring faculty and staff. Safe Zone involves helping employees of the University to respect all sexual orientations and to create a safe space, a safe zone, for GLBT students who may be having difficulty in some way because of their sexual orientations.

More than 20 of my colleagues at the School of Law signed up for and completed Safe Zone training. We have placards posted at our doors to alert students that the person in the office supports them and will help them without judgment or ridicule. We care.

We also need to realize that diversity is a two-way street. Many people think diversity is an effective way to help the minority learn from the majority. It is, but the reverse is also true.

As everyone here probably knows, the nine justices of the Supreme Court, who heard the Brown case, were all white men, some appointed by Franklin Roosevelt, some appointed by Harry Truman and one – Governor Earl Warren of California – appointed by Dwight Eisenhower to be the chief justice.

A majority espoused “judicial restraint,” a belief that the high court should restrain itself from striking down state or federal laws passed by democratically elected legislators. Others espoused judicial activism, especially in civil liberties cases, insisting that the rights guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution trumped state laws if they compromised those rights, even if the laws were passed by so-called “democratically elected legislators.”

A few of the justices were liberal, and a few were doggedly conservative, and a couple of them, it is reported, absolutely hated each other!

These nine men came together and declared that separate education was not equal. How? No one really knows because the Supreme Court always deliberates in secret so there is no record of who said what to whom or who persuaded whom to change his mind.

However, there is one story that has long fascinated me because I'd like to believe that it sheds some light on the situation. Author James T. Patterson, in his book titled, “Brown v. Board of Education: A Civil Rights Milestone and its Troubled Legacy,” shares an interesting behind-the-scenes story that few people know.

Sometime before the court announced the Brown decision, Chief Justice Warren decided to go to Virginia and tour Civil War sites. His black chauffeur drove him out of Washington, D.C., and to the various sites. At the end of the first day, Justice Warren checked into a hotel and assumed that his driver had done the same.

The next day, the justice found his driver in the car and learned that he had spent the night in the car because he couldn't find accommodations for himself in segregated Virginia. Justice Warren remarked that he had heard enough saying, “I was embarrassed, I was ashamed.”

He cut short his trip and returned immediately to Washington. He had come as close as any white person could to the racial discrimination of a black man, and he did not like it.

A year after the decision, a national debate was taking place as to how fast the country would be expected to desegregate public education. Once again, the nine justices were unanimous and ruled that the desegregation of America's segregated schools must be carried out with “all deliberate speed.”

Brown II, as it has come to be known, set the clock in motion, and school districts across America were under the gun to end separate but equal education.

I like the story because it underscores that we all learn when people from various backgrounds interact with one another. I am reminded that being a person of color doesn't have to mean that I am a victim; it can also mean that I have something important and unique to contribute to society. I want to be included so that I, too, can make a difference because I care.

I have a former colleague named John Maher, who has long realized that our society is better off when we embrace our differences instead of fighting them or trying to change them. John was the dean who hired me when I began in legal education in 1992.

I think it is fair to say that, as a member of the legal academy, he is a privileged Caucasian man. But he is also a man who “gets it.” There is no obvious reason why he would be expected to be progressive on the subject of diversity, but he is.

He has always worked hard to make sure that opportunities were made available to everyone; he was always willing to give people a chance. It never mattered to John that you were a man or a woman or person of color or whatever; he just wanted you to do your best work and succeed. Moreover, John has long espoused “pluralism” as the goal, rather than “diversity.”

I have always found his distinction to be interesting, but I never really focused on how the two are different. Wikipedia, the popular online encyclopedia, defines “cultural pluralism” as when small groups, within a larger society, maintain their unique cultural identities. Maybe my friend is onto something.

Instead of trying to make the different races and ethnic groups assimilate, perhaps a more enriching option is to let each group celebrate its traditions and remember its heritage, but do so in a society that tolerates difference and celebrates diversity. That's why we have to care.

Next month, the SIU School of Law will announce the creation of a new scholarship in John Maher's honor, one that I have funded along with a few of John's other friends, to provide support for a student who exemplifies the qualities that John so wonderfully represents, among them being professionalism, compassion and pluralism.

That scholarship will join with the Peoria County Bar Association's scholarship and one sponsored by the Metro East firm of Hinshaw Culbertson to provide support for some of our students whose lives and life stories enrich us daily.

The group assembled in this room cares. You understand that diversity means that the whole is stronger than the sum of its parts. Now, you must take the next step.

Engage others, people outside of this progressive group, and help them to understand that “those people” are not a threat; we are not taking away good jobs from those who have had them for centuries.

Educate them that our communities are better, richer and more productive when we are working together, even if different people go about solving problems and making improvements in very different ways.

Continue to create new initiatives to support talented women and people of color. Look for new ways to reach communities of color and women, especially when you have job openings.

There is a new web-site called Ihave-adreamjob.com. It is a job-posting site run by African Americans and it is being marketed to African Americans in the hope that the title–an obvious reference Dr. Martin Luther King–will keep the site in people's minds. Post your openings on that site. Place ads in newspapers and other publications that target women and people of color.

Use the Illiniois State Bar Association's committees, particularly the Committee on Minority and Women Participation, to get the word out when you have positions to fill.

We must also redouble our efforts to broaden the umbrella of experiences that are valued and included in policymaking. Those of us in this room must continue to talk with one another and share our stories – all of us.

We have to stand together to fight misunderstanding, inexperience, doubt, intolerance, ignorance and prejudice – all of which get in the way of an honest discussion about race and ethnicity and what it means to provide equal opportunity for everyone.

Continue to care. If our society is to grow and thrive and to make life better for all of its citizens, caring is a must. Thank you for what you do, individually and as a group, and keep up the good and hard work. It makes a difference.