Given the specificity of the Supreme Court's decisions in Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard University and SFFA v. University of North Carolina (UNC), the immediate relevance to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) might seem tangential. The decisions effectively eliminated the use of affirmative action in college admissions. As seen over the past few months, these decisions are being used to take aim at programs that address diversity and inclusion. The broader implications of these decisions can potentially influence the dynamics and utility of ADR in various ways.
In 2018, the American Bar Association (ABA) adopted Resolution 105 which urges expanding ADR neutral rosters to include significantly more diverse neutrals as well as increase their selection to handle more matters. To be able to meet this mandate, there has to be significant growth in the number of diverse ADR professionals, which lags the legal profession as a whole. These decisions can adversely impact these efforts.