Welcome to The EDU Ledger.com! We’ve moved from Diverse.
Welcome to The EDU Ledger! We’ve moved from Diverse: Issues In Higher Education.

Create a free The EDU Ledger account to continue reading. Already have an account? Enter your email to access the article.

GMU Law School Renaming a Possible Roadblock to Diversity

When Jacquelyn Branscomb—a second-year evening law school student at George Mason University—got a letter recently informing her that she had been awarded a scholarship from the school, she hesitated as to whether to accept the money.

That’s because the scholarship—called the A. Linwood Holton, Jr. Leadership Scholarship—was awarded with funds that came from a controversial $30 million donation that was contingent upon the law school being renamed in honor of the late Justice Antonin Scalia, the conservative U.S. Supreme Court justice often criticized for rendering rulings and making public remarks seen as offensive toward African-Americans, gays and women.

“I have mixed feelings about it but law school is expensive,” Branscomb told Diverse in reference to her scholarship to study law at Mason, where tuition for law school students is about $25,000 for in-state students and about $41,000 for out-of-state students.

Branscomb ultimately accepted the scholarship. She declined to disclose the amount but said her rationale was that the money would not only help pay her way through law school but help enable her to fight to improve diversity as well. Branscomb is of mixed Filipino and African-American heritage.

“I figured, why not use the money to improve diversity at the school? Because I feel like I have a different political background than most people at the school,” said Branscomb, who is a board member of the Asian Pacific American Law Students Association and a member of the Black Law Student Association at Mason.

“It’s almost ironic to accept the money,” Branscomb conceded. “It just seems like the money is for renaming the law school the Scalia School of Law and his conservative background, but I’m receiving funds and I’m not a conservative person. I just feel like: Why not?”

In many ways, Branscomb finds herself in the same position as the law school itself—accepting money for practical purposes even though the money is associated with an influential legal figure whose views are as resented as they are revered.