IILP Review 2017: The State of Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession © 2017 Institute for Inclusion in the Legal Profession All rights reserved. IILP Review 2017: The State of Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession IILP Review 2017 •••• 1 Editorial Board Editor-in-Chief Elizabeth Chambliss Editorial Board Brian W. Duwe Sharon E. Jones Philip Lee Sandra S. Yamate Articles Editors Joseph Giordano Gabriella Tringali Editorial Assistants Hannah Kelly Sarah Miller The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author of each article or essay and not necessarily those of the Institute for Inclusion in the Legal Profession or the employer of any author. Any individuals who may be quoted in specific articles and who are identified in connection with their employer are not representing the views, opinions, or positions of their employer unless that representation is specifically noted. 2 •••• IILP Review 2017 Table of Contents 8 Letter from the Chair 9 Letter from the Editor-in-Chief 10 Letter from The Claro Group 11 About IILP 11 About the IILP Review: The State of Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession The State of Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession 13 The Demographics of the Profession by Elizabeth Chambliss Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession: Current Challenges 39 The Association of Legal Administrators Diversity Toolkit by The Association of Legal Administrators 52 Changing the Landscape of the Legal Profession Globally: The Development of a Culturally Sensitive Diversity and Inclusion Pipeline by Gretchen Bellamy 56 The Undocumented JD: The Changing Landscape of Admissibility to the Bar for Undocumented Immigrants by Colette A. Brown IILP Review 2017 •••• 3 Table of Contents 62 An Innovative Approach to Hiring Lawyers: One Firm’s New Program Reflects Its Firm Values and Eliminates Implicit Bias by Lisa A. Brown 66 The Scientific Basis for the Ethical Obligation to Require Action to Eliminate Bias and Promote Diversity in the Legal Profession by David L. Douglass 72 Focus on the “How” (not the “Why”) of the Commitment to Diversity in the Legal Profession by Stacy Hawkins 86 Diversity and Inclusion: Transformative Steps to a More Inclusive Profession by Sharon E. Jones 93 Erase the Lines … We’re All in This Together by Sidney K. Kanazawa 100 Mentoring Law Students: A Theoretical Frame and Praxis by Melinda S. Molina 105 From Bystanders to Upstanders: Amplifying Diversity Efforts Through Action by Meredith Moore and Drew Gulley 112 An Empirical Analysis of Diversity in the Legal Profession by Jason P. Nance and Paul E. Madsen 119 On a Mission to Bring “True Diversity” to the Field of Law by Leon B. Silver 4 •••• IILP Review 2017 124 Corporate Lawyers and Diversity Discourse by Cheryl L. Wade 132 Diversity of Talent: Maximizing Diversity of Thought, Minimizing the Use of Problematic Heuristics by Lisa Webley and Liz Duff Gender Diversity and Inclusion Issues in the Legal Profession 137 Rising to the Challenge: How the NAWL Challenge Club is Helping Corporations and Law Firms Advance Women in the Profession by Angela Beranek Brandt and Alan Bryan 142 The Next Generation of Women's Diversity Initiatives by Margo Wolf O’Donnell and Marcia Owens Racial and Ethnic Diversity and Inclusion Issues in the Legal Profession 149 Looking Back to Push Forward: An Overview of Asian American Involvement in the Civil Rights Movement by Brandon R. Mita 160 The Rise of the Uniform Bar Exam: Considerations for the Diversity Pipeline and Indian Law by Lauren van Schilfgaarde and Kori Cordero 171 Filipinos on the Bench: Challenges and Solutions for Today and Tomorrow’s Generations by Serafin Tagarao, Edward Dailo, and Christine J. Gonong 180 The Way to Stop Discrimination on the Basis of Race… By Ronald Turner IILP Review 2017 •••• 5 Table of Contents Disability Diversity and Inclusion Issues in the Legal Profession 191 Disability Diversity: A Primer for the Legal Profession By Sarah Babineau and Jason Goitia 199 Attorneys with Disabilities: Shedding Light on the Invisible Element of Diversity by Angela Winfield LGBT Diversity and Inclusion Issues in the Legal Profession 205 LGBT Equality in the Legal Sector: A View from the United Kingdom by Daniel K. Winterfeldt, and Eilidh Douglas 212 Thirty Years of Progress, Far from Perfection: The LGBT Experience in the Legal Industry from the 1980s to the Present by Brian J. Winterfeldt, Sherry L. Jetter, Timothy C. D’Arduini, and Emily D. Murray The Intersection of Diversity and Inclusion Issues in the Legal Profession 219 Latina Lawyers - Still Too Few and Far Between: The Hispanic National Bar Association Latina Commission’s Efforts to Chart a More Open Path by Jill Lynch Cruz 226 A Qualitative Study of the Lived Experiences of Black Women Equity Partners in Elite Law Firms by Keith H. Earley 237 Barring Black Men: Character and Fitness and the Underrepresentation of Black Men in the Legal Profession by Jay E. Mitchell 6 •••• IILP Review 2017 246 Expanding the Pie: A New Approach to Big Law’s Never-Ending Diversity Problem by Tiffany R. Harper and Chasity A. Boyce 250 South Asian American Women Lawyers: Supporting Each Other by Mona Mehta Stone 268 About the Authors 296 Practice Round-Up 314 IILP Board of Directors 315 IILP Advisory Board 316 Partners, Allies, Supporters, and Friends 320 Acknowledgements IILP Review 2017 •••• 7 January, 2017 Dear Colleagues, The Institute for Inclusion in the Legal Profession (IILP) is proud to present the IILP Review 2017: The State of Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession. Our fourth Review once again presents important data and analytics on the state of diversity and inclusion in the legal profession. Its original articles contribute to our continuing search for innovative approaches in this area. The IILP Reviews are an important platform for the advancement of real, meaningful change. I am pleased to hear that many of you consider them an informative and valuable tool. This would not be possible without the contributions of their many authors and editors, whose hard work and dedication to IILP’s mission deserve our gratitude and the highest compliments. I also thank our Visionaries, Partners and Allies for their indispensable support and encouragement throughout our eight years of existence. With best wishes, Marc S. Firestone Chair Institute for Inclusion in the Legal Profession 8 •••• IILP Review 2017 January, 2017 Dear Readers, The Institute for Inclusion in the Legal Profession (IILP) is proud to present the 2017 edition of the IILP Review: The State of Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession. The IILP Review brings together a statistical summary of recent demographic data, thought pieces exploring diversity issues in a wide range of professional contexts, and a roundup of initiatives by law firms, corporations, law schools, bar associations, and government—all in an accessible, readable format. Our goal is make it easier for busy lawyers, judges, law professors, students, employers, and diversity professionals to keep abreast of thinking and research related to diversity and inclusion in the profession and to provide momentum—and a regular venue—for addressing the continuing challenges that we face. This year’s IILP Review includes contributions from over 40 people at the forefront of thinking and practice in the field, as well as reports and roundups from an impressive array of professional and practice organizations. We are delighted to present such a comprehensive sampling of this important work and welcome the continued development of both the content and format of the review. In particular, we hope to stimulate both large-scale and small-scale data collection and reporting by employers, diversity professionals, bar associations, and research institutions, so that we might better assess our progress toward greater integration and inclusion within the profession. We hope that you find the 2017 IILP Review useful and informative, and that you will consider contributing to a future issue of the IILP Review. Elizabeth Chambliss Editor-in-Chief IILP Review 2017 •••• 9 Dear Participant: The Claro Group is pleased and heartened to announce that we will be continuing our relationship with IILP for yet another year. In ever-expanding global economies, it seems inevitable that inclusion of new or varied perspectives is not only necessary, but critical to the successful growth of any industry. In order to flourish, companies MUST embrace diversity and inclusion as key business imperatives. Research shows diversity and inclusion increase the richness of ideas and problem solving abilities. A diverse mix of voices leads to dynamic discussions and better decisions. We need to commit to questioning our own beliefs and assumptions to help cultivate flexible and reflective thinking. Being a member of a professional services firm working closely with the legal industry, we at Claro recognize the importance of acting as a champion of inclusion and will continue to seek to work with firms with whom these values are aligned. While stalwarts of some perceived tradition may remain unchanged, even in the face of the evidentiary benefits of diversity and inclusion, we can all do our part to encourage the promulgation of these tenets, and work to ensure the most-timely end to antiquated traditions. We, again, look forward to working with this outstanding and collaborative body that has its eye on the future, and through which progress is being driven. Sincerely, Michelle Uddin Managing Director The Claro Group, LLC ● 321 North Clark Street ● Suite 1200 ● Chicago, IL 60654 10 •••• IILP Review 2017 Tel 312.546.3400 Fax 312.554.8085 About IILP The Institute for Inclusion in the Legal Profession (“IILP”) is a 501 (c) (3) organization that believes that the legal profession must be diverse and inclusive. Through its programs, projects, research, and collaborations, it seeks real change, now, and offers a new model of inclusion to achieve it. IILP asks the hard questions, gets the data, talks about what is really on people’s minds, no matter how sensitive, and invents and tests methodologies that will lead to change. For more information about IILP, visit www.TheIILP.com. About the IILP Review: The State of Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession The IILP Review features the most current data about the state of diversity in the legal profession. The Review features compelling essays that explore the nuances and important subtleties at play in regard to diversity and inclusion for lawyers, along with current research from academic experts. As such, the Review brings together insights on programs and strategies to address diversity generally and in regard to the different challenges that different people face in reaching the law. The depth and breadth of diversity and inclusion efforts makes it hard to keep abreast of the most current information about our progress or lack thereof. Furthermore, as notions of diversity and inclusion have expanded and evolved, it’s even more difficult to stay current with the latest thinking. The IILP Review: The State of Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession addresses that challenge by making information about diversity and inclusion more readily and easily accessible. If you are interested in submitting an article for a future edition of the “IILP Review: The State of Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession,” please visit www.TheIILP.com for more information and to download the Call for Papers IILP Review 2017 •••• 11 IILP Review 2017: The State of Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession 12 •••• IILP Review 2017 Demographic Summary Elizabeth Chambliss Professor of Law and Director, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough Center on Professionalism, University of South Carolina Law School An executive summary of the most current demographic data on the legal profession T he Institute for Inclusion in the Legal Profession (IILP) was created in 2009 to promote demographic and cultural diversity and inclusion in the U.S. legal profession. As part of this effort, the IILP Review publishes an annual statistical summary regarding the status of traditionally underrepresented groups within the profession. Such data are critical for assessing the profession’s progress toward greater diversity and inclusion. This summary takes stock of the profession’s progress as of September, 2016. Its goal is to provide a current, comprehensive picture of the demographics of the profession and to use this information to help the profession set an agenda for effective future action. The summary is based on a review of academic, government, professional, and popular data sources. Most sources focus primarily on providing racial and ethnic data, or data about gender and minority1 representation, and these emphases are reflected below. Where available, however, the summary also includes data about the representation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) lawyers, lawyers with disabilities, and other demographic categories relevant to diversity and inclusion, broadly defined. One goal of the IILP Review is to promote the systematic collection of a wide range of demographic data. The main findings of the 2016 demographic summary are as follows: GENDER • Female representation among lawyers stood at 34.5% in 2015, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (see Table 1); and at 36% in 2016, according to the American Bar Association National Lawyer Population Survey (see Table 2). In 2010, female representation among lawyers was about 31% (see Tables 1 and 2). • Women’s representation among lawyers is higher than their representation in some other professions, including software developers (17.9%), architects (25.7%), civil engineers (12.6%), and clergy (20.6%) (see Table 3). Women’s representation among lawyers is lower than their representation among financial managers (49.6%), accountants and auditors (59.7%), physical scientists (41.4%), and post-secondary teachers (46.5%); and significantly lower than their representation within the professional workforce as a whole (57.2%) (see Table 3). • Women continue to be underrepresented in top-level jobs within the legal profession, such as law firm partner. In 2015, women made up only 21.5% of law firm partners (see Table 13)—and only 17.4% of equity partners (see Table 16). Minority women, especially, are underrepresented among law firm partners. In 2015, minority women made up only 2.6% of law partners 1.The term “minority” typically is used to refer to aggregated data about African Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans, although there are variations from source to source. Unless otherwise noted, we follow the categories used in the original source and provide definitions in the footnotes. IILP Review 2017 •••• 13 nationally (see Table 13), and even this figure is skewed upward by a few standout cities, such as Miami (8.2%), Los Angeles (4.9%), San Jose (4.6%), and San Francisco (4.3%) (see Table 19). In many other cities, minority women’s representation among partners is less than 2% (see Table 19). Women’s representation among judges also has dropped from a peak of 56.7% in 2004 to 39% in 2015 (see Table 22). • Women’s entry into the profession has slowed. After peaking in the early 2000s at about 49%, female representation among law students has dropped to 47%, according to the most recent aggregate data (see Table 4). Women’s entry into private practice, in particular, has dropped. In 2003, 58.8% of white female and 53.9% of minority female law graduates began their careers in private practice, compared to less than 50% in 2014 (see Table 7). In 2015, women’s representation among law firm associates was 44.7%, the lowest point since the recession (see Table 13). Although all groups’ entry into private practice has dropped since the recession, women’s declining representation among associates represents a reversal of previous gains. • Some bright spots: women’s representation among in-house lawyers has increased. The Association of Corporate Counsel’s 2015 global census found that women make up 49.5% of all in-house lawyers, including both entry-level and senior positions (see Table 20). Women also make up a growing percentage of law school deans and tenured law faculty. In 2013, 28.7% of law deans and 32.7% of tenured law faculty were women (see Table 25). RACE/ETHNICITY • Aggregate minority representation among U.S. lawyers stood at 14.5% in 2015, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (see Table 1). This represents a drop from a high of 15.7% in 2014; however, these data appear somewhat noisy, with significant year-to-year fluctuations. Based on three-year (unweighted) averages, aggregate minority representation among lawyers has increased from 10.5% in 2003-05 to 14.8% in 2013-15 (see Table 1). • Progress for different groups varies. African American representation among lawyers has increased very little over the past ten years, from an average of 4.3% in 2003-05 to an average of 4.8% in 2013-2015 (see Table 1). During the same period, Hispanic representation among lawyers increased from an average of 3.6% to an average of 5.3%, and Asian American representation among lawyers increased from an average of 2.6% to an average of 4.8% (see Table 1). Thus, while African Americans historically have been the best-represented minority group among lawyers, this pattern has changed. In 2015, African American representation among lawyers was 4.6%, compared to 5.1% for Hispanics and 4.8% for Asian Americans (see Table 1). • Aggregate minority representation among lawyers is significantly lower than minority representation in most other management and professional jobs. In 2015, minority representation among lawyers was 14.5%, compared to 24.5% among financial managers, 28.2% among accountants and auditors, 44.2% among software developers, 31.2% among physicians and surgeons, and 27.3% within the professional labor force as a whole (see Table 3). Moreover, “legal occupations” collectively have the lowest level of minority representation of any subcategory of “management, professional, and related occupations,” including those not reported here. Although these figures, too, can be noisy, this unhappy comparison is consistent with patterns from prior years. 14 •••• IILP Review 2017 Minority representation among law firm partners remains stubbornly low. • The pace of African American entry into the profession has remained steady since 2009, with about 10,000 African American students enrolled in law school each year, according to data from the American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar (see Table 6). Moreover, as overall law school enrollment has dropped, African American representation among law students has increased, from 7% in 2009-10 to 8% in 2013-14—an all-time high. Hispanic representation among law students also has increased in both absolute and relative terms, from 6.7% in 2009-10 to 8.7% in 2013-14 (see Table 6). As a result, aggregate minority representation among law students increased from 22.3% in 2009-10 to 26.9% in 201314 (see Table 4). • Meanwhile, Asian American enrollment in law school has dropped in both absolute and relative terms, from a high of 11,000-plus students (8%) in the mid-2000s to 8,696 students (6.8%) in 2013-14. Native American enrollment also has dropped, from a high of 1,273 in 200910 to 1,065 in 2013-14 (see Table 6). • Initial employment patterns continue to differ between racial and ethnic groups, according to data from the National Association of Law Placement (NALP). African Americans are significantly less likely than other groups to start off in private practice, and more likely to start off in business or government. In 2014, only 37.4% of African American law graduates were initially employed in private practice, compared to 53.5% of Hispanic graduates, 55.6% of Asian American graduates, 46.6% of Native American graduates, and 51.4% of white graduates (see Table 8). In 2015, African Americans made up only 4% of associates in U.S. law firms, down from 4.7% in 2009 (see Table 14). Much of the drop appears to reflect the departure of African American women from law firms. In 2015, African American women made up only 2.3% of law firm associates, compared to 2.9% in 2009 (see Table 14). • Asian Americans are the most likely group to enter private practice (see Table 8). In 2014, Asian Americans made up 10.9% of associates in law firms (see Table 14). Notably, a majority of Asian American associates are women (see Table 14). Asian Americans also make up 2.9% of law partners, up from 2.2% in 2009 (see Table 15). Hispanics, too, have made gains within law firms, comprising 4.3% of associates (see Table 14) and 2.2% of partners (see Table 15) in 2015. • Despite this progress, minority representation among law firm partners remains stubbornly low. In 2015, minorities made up only 7.5% of all partners (see Table 13) and only 5.6% of equity partners (see Table 16). IILP Review 2017 •••• 15 • Since the recession, law graduates’ entry into business and public interest jobs has increased. In 2014, 24.2% of white graduates and 28.8% of minority graduates started off in business or public interest jobs, a significant increase from prior years (see Table 7). Among minorities, African Americans are the most likely to start off in business (23.2%) and Hispanics are the least likely (15.7%) (see Table 8). Hispanics (11.6%) and Native Americans (11.5%) are the most likely to start off in public interest jobs (see Table 8); and minority women are more likely to do so than minority men. In 2014, 11.2% of minority women began their careers in public interest positions, compared to 8.5% of white women, 6.8% of minority men, and 4.9% of white men (see Table 7). • Among all groups, the percentage of law graduates who start off in government has dropped in recent years, as has the percentage of graduates with judicial clerkships (see Tables 7 and 8). The percentage of minority graduates with judicial clerkships, in particular, has dropped, from 10.2% in 1998 to 6.5% in 2014 (see Table 7). Minority men (see Table 7) and Hispanics (see Table 8) are the least likely to begin their careers with a judicial clerkship. • Based on the limited data available for different employment settings, African American representation is highest among federal government attorneys (8.7% in 2010, see Table 21) and in law schools (see Table 26); Hispanic representation is highest among in-house lawyers (5% in 2015, see Table 20) and tenure-track faculty (6.4% in 2013, see Table 26); and Asian American representation is highest among law firm associates (10.9% in 2015, see Table 14) and tenuretrack faculty (8.5% in 2013, see Table 26). • Minority representation among judges is difficult to assess because of yearly fluctuations in the Bureau of Labor Statistics data. In 2015, the Bureau reported that 23.5% of U.S. judges were minorities—and 6.2% were Asian American, the highest percentage ever reported (see Table 22). Meanwhile, federal judges have become more racially and ethnically diverse under President Obama: 36.8% of his judicial appointments were minorities (121 of 329) compared to 17.7% (58 of 327) under President George Bush (see Table 24). DISABILITY • The initial employment of lawyers with disabilities varies from year to year, due in part to the small number of lawyers in the sample (491 in 2014) and, perhaps, the diversity of law graduates in this category. In general, however, the percentage of graduates with disabilities who start off in private practice has declined in recent years, whereas the percentage who start off in business or public interest has increased, consistent with other groups. In 2014, 42.2% of law graduates with disabilities started off in private practice, down from to 48.1% in 2010; whereas 32% started off in business or public interest, compared to 25% in 2010 (see Table 9). Judicial clerkship rates for graduates with disabilities also have dropped from 10.8% in 2010 to 9.4% in 2014—although the 2014 figure represents a rebound from 2013 (see Table 9). • The representation of lawyers with disabilities in law firms has eked up slightly among associates, from 0.2% in 2009 to 0.3% in 2014, but remained flat at 0.3% among partners (see Table 18). More data are needed to place these figures in perspective, including data from other employment settings and occupations. • Unlike his predecessors, President Obama appointed no federal judges with disabilities (see Table 24). 16 •••• IILP Review 2017 LGBT • Law graduates identifying as LGB are less likely than most other groups to start off in private practice and more likely to start off in public interest jobs. In 2014, 15.9% of the 529 law graduates identifying as LGB took public interest jobs—the highest percentage of any demographic group (see Table 10). • Despite this, the representation of LGBT lawyers in law firms has been steadily inching upward since NALP began compiling these data. In 2015, 3.1% of associates and 1.8% of partners identified as LGBT, up from 2.3% and 1.4%, respectively, in 2009 (see Table 17). • President Obama has appointed 11 LGBT judges—3.3% of his total appointments (see Table 24). LACK OF DATA • Tracking the profession’s progress toward diversity and inclusion is made difficult by the continuing lack of data. For instance, there are no recent data on the distribution of lawyers by type of employment, beyond initial employment. The most recent figures, covering only gender, are from 2005 (see Tables 11 and 12). Outside of law firms, the profession lacks even basic gender and racial/ethnic breakdowns by employment category, not to mention more detailed breakdowns by title, seniority and region; or more inclusive efforts covering sexual orientation and disability status. Moreover, some previous sources of demographic data on the profession have changed or dried up, such as the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, which has stopped publishing aggregate data on the demographics of law students and faculty (see Tables 4-6 and 25-26), and the Office of Personnel Management, whose most recent demographic profile of the federal workforce was in 2010 (see Table 21). More robust statistics on the demographics of the legal profession are sorely needed. • Gathering systematic data on diversity and inclusion in the profession requires a sustained commitment by the entire profession, including bar associations, employers, law schools, and research institutions. Contributing to this effort is a chief goal of the IILP Review. The representation of LGBT lawyers in law firms has been steadily inching upward. IILP Review 2017 •••• 17 Table 1 - U.S. Lawyers by Gender and Race/Ethnicity (BLS)1 Lawyers Female Af Am. Hisp. As Am. Minority 1995 894,000 26.4% 3.6 2.2 1996 880,000 29.5 3.5 2.8 1997 885,000 26.6 2.7 3.8 1998 912,000 28.5 4.0 3.0 1999 923,000 28.8 5.1 4.0 2002 929,000 29.2 4.6 3.1 2003 952,000 27.6 3.6 4.0 2.8 10.4 2004 954,000 29.4 4.7 3.4 2.9 10.9 2005 961,000 30.2 4.7 3.5 2.0 10.2 2006 965,000 32.6 5.0 3.0 2.9 10.9 2007 1,001,000 32.6 4.9 4.3 2.6 11.8 2008 1,014,000 31.4 4.6 3.8 2.9 11.3 2009 1,043,000 32.4 4.7 2.8 4.1 11.6 2010 1,040,000 31.5 4.3 3.4 3.4 13.1 2011 1,085,000 31.9 5.3 3.2 4.2 12.7 2012 1,061,000 31.1 4.4 4.0 4.3 12.7 2013 1,092,000 33.1 4.2 5.1 5.1 14.4 2014 1,132,000 32.9 5.7 5.6 4.4 15.7 2015 1,160,000 34.5 4.6 5.1 4.8 14.5 1. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table 11: Employed Persons by Detailed Occupation, Sex, Race, and Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity, U.S. Dep’t of Labor, http://www.bls.gov/cps/tables.htm (follow links for individual years and scroll down to “Characteristics of the Employed,” Table 11). Figures for 2000 and 2001 are not available. See Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey, 1995–1999 Annual Averages - Household Data - Tables from Employment and Earnings, U.S. Dep’t of Labor, http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_aa1995_1999.htm. Figures for minorities are derived from aggregating the minority categories listed. Table 2 - U.S. Lawyers by Gender (ABA)2 Lawyers Female (%) 2000 1,022,462 28.0% 2005 1,104,766 29.0 2010 1,203,097 31.0 2016 1,315,561 36.0 2. ABA National Lawyer Population Survey, Historical Trend in Total National Lawyer Population 1878-2016, Am. Bar Ass’n, http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/market_research/total-national-lawyer-population-1878-2016.authcheckdam.pdf (for total number of lawyers); ABA Lawyer Demographics, Year 2016 (Gender), Am. Bar Ass’n, http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/market_research/lawyer-demographicstables-2016.authcheckdam.pdf (for percent female). 18 •••• IILP Review 2017 Table 3 - Selected U.S. Occupations by Gender and Race/Ethnicity (2015)3 Total Employed Civilian Labor Force 148,834,000 Female 46.8% Af Am. Hisp. As Am. Minority 11.7 16.4 5.8 33.9 16,994,000 39.2 7.3 9.7 5.6 22.6 Chief Executives 1,517,000 27.9 3.6 5.5 4.7 13.8 Financial Managers 1,197,000 49.6 7.2 9.4 7.9 24.5 7,114,000 54.3 10.3 8.8 7.9 27.0 1,732,000 59.7 9.5 7.4 11.3 28.2 662,000 74.0 15.4 10.7 4.9 31.0 4,369,000 24.7 8.6 6.8 19.9 35.3 552,000 34.2 9.6 6.9 19.6 36.1 1,353,000 17.9 5.0 5.4 33.8 44.2 2,954,000 15.1 6.0 8.2 11.4 25.6 Architects 203,000 25.7 5.8 5.7 7.6 19.1 Civil Engineers 360,000 12.6 3.6 9.0 10.2 22.8 1,404,000 46.6 6.1 7.0 14.5 27.6 Physical Scientists 232,000 41.4 4.4 6.2 23.9 34.5 Psychologists 193,000 70.3 4.1 5.8 2.5 12.4 2,596,000 65.3 17.4 10.7 3.6 31.7 Counselors 802,000 71.4 18.4 9.5 2.5 30.4 Clergy 469,000 20.6 10.2 7.3 6.6 24.1 Lawyers 1,160,000 34.5 4.6 5.1 4.8 14.5 58,000 39.0 11.8 6.4 6.2 24.4 400,000 85.4 10.3 13.4 3.9 27.6 Management Occupations Business and Finance Accountants/Auditors Human Resources Workers All Computer/Mathematical Computer Systems Analysts Software Developers All Architecture/Engineering Life/Physical/Social Sciences All Community/Social Services Judges/Magistrates Paralegals/Legal Assistants 8,908,000 73.4 10.4 9.9 4.5 24.8 Postsecondary Teachers 1,341,000 46.5 5.1 7.6 12.6 25.3 Secondary School Teachers 1,144,000 59.2 8.7 7.8 2.5 19.0 Healthcare Practitioners 8,766,000 75.1 11.5 8.1 9.2 28.8 Physicians/Surgeons 1,007,000 37.9 6.4 6.4 18.4 31.2 Registered Nurses 2,973,000 89.4 12.2 6.6 8.7 27.5 33,852,000 57.2 9.8 8.8 8.7 27.3 Education All Professional/Related Occupations 3. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table 11: Employed Persons by Detailed Occupation, Sex, Race, and Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity, U.S. Dep’t of Labor (2015), http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.pdf. Figures for minorities are derived from aggregating the minority categories listed. IILP Review 2017 •••• 19 Table 4 - Law School Enrollment by Gender and Minority Status4 Total Female (%) Minority (%) 1976-77 112,401 29,343 (26.1) 9,589 (8.5) 1977-78 113,080 31,650 (28.0) 9,580 (8.5) 1978-79 116,150 35,775 (30.8) 9,952 (8.6) 1979-80 117,297 37,534 (32.0) 10,013 (8.5) 1980-81 119,501 40,834 (34.2) 10,575 (8.8) 1981-82 120,879 43,245 (35.8) 11,134 (9.2) 1982-83 121,791 45,539 (37.4) 11,611 (9.5) 1983-84 121,201 46,361 (38.2) 11,866 (9.8) 1984-85 119,847 46,897 (39.1) 11,917 (9.9) 1985-86 118,700 47,486 (40.0) 12,357 (10.4) 1986-87 117,813 47,920 (40.7) 12,550 (10.7) 1987-88 117,997 48,920 (41.5) 13,250 (11.2) 1988-89 120,694 50,932 (42.2) 14,295 (11.8) 1989-90 124,471 53,113 (42.7) 15,720 (12.6) 1990-91 127,261 54,097 (42.5) 17,330 (13.6) 1991-92 129,580 55,110 (42.5) 19,410 (15.0) 1992-93 128,212 54,644 (42.6) 21,266 (16.6) 1993-94 127,802 55,134 (43.1) 22,799 (17.8) 1994-95 128,989 55,808 (43.3) 24,611 (19.1) 1995-96 129,397 56,961 (44.0) 25,554 (19.7) 1996-97 128,623 57,123 (44.4) 25,279 (19.7) 1997-98 125,886 56,915 (45.2) 24,685 (19.6) 1998-99 125,627 57,952 (46.1) 25,266 (20.1) 1999-00 125,184 59,362 (47.4) 25,253 (20.2) 2000-01 125,173 60,633 (48.4) 25,753 (20.6) 2001-02 127,610 62,476 (49.0) 26,257 (20.6) 2002-03 132,885 65,179 (49.0) 27,175 (20.5) 2003-04 137,676 67,027 (48.7) 28,325 (20.6) 2004-05 140,376 67,438 (48.0) 29,489 (21.0) 2005-06 140,298 66,613 (47.5) 29,768 (21.2) 2006-07 141,031 66,085 (46.9) 30,557 (21.6) 2007-08 141,719 66,196 (46.7) 30,657 (21.6) 2008-09 142,922 66,968 (46.9) 31,368 (21.9) 2009-10 145,239 68,502 (47.2) 32,505 (22.3) 2010-11 147,525 69,009 (46.8) 35,045 (23.8) 2011-12 146,288 68,262 (46.7) 35,859 (24.7) 2012-13 139,055 65,387 (47.0) 35,914 (25.8) 2013-14 128,712 34,584 (26.9) 4. A.B.A. Sec. of Legal Educ. & Admissions to the B., Enrollment and Degrees Awarded, A.B.A. (2013), http://www.americanbar. org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_education_and_admissions_to_the_bar/statistics/enrollment_degrees_awarded. authcheckdam.pdf (for data on female enrollment) (aggregate figures for 2013-14 and later years are not available); A.B.A. Sec. of Legal Educ. & Admissions to the B., Statistics: Ethnic/Gender Data: Longitudinal Charts, First Year & Total JD Minority, A.B.A., http:// www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/resources/statistics.html (scroll down and click “First Year & Total JD Minority”) (for data on minority enrollment) (aggregate figures for 2014-15 and later years are not available). Some figures differ slightly from those previously reported by the ABA. 20 •••• IILP Review 2017 Table 5 - JDs Awarded by Gender and Minority Status5 Total Female (%) Minority (%) 1983-84 36,687 13,586 (37.0) 3,169 (8.6) 1984-85 36,829 14,119 (38.3) 3,150 (8.6) 1985-86 36,121 13,980 (38.7) 3,348 (9.3) 1986-87 35,478 14,206 (40.0) 3,450 (9.7) 1987-88 35,701 14,595 (40.9) 3,516 (9.8) 1988-89 35,520 14,553 (41.0) 3,809 (10.7) 1989-90 36,385 15,345 (42.2) 4,128 (11.3) 1990-91 38,800 16,580 (42.7) 4,585 (11.8) 1991-92 39,425 16,680 (42.3) 4,976 (12.6) 1992-93 40,213 16,972 (42.2) 5,653 (14.1) 1993-94 39,710 16,997 (42.8) 6,099 (15.4) 1994-95 39,191 16,790 (42.8) 6,802 (17.4) 1995-96 39,920 17,366 (43.5) 7,152 (17.9) 1996-97 40,114 17,552 (43.8) 7,611 (19.0) 1997-98 39,455 17,662 (44.8) 7,754 (19.7) 1998-99 39,071 17,516 (44.8) 7,532 (19.3) 1999-00 38,157 17,713 (46.4) 7,391 (19.4) 2000-01 37,909 18,006 (47.5) 7,443 (19.6) 2001-02 38,576 18,644 (48.3) 7,780 (20.2) 2002-03 38,863 19,133 (49.2) 8,233 (21.2) 2003-04 40,018 19,818 (49.5) 8,367 (20.9) 2004-05 42,673 20,804 (48.8) 9,568 (22.4) 2005-06 43,883 21,074 (48.0) 9,564 (21.8) 2006-07 43,518 20,669 (47.5) 9,820 (22.5) 2007-08 43,588 20,537 (47.1) 9,631 (22.0) 2008-09 44,004 20,191 (45.9) 9,725 (22.1) 2009-10 44,258 20,852 (47.1) 10,121 (22.9) 2010-11 44,495 21,043 (47.3) 10,748 (24.2) 2011-12 46,478 11,188 (24.1) 2012-13 46,763 11,951 (25.5) 5. A.B.A. Sec. of Legal Educ. & Admissions to the B., Statistics: Degrees Awarded: Longitudinal Charts, JD & LLB, A.B.A., http://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/resources/statistics.html (scroll down and click “JD & LLB”) (for gender data) (aggregate figures for 2011-12 and later years are not available); A.B.A. Sec. of Legal Educ. & Admissions to the B., Statistics: Degrees Awarded: Longitudinal Charts, Totals and Minority Students, A.B.A., http://www.americanbar.org/ groups/legal_education/resources/statistics.html (for data on minorities) (aggregate figures for 2013-14 and later years are not available). Some figures differ slightly from those previously reported by the ABA. IILP Review 2017 •••• 21 Table 6 - Law School Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity6 Total Af Am. (%) Hisp. (%) As Am. (%) Na Am. (%) 1984-85 119,847 5,476 (4.6) 3,507 (2.9) 2,026 (1.7) 429 (0.4) 1985-86 118,700 5,669 (4.8) 3,679 (3.1) 2,153 (1.8) 463 (0.4) 1986-87 117,813 5,894 (5.0) 3,865 (3.3) 2,303 (2.0) 488 (0.4) 1987-88 117,997 6,028 (5.1) 4,074 (3.5) 2,656 (2.3) 492 (0.4) 1988-89 120,694 6,321 (5.2) 4,342 (3.6) 3,133 (2.6) 499 (0.4) 1989-90 124,471 6,791 (5.5) 4,733 (3.8) 3,676 (3.0) 527 (0.4) 1990-91 127,261 7,432 (5.8) 5,038 (4.0) 4,306 (3.4) 554 (0.4) 1991-92 129,580 8,149 (6.3) 5,541 (4.3) 5,028 (3.9) 692 (0.5) 1992-93 128,212 8,638 (6.7) 5,969 (4.7) 5,823 (4.5) 776 (0.6) 1993-94 127,802 9,156 (7.2) 6,312 (4.9) 6,458 (5.1) 873 (0.7) 1994-95 128,989 9,681 (7.5) 6,772 (5.3) 7,196 (5.6) 962 (0.7) 1995-96 129,397 9,779 (7.6) 6,970 (5.4) 7,719 (6.0) 1,085 (0.8) 1996-97 128,623 9,542 (7.4) 6,915 (5.4) 7,706 (6.0) 1,116 (0.9) 1997-98 125,886 9,132 (7.3) 6,869 (5.5) 7,599 (6.0) 1,085 (0.9) 1998-99 125,627 9,271 (7.4) 7,054 (5.6) 7,877 (6.3) 1,064 (0.8) 1999-00 125,184 9,272 (7.4) 7,120 (5.7) 7,883 (6.3) 978 (0.8) 2000-01 125,173 9,354 (7.5) 7,274 (5.8) 8,173 (6.5) 952 (0.8) 2001-02 127,610 9,412 (7.4) 7,434 (5.8) 8,421 (6.6) 990 (0.8) 2002-03 132,885 9,436 (7.1) 7,539 (5.7) 9,179 (6.9) 1,021 (0.8) 2003-04 137,676 9,437 (6.9) 7,814 (5.7) 10,042 (7.3) 1,048 (0.8) 2004-05 140,376 9,488 (6.8) 8,068 (5.7) 10,856 (7.6) 1,106 (0.8) 2005-06 140,298 9,126 (6.5) 8,248 (5.9) 11,252 (8.0) 1,142 (0.8) 2006-07 141,031 9,529 (6.8) 8,564 (6.1) 11,306 (8.0) 1,158 (0.8) 2007-08 141,719 9,483 (6.7) 8,782 (6.2) 11,176 (7.9) 1,216 (0.9) 2008-09 141,922 9,822 (6.9) 8,834 (6.2) 11,244 (7.9) 1,198 (0.8) 2009-10 145,239 10,173 (7.0) 9,732 (6.7) 11,327 (7.8) 1,273 (0.9) 2010-11 147,525 10,352 (7.0) 10,454 (7.1) 10,215 (6.9) 1,208 (0.8) 2011-12 145,288 10,452 (7.1) 11,027 (7.5) 10,415 (7.1) 1,165 (0.8) 2012-13 139,055 10,435 (7.5) 11,328 (8.1) 9,666 (7.0) 1,063 (0.8) 2013-14 128,712 10,241 (8.0) 11,215 (8.7) 8,696 (6.8) 1,065 (0.8) 6. A.B.A. Sec. of Legal Educ. & Admissions to the B., Statistics: Ethnic/Gender Data: Longitudinal Charts, Diversity Data 1988-1010, A.B.A., http://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/resources/statistics.html (scroll down and click “Diversity Data 1988-2010”) (for figures through 2009-10); A.B.A. Sec. of Legal Educ. & Admissions to the B., Statistics: Ethnic/Gender Data: Longitudinal Charts, Black or African American, A.B.A., http://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/resources/statistics.html (scroll down and click “Black or African American”) (for black/African American figures beginning in 2010-11); A.B.A. Sec. of Legal Educ. & Admissions to the B., Statistics: Ethnic/ Gender Data: Longitudinal Charts, All Hispanic, A.B.A., http://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/resources/statistics.html (scroll down and click “All Hispanic”) (for Hispanic figures beginning in 2010-11); A.B.A. Sec. of Legal Educ. & Admissions to the B., Statistics: Ethnic/ Gender Data: Longitudinal Charts, Asian, A.B.A., http://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/resources/statistics.html (scroll down and click “Asian”) (for Asian American figures beginning in 2010-11); A.B.A. Sec. of Legal Educ. & Admissions to the B., Statistics: Ethnic/Gender Data: Longitudinal Charts, American Indian or Alaska Native, A.B.A., http://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/resources/statistics. html (scroll down and click “American Indian or Alaska Native”) (for Native American figures beginning in 2010-11). Figures include all JD candidates enrolled at ABA-approved law schools, excluding Puerto Rican law schools. Figures for Hispanics include Hispanics of any race. Figures for Native Americans do not include Native Hawaiians or Pacific Islanders. In 2013–14, there were 279 Hawaiian Natives or other Pacific Islanders enrolled in ABA-approved law schools. A.B.A. Sec. of Legal Educ. & Admissions to the B., Statistics: Ethnic/Gender Data: Longitudinal Charts, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, http://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/resources/statistics.html (scroll down and click “Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander”). 22 •••• IILP Review 2017 Table 7 - Initial Employmet by Minority Status and Gender7 1998 White Male Minority Female Total Male Female Total Private Practice 59.4% 53.9 57.1 52.8 46.5 49.5 Business 13.5 12.0 12.9 16.0 14.5 15.2 Government 12.6 13.4 13.0 16.4 17.7 17.1 Judicial Clerkships 10.7 14.8 12.4 8.7 11.5 10.2 Public Interest 1.3 3.5 2.2 2.5 5.9 4.3 Academic 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.4 2.0 1.7 Unknown 1.7 1.4 1.5 2.1 1.9 2.0 2003 White Male Minority Female Total Male Female Total Private Practice 62.1 58.8 60.5 53.0 53.9 53.5 Business 10.6 8.8 9.7 15.3 11.1 12.9 Government 12.7 12.4 12.6 15.6 15.2 15.3 Judicial Clerkships 10.7 14.1 12.3 8.1 10.4 9.4 Public Interest 1.5 3.5 2.5 3.3 5.7 4.8 Academic 1.0 1.3 1.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 Unknown 1.4 1.1 1.3 2.6 1.5 2.0 2010 White Male Minority Female Total Male Female Total Private Practice 55.8 53.1 54.6 53.4 48.8 50.8 Business 14.2 11.7 13.1 15.8 13.7 14.6 Government 13.2 13.1 13.2 14.6 15.0 14.9 Judicial Clerkships 10.6 12.3 11.4 7.4 8.6 8.1 Public Interest 3.9 7.1 5.3 5.4 9.5 7.7 Academic 1.6 2.0 1.6 2.4 3.1 2.8 Unknown 0.6 0.7 0.6 1.0 1.3 1.1 2014 White Male Minority Female Total Male Female Total Private Practice 52.8 49.6 51.4 51.0 47.5 49.0 Business 19.0 16.1 17.7 22.1 17.4 19.4 Government 12.0 12.1 12.0 12.1 13.3 12.7 Judicial Clerkships 9.5 11.1 10.2 5.6 7.1 6.5 Public Interest 4.9 8.5 6.5 6.8 11.2 9.4 Unknown 1.8 2.6 2.2 2.4 3.5 3.0 7. Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Jobs & JDs: Employment and Salaries of New Law Graduates, Class of 1998 48 (1999) [hereinafter Class of 1998] (for 1998 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Jobs & JDs: Employment and Salaries of New Law Graduates, Class of 2003 52 (2004) [hereinafter Class of 2003] (for 2003 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Jobs & JDs: Employment and Salaries of New Law Graduates, Class of 2010 52 (2011) [hereinafter Class of 2010] (for 2010 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Jobs & JDs: Employment and Salaries of New Law Graduates, Class of 2014 64 (2015) [hereinafter Class of 2014] (for 2014 figures). Figures for 2010 include only full-time jobs. IILP Review 2017 •••• 23 Table 8 - Initial Employment by Race/Ethnicity8 1998 Private Practice White Af Am. Hisp. As Am. Na Am. 57.1% 40.1 55.2 55.8 46.6 Business 12.9 16.7 11.6 15.9 19.4 Government 13.0 21.5 17.7 11.9 16.2 Judicial Clerkships 12.4 11.1 7.5 11.4 8.9 Public Interest 2.2 5.1 5.1 2.6 6.3 Academic 1.0 2.6 1.6 1.0 0.5 Unknown 1.5 2.8 1.4 1.6 2.1 2003 Private Practice White Af Am. Hisp. As Am. Na Am. Latino 60.5 46.3 55.8 59.4 46.4 54.3 9.7 14.6 12.2 12.5 10.2 11.8 Government 12.6 19.1 14.7 10.7 21.7 17.2 Judicial Clerkships Business 12.3 10.3 6.5 10.3 10.8 7.1 Public Interest 2.5 4.1 6.9 4.1 6.0 6.2 Academic 1.1 3.4 0.9 1.3 2.4 2.2 Unknown 1.3 2.2 3.0 1.7 2.4 1.2 2010 White Af Am. Hisp. As Am. Na Am. Multi-racial Private Practice 54.6 41.3 55.7 55.6 47.1 46.9 Business 13.1 15.5 12.2 16.3 11.8 13.0 Government 13.2 19.7 14.0 10.6 19.4 18.4 Judicial Clerkships 11.4 8.8 6.6 8.1 5.9 11.1 Public Interest 5.3 8.8 8.6 6.2 8.2 7.9 Academic 1.8 3.8 2.4 2.4 4.1 1.7 Unknown 0.6 2.1 0.6 0.7 2.9 1.0 2014 White Af Am. Hisp. As Am. Na Am. Multi-racial Private Practice 51.4 37.4 53.5 55.6 46.6 48.6 Business 17.7 23.2 15.7 18.9 18.9 19.9 Government 12.0 17.4 11.4 9.4 16.2 13.5 Judicial Clerkships 10.2 7.0 5.8 6.7 4.1 6.4 Public Interest 6.5 10.7 11.6 6.9 11.5 8.4 Unknown 2.2 4.3 2.0 2.5 2.7 3.2 8. Class of 1998, supra note 7, at 49 (for 1998 figures); Class of 2003, supra note 7, at 53 (for 2003 figures); Class of 2010, supra note 7, at 53 (for 2010 figures); Class of 2014, supra note 7, at 65 (for 2014 figures). 2003 figures for Hispanics do not include Latinos. NALP defines “Latino” as Mexican, Puerto Rican, or Cuban. Figures for 2010 include only full-time jobs. 24 •••• IILP Review 2017 Table 9 - Initial Employment of Graduates with Disabilities9 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Private Practice 48.1% 48.9 50.7 46.2 42.2 Business 16.1 16.9 16.4 20.7 19.8 Government 12.3 13.4 10.0 14.6 13.2 Judicial Clerkships 10.8 6.5 7.0 5.3 9.4 Public Interest 8.9 9.3 11.4 8.3 12.2 Academic 2.4 6.5 4.0 4.3 3.3 9. Class of 2010, supra note 7, at 54 (2011) (for 2010 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Jobs & JDs: Employment and Salaries of New Law Graduates, Class of 2011 66 (2012) (for 2011 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Jobs & JDs: Employment and Salaries of New Law Graduates, Class of 2012 66 (2013) (for 2012 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Jobs & JDs: Employment and Salaries of New Law Graduates, Class of 2013 66 (2014) (for 2013 figures); Class of 2014, supra note 7, at 66 (for 2014 figures). Figures for 2010 include only full-time jobs. Table 10 - Initial Employment of Graduates Identifying as LGB10 2014 Private Practice 41.6 Business 16.1 Government 11.2 Judicial Clerkships 11.2 Public Interest 15.9 Academic 4.2 10. Class of 2014, supra note 7, at 66. IILP Review 2017 •••• 25 Table 11 - Distribution of U.S. Lawyers by Type of Employment11 1980 1991 2000 2005 Private Practice 68.0 73.0 74.0 75.0 Private Industry 10.0 9.0 8.0 8.0 Private Association 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Federal Judiciary 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 State/Local Judiciary 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Federal Government 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 State/Local Government 6.0 5.0 4.0 Legal Aid/Public Defender 2.0 1.0 1.0 Education 1.0 1.0 1.0 Retired or Inactive 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 11. Clara N. Carson & Jeeyoon Park, A.B. Found., The Lawyer Statistical Report: the U.S. Legal Profession in 2005 5 ( 2012). Table 12 - Distribution of U.S. Lawyers by Type of Employment and Gender12 1980 Male Private Practice 73.3% Industry/Association 1991 Female Male 2000 Female Male 2005 Female Male Female 58.9 77.6 71.9 75.0 71.0 76.3 71.6 10.7 9.7 9.5 8.5 8.0 9.0 8.2 9.9 Government 9.1 18.2 7.7 8.5 7.0 10.0 6.4 10.2 Judiciary 3.8 4.0 2.8 2.8 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.4 PubInt/Education 3.2 9.2 2.4 4.9 2.0 4.0 1.7 3.0 6.0 3.0 5.0 2.7 Retired/Inactive 12. Lewis A. Kornhauser & Richard Revesz, Legal Education and Entry into the Legal Profession: The Role of Race, Gender, and Educational Debt, 70 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 829, 850 (1995) (footnote omitted) (for 1980 data); Clara N. Carson, A.B. Found., The Lawyer Statistical Report: the U.S. Legal Profession in 2000 9 (2004) (for 1991 and 2000 data); Carson & Park, supra note 11, at 6 (for 2005 data) (some categories were combined for consistency with prior years). 26 •••• IILP Review 2017 Table 13 - Representation of Female and Minority Lawyers in Law Firms13 Partners Female Associates Minority Minority F Female Minority Minority F 2009 19.2% 6.1 1.9 45.7 19.7 11.0 2010 19.4 6.2 2.0 45.4 19.5 10.9 2011 19.5 6.7 2.0 45.4 19.9 11.0 2012 19.9 6.7 2.2 45.1 20.3 11.1 2013 20.2 7.1 2.3 44.8 20.9 11.3 2014 21.1 7.3 2.5 44.9 21.6 11.5 2015 21.5 7.5 2.6 44.7 22.0 11.8 13. Press Release, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Women, Black/African-American Associates Lose Ground at Major U.S. Law Firms (Nov. 19, 2015), http://www.nalp.org/lawfirmdiversity_nov2015 [hereinafter November 2015 Release]. Figures are based on statistics provided by firms in the NALP Directory of Legal Employers. Table 14 - Associates by Gender and Race/Ethnicity14 Af Am. Total Hisp. Female As Am. Total Female Total Female 2009 4.7% 2.9 3.9 2.0 9.3 5.1 2010 4.4 2.8 3.8 1.9 9.4 5.2 2011 4.3 2.6 3.8 1.9 9.7 5.3 2012 4.2 2.6 3.9 2.0 10 5.4 2013 4.1 2.4 3.8 1.9 10.5 5.6 2014 4.0 2.3 4.0 1.9 10.8 5.8 2015 4.0 2.3 4.3 2.0 10.9 6.0 14. November 2015 Release, supra note 13. Tracking the profession’s progress toward diversity and inclusion is made difficult by the continuing lack of data. Some previous sources of demographic data on the profession have changed or dried up. IILP Review 2017 •••• 27 Table 15 - Partners by Gender and Race/Ethnicity15 Af Am. Total Hisp. Female As Am. Total Female Total Female 2009 1.7% 0.6 1.7 0.4 2.2 0.8 2010 1.7 0.6 1.7 0.4 2.3 0.8 2011 1.7 0.6 1.9 0.5 2.4 0.8 2012 1.7 0.6 1.9 0.5 2.5 0.9 2013 1.8 0.6 2.0 0.5 2.7 0.9 2014 1.7 0.6 2.2 0.6 2.7 1.0 2015 1.8 0.6 2.2 0.6 2.9 1.1 15. Id. Table 16 - Equity Partners by Gender and Minority Status16 Equity Non-equity Female Minority Female Minority 2011 15.6% 4.7 27.7 8.3 2012 15.3 4.8 27.3 8.4 2013 16.5 5.4 27.6 9.1 2014 17.1 5.6 28.2 8.9 2015 17.4 5.6 28.8 9.4 16. Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Women and Minorities Maintain Representation Among Equity Partners, Broad Disparities Remain, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Mar. 2016), http://www.nalp.org/0316research. 28 •••• IILP Review 2017 Table 17 - Representation of LGBT Lawyers in Law Firms17 Partners Associates 2009 1.4% 2.3 2010 1.5 2.4 2011 1.4 2.4 2012 1.6 2.7 2013 1.7 2.8 2014 1.8 2.9 2015 1.8 3.1 17. Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Although Most Firms Collect GLBT Lawyer Information, Overall Numbers Remain Low, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Dec. 2009), http://www.nalp.org/dec09glbt (for 2009 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Most Firms Collect LGBT Lawyer Information—LGBT Representation Up Slightly, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Dec. 2010), http://nalp.org/dec10lgbt (for 2010 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Most Firms Collect LGBT Lawyer Information, LGBT Representation Steady, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Dec. 2011), http://www.nalp.org/lgbt_lawyers_dec2011 (for 2011 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, LGBT Representation Up, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Jan. 2013), http:// www.nalp.org/lgbt_representation_up_in_2012 (for 2012 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, LGBT Representation Up Again in 2013, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Jan. 2014), http://www.nalp.org/jan14research (for 2013 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, LGBT Representation Among Lawyers in 2014, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Mar. 2015), http:// www.nalp.org/0315research (for 2014 figures); Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, LGBT Representation Among Lawyers in 2015, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Dec. 2015), http://www.nalp.org/1215research (for 2015 figures). Table 18 - Representation of Lawyers with Disabilities in Law Firms18 Partners Associates 2009 0.3% 0.2 2010 0.2 0.2 2011 0.2 0.2 2012 0.3 0.2 2013 0.3 0.3 2014 0.3 0.3 18. Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Reported Number of Lawyers with Disabilities Remains Small, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Dec. 2009), http://nalp.org/dec09disabled (for 2009 figures); Press Release, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Law Firm Diversity Among Associates Erodes in 2010, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Nov. 4, 2010), http://www.nalp.org/2010law firmdiversity?s=disabilities (for 2010 figures); Press Release, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Law Firm Diversity Wobbles: Minority Numbers Bounce Back While Women Associates Extend Two-Year Decline, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Nov. 3, 2011), http://www.nalp.org/2011_law_firm_diversity?s=disabilities (for 2011 figures); Press Release, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Representation of Women Among Associates Continues to Fall, Even as Minority Associates Make Gains, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Dec. 13, 2012), http://www.nalp.org/2012lawfirmdiversity?s=disabilities (for 2012 figures); Press Release, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Representation of Women Associates Falls for Fourth Straight Year as Minority Associates Continue to Make Gains - Women and Minority Partners Continue to Make Small Gains, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Dec. 11, 2013), http://www.nalp.org/lawfirmdiversity_2013 (for 2013 figures); Press Release, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement, Diversity Numbers at Law Firms Eke Out Small Gains – Numbers for Women Associates Edge Up After Four Years of Decline, Nat’l Ass’n for L. Placement (Feb. 17, 2015), http://www.nalp.org/lawfirmdiversity_feb2015 (for 2014 figures). IILP Review 2017 •••• 29 Table 19 - Partner Diversity by Firm Size and City (2015)19 Partners Total Nationwide Minority Minority Female 51,419 7.5% 2.6 3,884 5.9 2.0 101-250 lawyer firms 10,467 5.6 1.8 251-500 lawyer firms 11,027 6.9 2.4 501-700 lawyer firms 6,637 7.7 2.6 19,404 9.2 3.1 1,236 8.3 2.1 356 12.6 3.9 1,607 4.3 1.6 463 4.8 1.5 3,269 6.6 2.3 Cleveland 349 2.9 0.9 Columbus 342 5.0 1.5 Dallas 933 6.7 2.1 Denver 525 5.0 1.7 Detroit area 723 4.4 1.8 1,023 9.8 3.0 Indianapolis 362 3.3 1.7 Kansas City 419 4.1 1.0 1,983 13.9 4.9 Miami 559 29.9 8.2 Milwaukee 550 3.5 1.3 Minneapolis 1,063 2.9 1.3 New York City 6,332 8.2 2.9 Newark area 529 4.5 1.7 Orange County 583 13.2 3.8 Philadelphia 751 4.0 1.3 Phoenix 581 5.9 1.4 Pittsburgh 556 2.9 0.9 Portland area 369 4.9 2.2 San Diego 267 13.1 2.3 San Francisco 1,245 13.2 4.3 San Jose area 790 16.1 4.6 Seattle area 920 8.9 3.4 St. Louis 744 3.9 1.3 4,780 8.5 3.2
Purchase answer to see full attachment