Download Electronic Version - UDC Law Review

MILLENNIUM SHOWDOWN FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LAW 23
lence and inaction from public interest advocates purporting to facilitate equal
access. There are well-rehearsed justifications and protocols that document this
caliber of system failure. There is no intent to discriminate. 179 Hiring processes
end with a selection of the strongest candidate. Blacks and other racial minorities
are actively recruited, and the institution enjoys greater diversity than many other
organizations. The institution's unique staffing and public interest orientation are
hallmarks of meeting the very challenge that society has failed miserably to undertake.
No selection should ever involve the color of the candidate's skin.Iso
There is no diversity plan or written statement of institutional hiring goals.
There is no discussion of diversity and, to the extent that community members
raise concerns about diversity, there is neither the will nor forum in which to
pursue resolution of such concerns. Racism is a problem of the past. To the extent
that community members believe their experiences to be race tainted, future efforts
will address those concerns. The roster of minorities who support the effort
is proof that discrimination does not flourish here. No one can prove that there is
discrimination here. There is nothing to do about it ... next time. It won't happen
again.
Silence and inaction are deliberate. Faculty and administrators interact in real
time. People vote to hire or recommend hiring. Individuals knowledgeable of the
institution's history abstain from any movement that would alter the status quo.
They evaluate faculty, student and staff reports of institutional hostility and determine
that the concern is not sufficient, serious enough, advanced soon enough
to influence present decision-making. Individuals consult and withhold cooperation
in the vain expectation of acquiring or maintaining political muscle within
existing paradigms. Where the stated mission embraces equal access, a choice for
personal comfort is most often a choice to protect white expectancy and dominance.
White discretionary decision making, e.g., performance evaluation, hiring,
lending, servicing students reflects racial bias. 1St Even if one could convincingly
argue that such incidents are unconscious, the outcome favoring or advantaging
whites speaks for itself. When combined with instances of electing personal or
group comfort over mission and institution building, stakeholders conspire to
protect the dominance of white values and a system of advantaging whites.
In living organisms, the absence of challenge or resistance leads to weakened
capacity. Without consistent effort, institutions develop neither the resources nor
the reputation for providing the nurturing, safe environment consistent with
equal educational access. Silence and inaction become even more dangerous
when regulatory schemes, accreditation standards and affirmative action case rulings
are used as justifications for silence and inaction. The litmus test for un-
179 Flagg, supra note 135, at 968.
180 Id.
181 Flagg, supra note 135, at 983-85.