Critical race theory has been around since the 1980s, yet few law schools provide courses on this crucial body of scholarship. While “Critical Race Theory” is a course taught at Berkeley Law, it is not offered every year. For example, I have never had the opportunity to take this course during my time at Berkeley Law. Because of this, I was excited to hear that Yale Law School was organizing a conference entitled “Critical Race Theory: From the Academy to the Community.” When I registered for this conference, I had such high hopes for what the conference could offer me: a sense of community and an opportunity to fill in the gaps of my legal education. While I left the conference feeling like I finally found a group of people who spoke the same language as me, I was disappointed by the depth, scope, and practicality of the conference.
Blizzard Nemo prevented about 350 attendees and many speakers from attending the conference. In addition, half of the symposium panels and workshops were cancelled due to the blizzard. These setbacks had a noticeable impact on the conference’s organization, format, and depth. Some discussions, such as those that occurred in “The Future of Race in Law School Curriculum” plenary, were so narrow that they pertained only to a specific law school, while other discussions, such as those that occurred in the “Critical Race Theory in the Community” plenary, were discussed so broadly that it left me with lingering questions on how to practically use critical race theory.
For example, I attended a panel titled “Intersectional Lawyering: Developing a Whole Person, Whole Experience, and Whole System Practice.” During this panel, the speaker defined intersectionality and described generally what intersectional lawyering entailed: whole person, whole experience, and whole systems practice. We delved deeper into the topic of intersectional lawyering through a description of a project that works to enfranchise ex-offenders in Virginia. While this case study provided some insight into what intersectional lawyering looks like, it offered very little practical advice on how to find a job that would allow you to be an intersectional lawyer, talk to attorneys and legal organizations about the importance of intersectional lawyering, create your own project using a critical race theory framework, access funding, or obtain institutional support. As a current law student who will be entering the legal market later this year, I had real concerns on how I could build a career as an intersectional lawyer. Because of the short time allotted for this panel and the pressure put on the speaker to stick to this time frame, there was not enough time for the discussion to develop, progress, and shift from theory to practice.
Similarly, during the plenary “Critical Race Theory in the Community,” the discussion, while insightful, educational, and motivational, lacked a practical element. The plenary described projects that were guided by critical race theory. It also discussed the importance of empowering communities and making critical race theory relevant for these communities. While this discussion briefly touched on the issues of which classes to take and how to acquire funding for a critical race theory project, it was very brief and did not present much guidance on how to be a critical race theory advocate.
The most practical portion of the conference occurred at the “Critical Race Theory Teach-In with Lani Guinier and Gerald Torres.” During this teach-in, Lani Guinier and Gerald Torres presented an introduction to critical race theory, ideas to keep in mind throughout the conference, and a brief discussion of power, specifically, invisible conflict, agenda setting, and meta-narratives. After this discussion, Guinier and Torres acted out an argument between a poor Black woman and a panel of Latino academics at a conference discussing the issue of immigration. After acting out this scene, Guiner and Torres invited attendees to “replay” the scene, and experiment with different strategies, such as shifting power, to encourage coalition building. This role-playing activity provided attendees with a safe space to test out and practice different communication strategies to increase cooperation between different marginalized communities. This is an issue that we are constantly confronted with since marginalized communities oftentimes fight over which movement takes precedence over others? Rather than fighting with each other, marginalized communities need to recognize their commonalities and work together to create positive social change. This exercise provided a way for students, practitioners, and academics to practice having these conversations and begin to build coalitions across communities and issues.
Overall, the conference went as well as it could have given the severe weather conditions. The organizers not only spent hundreds of hours preparing for this conference, but also spent an extraordinary amount of time creating last-minute adjustments to the conference schedule to ensure our safety and well-being during the blizzard. While this conference did not live up to the high expectations I initially had when I registered, the level of discussion, participation, and excitement that was achieved in light of the setbacks that occurred makes me hopeful that next year’s conference will be even more impactful and exceed all of my hopes and expectations.
The ideas expressed on the Haas Institute blog are not necessarily those of UC Berkeley or the Division of Equity & Inclusion, where the Haas Institute website is hosted. They are not official and not of one mind. Thoughts here are those of individual authors. We are committed to academic freedom, free speech and civil liberties.
