David Giacalone has more discussion on the Minnesota Supreme Court requiring lawyers to take an anti-bias CLE. I think David has a point that this could be handled in an ethics CLE.

As far as anti-bias, I understand the outrage over it. It’s kind of silly to tell a 40 year old that he must attend a CLE on anti-bias. It’s a little late to cure him of bias and, if he does have a bias, it’s probably going to wrap itself in ethical hypos.

I think this is more of a “feel good-do nothing” solution to a possible problem among a small group of lawyers. As long as the Minn S. Ct. is doing something pro-active, it doesn’t matter that time is wasted and no hearts or minds are changed.

After all, who can picture the lawyer that stands up after the kumbaya session and says, “I was a racist until I sat through this anti-bias session. Now, I’ve found Jesus, Allah, Vishnu, and Buddha and I am reformed.”