Abstract
Law school rankings play a pivotal role in shaping legal education. However, these rankings have faced substantial criticism for their methodology, susceptibility to manipulation, and bias related to political ideology and race. This Article measures bias by applying a novel, quantitative analysis to disparities between the objective overall rankings and the subjective peer rankings among religiously affiliated law schools. The findings reveal that religiously affiliated law schools experience a 17.65 peer rankings penalty. Further analysis strengthens the evidence of bias by showing a heightened penalty among more devoutly religious law schools. A longitudinal analysis finds that this trend is rapidly increasing along with correspondingly increasing political partisanship.
This result elicits discussion regarding numerous aspects of rankings, legal academia, religious education, and bias. This is of particular importance given the numerous benefits religious legal education offers through its holistic approach. This study provides a novel framework for further research on bias in legal academia and contributes to the ongoing debate about law school rankings. Finally, it raises broader concerns about the treatment of religion within legal academia and the importance of fostering diverse perspectives. This Article concludes by providing a pragmatic solution to eliminate these biased distortions in the rankings, resulting in a more transparent, equitable, and merit-based outcome.
Recommended Citation
Michael Conklin,
Religious Law Schools, Rankings, and Bias: Measuring the Rankings Penalty at Religious Law Schools,
36 U. Fla. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y
601
(2026).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/jlpp/vol36/iss3/5