U.S. Asks to Intervene in LSAT Bias Action

     SAN FRANCISCO (CN) – The federal government seeks to intervene in a federal class action accusing the Law School Admission Council of discriminating against disabled people who take the LSAT exam.
     The government claims it has a right to intervene based on its “significant protectable interest” in enforcing the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
     The Department of Fair Employment and Housing sued the admission council in March, claiming it failed to provide adequate testing accommodations for disabled people, placed cumbersome documentati     on requirements on applicants who asked for extra time taking the LSAT, and “flagged” disabled test takers before sending their scores to member law schools.
     The council removed the case to federal court on April 12 and filed a motion to dismiss the following month, challenging the ADA’s permissible scope of implementation.
     That’s when the United States decided to step in, claiming it is the agency charged by Congress with implementing Title III of the ADA, which outlaws discrimination based on disability.
     The government claims it should be allowed to intervene “as of right” or by permission, because the plaintiffs’ interests “may not sufficiently align with those of the United States,” and their representation “may be inadequate to protect the United States’ interests.”
     And the government’s claims against the council “share common questions of law and fact with those in the pending litigation,” according to its motion to intervene.
     “Credentialing examinations, such as the LSAT, are increasingly the gateway to educational and employment opportunities, and the ADA demands that each individual with a disability have the opportunity to fairly demonstrate their abilities so they can pursue their dreams,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “The Justice Department’s participation in this action is critical to protecting the public interest in the important issues raised in this case.”

%d bloggers like this: