By Members of the Philadelphia Bar Association
We asked members of the Philadelphia Bar Association to share their perspectives on diversity, equity, and inclusion in the legal profession – the good, the bad and the ugly. The need for fair access to opportunities, embracing diversity, and challenging of biases are all reflected in the experiences shared by our members. With the need to break down barriers, we have a call to action to create a culture where everyone feels welcome, heard, and empowered.
Submissions have been lightly edited for clarity and length.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the legal profession is an evolving landscape, marked by significant strides, but also notable challenges. Historically, our profession has been criticized for its lack of representation and inclusivity, with systemic barriers impeding the advancement of underrepresented groups. In recent years, there has been commendable progress. Many law schools and firms are now prioritizing DEI initiatives, implementing policies designed to increase diversity in admissions and hiring. Programs aimed at fostering inclusive environments, such as mentorship opportunities and unconscious bias training, have become more common. These efforts are helping to create a more representative and equitable landscape.
However, challenges persist. Despite the progress, data indicates that disparities remain in representation and advancement within the legal field. Women, persons of color as well as persons with disabilities are all still underrepresented, and retention rates for these individuals are lower than their peers. The reasons for this are no secret: barriers to accessing legal education and career advancement opportunities abound. Additionally, the profession still struggles with maintaining a culture of inclusivity, where all voices are genuinely valued and heard.
But change is not elusive. Rather, it requires intention and commitment. As the chair of my firm’s Women’s Initiative, I have expanded programming to include all female employees, not just attorneys. We meet monthly to foster an environment where every perspective is respected and considered while discussing issues that impact us every day.
Looking forward, there are several changes I hope to see. First, a more systemic approach to DEI is necessary, one that goes beyond recruitment to address retention and career development. Law firms and legal institutions should implement more robust support systems, including employee resource groups, clear off-ramps and on-ramps for employees in periods of transition, and navigable pathways for advancement and professional development.
Second, pay equity must be the norm, not the exception. Pay equity is not merely an economic concern; it is a crucial step towards creating a society where all individuals, regardless of gender, are afforded equal opportunities and fair compensation for their talents and efforts. A workplace where all employees have equal opportunities, representation, and equitable compensation enhances its ability to attract, retain, and develop top-tier talent. Ensuring equality is not just about meeting quotas; it is about maximizing the potential of every individual within the organization.
And third, all state bars and licensing agencies should track race and ethnicity in the profession. This is crucial information for assessing progress.
Ultimately, achieving diversity, equity, and inclusion in the legal profession will require ongoing commitment, transparency, and a willingness to challenge existing norms and practices. We all need to practice what we preach so that DEI is ingrained in the organizational culture rather than being a set of isolated initiatives. Let us all commit to fostering a workplace that celebrates our diverse perspectives and wealth of talents.
Hillary Ladov
MGC Law
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a first-year associate at my firm, I’ve been fortunate to witness and contribute to the evolving landscape of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within the legal profession. My firm has made a meaningful commitment to DEI, and I have had the privilege of both proposing and organizing key initiatives that reflect this dedication.
Two standout programs that I helped bring to life within my first year were “Making Space at the Table” and the “Pride Walk-a-Thon.”
At “Making Space at the Table”, through the medium of a halo-halo – a dessert from my own background, with a focus on celebrating Asian heritage during AAPI month, we fostered a dialogue on accessibility and innovation, celebrating attendees’ differences.
By proposing this event, I aimed to create a platform where everyone could share their unique cultural experiences and insights, fostering a greater appreciation for the vibrant tapestry of cultures, not only within Asian, but within our firm. Organizing and promoting this event involved ensuring an inclusive atmosphere where everyone felt excited to share their experiences.
Similarly, during June, we celebrated Pride with the “Pride Walk-a-Thon.” This event was designed as an accessible way for all firm members, regardless of their physical ability or experience with fundraising, to participate in an inclusive event, celebrating queer identities and allyship. Over the course of the month, participants earned charitable donations for local queer organizations, based on their total steps, with the top steppers receiving special recognition.
Both events highlighted the impact of fostering an inclusive environment where diverse voices and identities were not only recognized but also celebrated. The participation levels and positive feedback received from colleagues served as key indicators of the programs' effectiveness in promoting a culture of inclusion.
These experiences have reinforced my belief that DEI efforts are not just about creating policies but also about actively engaging with, and celebrating, the diverse backgrounds and experiences of everyone within the firm. As a first-year associate, contributing to these initiatives has been both a privilege and a responsibility, and I look forward to continuing to champion DEI in our profession.
Angeli J. Fernandez
White & Williams LLP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About two years after passing the bar exam, a cold call came to my direct line. “A Black woman estate planner? You, my dear, are a unicorn!” the prospective client told me. This potential client, for whatever reason, had made it her personal goal to only be advised by Black women professionals—this included all of her doctors, her therapist, accountant, and financial advisors. Her relief at finding a lawyer who looked like her made all the difference in the trust she bestowed in her counsel.
As a Black lawyer and first-generation college student (and first-generation law school student), the main barrier to accessing the legal profession for me was the lack of exposure to lawyers. Some of my classmates had lawyers or even judges as their parents, siblings, or more distant family members. This lack of access made entering the legal profession appear to be elusive and mysterious. Also, as a law student, I became increasingly frustrated at the uncertainty of what it was that lawyers did all day. I made it my mission to find out, and luckily, with the assistance of professors and attorneys who took time out of their busy lives to speak with a hard-headed and chatty law student, I was able to gain insight and discovered that trusts and estates was my calling.
It is especially true in the trusts and estates world that clients having an attorney they identify with can make an immense impact on the trust between attorney and client, and on the client’s ability to communicate their goals. While many people with lower net-worths may tell me, “I don’t have any money, so I don’t need to do my estate planning,” the truth is that estate planning can be useful for estates of all sizes. Getting this message to a diverse population can be more effective when a person from that diverse community delivers it.
Last year, the Diversity Committee of the Philadelphia Bar Association’s Probate Section, for which I am honored to serve as current Chair, invited Professor Keeva Terry of Howard Law School to speak about the racial wealth gap at a program entitled “Black Assets Matter: Exploring the Racial Wealth Gap in America.” Professor Terry’s suggestions for mitigating the wealth gap experienced by Black Americans can also be applied to advancing diversity, equity and inclusion in the legal field.
Being that Professor Kerry has already done the research, I am obliged to reiterate her teachings here. She suggested requiring financial literacy programs in K-12 schools, and more programming to increase diverse attorneys in trusts and estates. By learning financial literacy and engaging in estate planning to preserve wealth for the next generation, diverse populations gain the knowledge to mitigate oppressive structural barriers, such as the racial wage gap.
Further, by performing outreach to individuals about what estate planning is, and why it’s important for everyone to do, regardless of the size of their estate, we can share knowledge that would otherwise not be provided to diverse populations.
Chloe Mullen‑Wilson
Timoney Knox, LLP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a post-graduate fellow and law professor at Temple Law, we are troubled by the lack of diversity in the public interest bar. Ensuring that lawyers reflect and relate to their clients is crucial in public interest legal organizations that primarily serve people of color.
As a public interest lawyer in the early 2000s, Jaya was involved in diversification efforts at the ACLU and elsewhere. When Lydia matriculated at Temple Law in 2020, expressing a desire to improve public interest diversity, a partnership was born. We worked with wonderful allies in public interest organizations (including Brenda Marrero at Community Legal Services and Reggie Shuford, formerly at the ACLU of PA), and a dedicated group of Temple Law students, including Elydah Joyce, Edmund Nyarko, and Kyra Sampson, to create the Diversity in Public Interest Law Project (DPIP).
Several factors, including inequitable access to information and lack of funding, have historically made public interest work inaccessible to diverse young lawyers. DPIP aims to identify those barriers and build pathways to public interest law for students from historically excluded backgrounds.
We began in 2022 with a survey of Temple Law students intended to guide the Project’s next steps, galvanize funding, and inform administrative and faculty priorities and program development. The DPIP student team presented the survey findings to the students, faculty, and administration, and followed up with focus groups. In fall 2024, we are planning an updated student body survey to track change and progress over time.
Responding to requests for more information about public interest careers, we hosted 10 panels with over 30 speakers, reaching approximately 350 students on topics including defining public interest law, pathways to leadership, hiring practices, and financial planning. We have begun work on a Best Practices Guide to Recruitment and Retention of Diverse Public Interest Attorneys.
DPIP students appreciate the opportunity to partner with the law school’s administration and faculty to create the change they want to see. This unique approach, along with DPIP’s research and resources, is already impacting Temple Law School, its students and future graduates. We are excited about our progress so far and are eager to continue moving the needle forward. We welcome suggestions, participation, and of course, donations! To get involved, reach out to Jaya and Lydia at jaya.ramji-nogales@temple.edu and lydia.hurtado@temple.edu.
Jaya Ramji-Nogales and Lydia Hurtado
Temple University James E. Beasley School of Law
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a queer pansexual homoromantic who has been out of the closet since the 90s, I have always had a special interest in meeting the needs of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersexed, and asexual (LGBTQIA+) community.
I have been exclusively practicing family law for over seventeen years. Family law has evolved in its treatment of LGBTQIA+ persons and families, largely in a positive direction towards more equity and inclusion. Unfortunately, it is still generally assumed by many family law practitioners, court personnel, and judges that everyone is straight and cisgendered, until they find out otherwise. This forces members of our community to have to come out, again and again, or to be less than whole, accepting admission into the category of all things heteronormative just to get through a conference, hearing, or trial.
Moreover, sometimes there are barriers to inclusion for my LGBTQIA+ clients within the court system itself. For example, with every Philadelphia Family Court appearance, my clients must fill out a Domestic Relations Information Sheet, which does not include space for preferred names and pronouns. As a consequence, my trans, non-binary, and intersex clients are often misnamed and misgendered by court personnel and even judges and are forced to come out in an already-stressful situation. I have also experienced many a raised eyebrow and whispering amongst staff in courtrooms in Philadelphia when my clients don’t “pass” as the gender typically associated with their legal name.
We need more people in our profession and in the courthouse to learn about, understand, and speak the language of inclusivity. I am grateful to be a part of the tight-knit Philadelphia family law section, where I have found colleagues that do, indeed, want to do the work. Together we will derive a greater understanding of each other in developing our professional relationships, and our diverse clients will experience more equity and inclusion.
Jennifer Dumin
Jerner Law Group, P.C.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I recently celebrated the 23rd anniversary of my diagnosis of ovarian cancer and the 30th anniversary of my breast cancer diagnosis. Shortly after my ovarian cancer diagnosis, my OB-GYN, who had urged me to have my ovaries removed preventively, had a freak accident on the AC Expressway and tragically died. Life can be unpredictable.
When people end up in the legal system, the cases often arise out of unpredictable situations. Some of these people, whether parties, defendants, witnesses, lawyers, judges, jurors or court staff, experience bias as small as biased barbs or even as stabs of pain. Bias in the legal system, to me, is like a cancer on justice, undetected by most at early stages, where it can often be remedied, but an ugly malignancy in the lives of those who have experienced bias that unfairly impacted the outcomes of their cases.
The Committee to Promote Fairness in the Philadelphia Legal System was established by the Board of Governors in 1999 to provide a central system for the Philadelphia Bar Association to:
For several years, the 15-member committee accepted confidential reports of bias, although there were not many since there was limited publicity. Anonymous reports could be submitted, but the allegations were retained only for statistical and record-keeping purposes. The committee treated the people who filed reports of bias with respect and compassion.
In the fall of 2008, the committee co-chairs, Phoebe Haddon and myself, were informed that the committee was no longer appropriate because the Pennsylvania Courts had adopted reporting policies to implement recommendations the Final Report of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Committee on Racial and Gender in the Justice System as of January 1, 2008.
The Committee to Promote Fairness served several purposes in addition to those covered by the Court’s policy, including the following:
National polling has found that fairness and lack of bias are key components of the public’s trust and confidence in the Courts. The Philadelphia Bar Association should take appropriate steps to determine whether there is a need to re-establish the Committee to Promote Fairness in the Philadelphia Legal System and should confer with the affinity bar associations, as well as the Bar’s pertinent Sections and Committees, to determine the best approach.
Judy Berkman
Regional Housing Legal Services
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At an interview with a large, established law firm, I once asked my interviewer, “Why did you go into law having worked so long as a scientist?” and received an answer that I have never forgotten. “Honestly, I was tired of working with people who can’t speak English, and, by the way, are you from China?”
Back then, as a student-loan-saddled 2L seeking work in a post-Great Recession economy, I hastened to reply, “no sir, I was born and raised in Allentown, PA and the proud grandson of a U.S. Army veteran,” while the National Anthem blared in my mind. No surprise: I didn’t get that job. But I did get my first job out of law school with Ed Seglias and Matt Gioffre at Cohen Seglias (thanks, Ed!).
For a while, I kept that experience, like many others, to myself, partly out of suspicion that sharing them would curb my job prospects (recall the student loans) and partly out of the suspicion that it must happen to everyone. (Among other experiences, I was once accused by a witness on cross-examination as not being “American.”) But as I worked longer as a lawyer (and had a kid!), and as my loan balance dropped from six figures to five, I started sharing. And, to my surprise, some people were shocked. So, here’s my, obvious to some and less obvious to others, observation about barriers in the law: stereotypes and racism exist.
Luckily for the profession, and luckily for me, as it turns out, I have seen at least three ways to dismantle barriers in our profession.
First, do what Cohen Seglias did for me, and what Judge Petrese B. Tucker did for me too when she gave me the honor of serving as her clerk—hire someone who doesn’t look like you. As a first-generation lawyer from a family that includes former child sweatshop workers from Hong Kong, I have been blessed by strangers who have given me the opportunity to work for them despite being of a different race, economic class, educational pedigree, and ethnicity.
Second, show the next generation of lawyers that law practice is as diverse as they are. For this method of barrier dismantling, I thank The Rendell Center for Civics and Civic Engagement, which has, through its Literature-Based Mock Trial and Read Aloud programs, put me before students from across the city and state to teach them about civics and what being a lawyer means. These students, some of whom are Asian, but many of whom are not, see that the law involves people from all walks of life. And just as diversity of identity and diversity of thought lends legitimacy to our jury system, so too does showing the diversity of the bench and bar lend legitimacy to the profession among our students (who will one day be our lawyers).
Third, share your experience with stereotyping and racism until no one is left who might be shocked to hear that they affect even the largest and most prestigious institutions in our community. Here, I thank The Philadelphia Lawyer, for letting me share some of my experiences with its readers. While I have had some struggles as a Chinese-American lawyer, I submit that the profession has been changing for the better. Let’s keep up the change!
Matthew G. Tom
U.S. Courts of Appeals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My colleagues might not believe this, but I was a quiet young woman growing up. Until the age of 22 years old, I was a competitive gymnast, working my way up from “Mommy and Me” classes to Level 10 and ultimately, a Division I team at a large university. I travelled across the country for competitions, trained five days a week and constantly battled injuries that amounted to 16 broken bones, five major surgeries and over 60 stitches all before I was old enough to legally order a drink at a bar.
And I did it without a voice. The balance beam and uneven bars were my workplace, and in that realm, meekness was a prized quality. Women gymnasts who spoke out “had a bad attitude” or were viewed as uncoachable and unserious about their goals. By the time I started law school, I was confidently telling interviewers that my greatest strength was following directions, and my greatest weakness was asking too many questions.
I have spent the last eight years of my practice as a woman in law unlearning silence. Every time I see a female attorney raise a question in a meeting or suggest a better approach to a pleading, I find my own voice. It took years to find the confidence to push the unmute button in a Teams meeting. I am thrilled to be at a firm where I am constantly encouraged to ask questions, to challenge existing procedures and raise concerns as they arise. Of course, I still have days where I worry that disagreeing with a colleague will be perceived as having a poor attitude, but I now know that to be blatantly false. Women’s voices represent diverse, unique perspectives that are utterly necessary to the legal field’s growing DEI framework.
Eight years after graduating law school, I find myself most looking forward to growing my voice along with my practice. I wrote this submission hoping to encourage other young women starting out in the legal field or to perhaps reach women athletes questioning their next steps in life. Your strengths are loudest when you press the unmute button, and there is a place for you here in law to grow your own voice.
Melanie Buzhardt
Leader Berkon Colao & Silverstein LLP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I had a choice. Ball up my 53-year-old grandmotherly fist and cold clock the double-breasted lawyer in open court or fire up the laptop and sign up for the LSAT. One choice satisfying. The other calculated. My professional responsibility handbook had become careworn. I carried it everywhere, reading and re-reading it. I wondered just how many rules were being broken: lying to the court, never visiting the client, not knowing the record. Did I have standing to file a bar complaint? What was the calculus of harm?
I was the mitigation specialist for Eddie McCrary. Jr. who was doing life at SCI Chester, just three exits down I-95 from Philadelphia. Eddie had 26 years in. Miller (2012) & Montgomery (2016) applied, and Jones (2021) had not yet been decided.
There is a truth that everyone who works at 13th and Filbert, and all the people who step into the glue trap known as the criminal justice system know: constitutional protections in Philadelphia courts are at best inconvenient. What else could justify ignoring the class impact of “Sex for lies”, “Overtime Scandals”, Officer Disability Fund scams, coerced confessions, and decades of false probably cause affidavits? Police and prosecutorial scandals may be headlining news but the communities who are victimized never fully recover: it is called generational trauma. Absolute immunity, qualified immunity and byzantine PCRA rules shield accountability, not just for the excesses, but the policies that fuel mass incarceration. Policies and practices that are racist, corrosive and criminogenic.
We cannot just punch in, punch out, not piss off the judge and move on. The humanity of our clients is paramount, not an hourly rate calculus. We must litigate like our own family member’s lives depend on it, because they do.
What can move us forward, you ask? Deep listening and conscious actions that honor people in prison and those under arrest. We need to value their lives and listen to their stories; we need to practice accompaniment. The inclusion of prisoner’s agency and voices can inform and motivate greater equity. The Abolitionist Law Center, Amistad Law Project, Coalition to Abolish Death by Incarceration and the Human Rights Campaign practice this kind of law. And we must never forget that Pro se writs by Clarence Gideon (Gideon v. Wainwright) J.W. Estelle (Estelle v Gamble) grievances filed by a class including Reginald Wilkinson (Wilkinson v. Austin) created law.
Noel Hanrahan, Esq. P.I. She passed the bar at age 57 in 2021, and lives in Philadelphia. As an abolitionist she seeks a future for Philadelphia that honors each and every citizen, and a future not defined by mass incarceration and the legacy of Rendell, Abraham, & Rizzo.
Noel Hanrahan
Private Investigator
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have been practicing law for almost 40 years. I have seen and experienced both barriers and progress to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the legal profession throughout that timeframe. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Students for Fair Admissions case last year was, unfortunately, not just a setback to efforts by universities to achieve diversity, equity and inclusion in their student bodies but it also had the unintended consequence of law firms and corporations being forced to pause and/or reconsider their important DEI efforts and goals as well.
It is not, however, a time to pause. The time is now to stay on track and continue to take action to move the needle forward – there is still much important progress to be made which will benefit us all as a profession. There are many options available to everyone at the bar – just to give a few examples:
-
The Philadelphia Bar Association has multiple, active committees and sections, an Office of Diversity and a multitude of CLE and other resources focused on DEI. In fact, “as we speak”, the Philadelphia Bar Association is forming discussion groups including members of the judiciary and the bar to brainstorm on how we can advance diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging in our community.
You do not have to be in a large law firm or corporation nor do you yourself have to be a member of an affinity group in order to find opportunities to move the needle forward. If you have a question or concern about whether your own DEI initiatives may withstand scrutiny, consult your DEI officer, HR counsel or a lawyer proficient in this area – the bar association also provides resources as do other legal and community organizations. But, whatever you do and whomever you are, please do not pause, reverse, slow down or refrain from maintaining a personal and professional commitment to improving DEI in the legal profession - it makes us stronger and more capable as an industry to reflect the diversity of our clients and the community we serve. After all, we are “Philadelphia Lawyers,” which means we always rise to any challenge and stand up for principles with conviction.
Patricia B. Santelle
White & Williams LLP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a newly admitted attorney, the obstacles I faced as a low-income law student are still well-remembered. They highlighted that part of our successes are not based on technical or intellectual abilities – but someone’s ability to pay.
Being a low-income student meant constantly navigating the dynamics of prioritizing my education or my finances. When I first started law school, I was actively discouraged from working a part-time job. Requesting work-study funding led me to being bounced around a financial aid department until someone knew how to help me apply. My supervisors at my summer internships constantly asked questions about my funding, my scholarships, and my finances. A supervisor once told me he didn’t understand why I would intern for funds instead of credits, because I should take out more loans to afford my cost of living.
The constant insistence that I should not be working and should not need funding was hard to ignore. It created such a strong stigma around myself and my other low-income classmates. It felt like we were doing something wrong. As if by prioritizing our finances in order to support our education, we didn’t care about our education at all. But if I wasn’t working, I would never have been able to afford my basic needs – my groceries, my study materials, or even the gas in my car to get to class. I would never have been able to succeed.
By the time the bar exam rolled around, I was terrified. Every lawyer knows about the high costs associated with the bar exam. But for low-income students, this was a horror story I’d heard about for years. These costs aren’t just a drain on our finances; they were often complete barriers to becoming attorneys and finishing what we started.
While the bar exam causes everyone stress and frustration, my anxiety was intensified by my inability to work while I studied. I poured over every bar prep program’s costs, every jurisdiction’s application fees, and the amount left from my last loan disbursement. I spent that summer living as frugally as I could, stretching my savings and paying for the fewest necessities possible.
And I was lucky. I passed the bar exam and became an attorney because I had worked hard and earned my successes. But so have countless low-income law students – and they have not all been fortunate enough to afford law school, pay their way through years of schooling, take an entire summer off to study, and spend thousands of dollars to have a chance at passing the bar exam. Many qualified people have not joined me here, on the other side of bar admission, as attorneys.
I am beyond thankful to feel so embraced and welcomed by the legal community in and around Philadelphia. But there will always be a need for more diverse perspectives in the legal profession. We need to support low-income law students, until individuals who are suppressed by the expenses of a legal education can break through these barriers.
Rachel Levy
Jerner Law Group, P.C.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For my entire life, my name has been mispronounced and misspelled. Before entering the legal field, I [perhaps incorrectly] assumed that individuals in this field would be more sensitive and careful than the average person regarding the spelling and pronunciation of my name because “lawyers are detail-oriented” and “people who work in the legal profession know how important it is to be accurate and precise.”
So, it came as a shock to me when I received emails, addressed to me, where my name was misspelled. Or when my name was misspelled in a Certificate of Good Standing from a state supreme court. Or when I excitedly opened the PDF to my first hearing’s transcript and saw that my name was the only name in the entire transcript that was misgendered. Instead of being thrilled, as I should have been, during each of these moments as a first-generation and new lawyer, my first reaction was always severe disappointment.
Names are important. They carry deep personal, cultural, and familial connections, and are a significant part of our identities. I have had experiences in the legal field where, unfortunately, people either consistently butcher my name or don’t even acknowledge me by name. Both are extremely hurtful and disrespectful, and the latter is particularly so.
Learning how to properly pronounce someone’s name is something small that really makes a big, and positive, difference. In my experience, it makes me feel included and helps me connect with my peers; if someone consistently butchers or misspells my name in the workplace and doesn’t make an effort to learn the most basic thing about me, it’s difficult to build a meaningful relationship with that person.
Here is some helpful guidance on encountering names that are new to you:
-
Double check (or better yet, triple check!) the spelling of names; certain names (like mine) are consistently misspelled and misgendered, and taking a few seconds to double check and make sure you get it right will save the person on the receiving end some disappointment.
-
Be an ally! If you hear someone’s name being mispronounced, and you know that’s not the way it is pronounced, don’t be afraid to speak up and correct. I assure you, it means a lot (and it’s one less person that the person with that name needs to correct).
Soumya Venkateswaran
Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I preface these remarks by noting that I have only practiced law for one-and-a-half years. However, I have extensive experience as a diverse student, interviewee, networker, job applicant, and now, employee. I have seen how institutional and individual commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) determine whether this profession, indeed our country, lives up to its ideals of justice, fairness, and equality.
As mentioned, DEI can be achieved through institutional and individual means. I will focus on the individual level for two reasons. First, I believe each of us is responsible for ensuring that our profession looks like the world around us. It is all too easy to shirk our responsibilities when we believe someone else, some other entity, is doing the work. It is on all of us, you and I included. Second, the recent attacks on DEI make it all the more important that we redouble our efforts to ensure that our colleagues do not face invisible barriers, and in fact, are enabled to succeed.
Newly barred attorneys universally find that legal theory and legal practice are not the same thing. The former conceptually prepares us for the latter but as Mike Tyson said in 1987, everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth. This is true even if you went to the top trial advocacy school in the country like I did. (Go Owls!) It is no fault of any school that legal practice is simply a world unto itself.
What’s the solution? Make it a habit to fold us into your daily practice. For me, simply being included in strategy sessions, email chains, and court hearings has provided me with a wealth of knowledge and opportunities. I have been blessed to work in a space where the senior attorneys have thought to bring me along to observe, ask questions, and above all, try for myself.
What young associate is not hungry for opportunities to prove themselves and learn? What partner is not vigilant for opportunities to delegate, train, and expand their shop? Demand. Meet supply.
This is especially true for diverse, first-generation, and non-traditional lawyers. In just under two years, I have drafted successful dispositive motions, won at arbitration, deposed witnesses, participated in oral arguments, and more. How? Lawyers who came before me paid forward the generosity and mentorship afforded to them. They made it part of their job.
No committee or aspirational statement required. I was invited to observe, then I was invited to ask questions, and then I was encouraged to practice. As you read this now, there are underutilized, overlooked members of your team waiting to be called off the sidelines.
Ultimately, we must ask ourselves: what makes DEI a worthy goal? To my mind, the objectives of DEI -- expanding opportunities and removing barriers – are part of our civic duty to create a more perfect union. We as attorneys, as agents for change, must strive to realize this goal. It starts with us.
David J. Carcamo
Tucker Law Group, LLC
