Staff Reports
Students at Southern Illinois University’s Simmons Law School were reportedly told they must attend mandatory DEI training — or face a formal “letter of reprimand” placed in their permanent school file and possibly shared with bar character-and-fitness reviewers. The claim comes from FOIA documents released by an advocacy group and now sits squarely in the middle of the national fight over DEI in legal education.
What the FOIA documents say — and why it matters
The records, obtained and publicized by Defending Education and reported by national outlets, show an associate dean telling a student that missing a required DEI session typically triggers make-up work and, if that is not completed, “we typically issue a letter of reprimand” that goes in the student’s permanent file and “would be shared with the bar” if requested. Training slides also reportedly framed bullying as disproportionately affecting “traditionally underrepresented groups” and said “lawyers of color were bullied more often than white lawyers.”
Coercion dressed up as compliance
Let’s call this what it is: coercion. Threatening a letter in a student’s permanent file — and hinting it could be seen by bar examiners — is a blunt way to shut down dissent. Law school should teach students to think, argue, and defend clients. It should not weaponize disciplinary files to enforce attendance at a politically charged training. If a student skips a seminar because they object to its content, threatening their future bar prospects is beyond heavy-handed; it’s a moral hazard for legal education.
Why this fits into the bigger fight over law-school DEI
The FOIA disclosure lands right when the American Bar Association and federal regulators are rethinking how much power schools should have to impose DEI requirements. The ABA’s recent move to curb or revise its diversity standard has stirred debate about whether law schools should have the authority to compel ideological conformity. If accreditor policy is up for review, incidents like this should be central to the conversation — not dismissed as isolated paperwork.
Southern Illinois University and Simmons Law owe students a clear answer: explain the scope of any policy that can create a record in a student’s file and whether that record is routinely passed to character-and-fitness evaluators. State bar officials should also clarify how such reprimands are treated. Law schools are meant to prepare advocates for the rule of law, not audition for thought-policing. If the goal is stronger lawyers, start with academic freedom, not threats in a student’s permanent file.
