New CLE courses will likely make little difference
August 14, 2025
“What the world needs now is love, sweet love…”
The title is a lyric from a 1965 song written by Hal David and Burt Bacharach. This song has popped up in films since then (My Best Friend’s Wedding, Austin Powers, and in last year’s Joker movie), so even you readers out there who weren’t born when it was popular are likely familiar with it. (This is just one of a few musical allusions I’m going to make in this article, by the way.)
Fast forward 60 years, and we’re trying — not very successfully — to eliminate hatred from the world. If it were only so easy.
Consider a recent order from the Wisconsin Supreme Court. SC order No. 2025WI37 will allow Wisconsin lawyers to receive continuing legal education credit for courses in cultural competency and reduction in bias. Taking these courses are, at least for now, voluntary. The rule passed by a 4-3 vote with Justices Brian Hagedorn, Rebecca Grassl Bradley and Annette Kingsland Ziegler dissenting.
With our Supreme Court becoming (and staying) more liberal, Wisconsin lawyers should be aware that certain states, including Illinois, Iowa and Minnesota have some mandatory requirements for these types of courses. My guess is that is in our future as well.
According to the State Bar of Wisconsin – I should emphasize, the mandatory state bar – which petitioned for the rule, courses in cultural competency seek “to improve client communication and representation through the lens of knowledge and understanding of diverse populations with a sensitivity to cultural and other differences in personal traits when interacting with the public and legal community.”
Reduction in bias courses are “designed to educate attorneys to identify and reduce from the legal profession, the practice of law, and the legal system at large, biases against persons because of but not limited to age, race, gender, gender identity, economic status, veteran status, creed, color, religion, national origin, disability or sexual orientation and to remove barriers to access to justice arising from discriminatory behavior.”
Well, yeah, who can argue against that?
Justice Rebecca Bradley, while not arguing against the concept, wrote a dissent which tries to inject some realism. She reasoned that absolutely no evidence shows that this type of requirement would be in the least bit effective. Bradley wrote: “If the majority cared about consistency, it would have rejected this petition for failing to identify a problem or present any credible evidence supporting a remedy.”
She’s right. The only lawyers who will sign up for this type of voluntary course are those who don’t need it. This is known as preaching to the choir. Is there a single person with any objectivity who really believes that offering credits for these courses will make a dime’s worth of difference? Thought not.
A quaint theory persists that hatred and intolerance can be cured through education. With all respect to Rogers and Hammerstein in “South Pacific,” it does not have to be “carefully taught.” There’s a reason why humans have hated, discriminated and warred for thousands of years. That reason has more to do with our DNA than anything that can be untaught.
I’ll conclude with my final musical reference. The great song writer, Tom Lehrer, who died last week, lampooned “National Brotherhood Week,” the one week each year when everyone was supposed to be nice to each other. Here is a sample (this and his other songs are available on YouTube):
“Oh, the Catholics hate the Protestants, and the Protestants hate the Catholics. And the Muslims hate the Hindus, and everyone hates the Jews. But during National Brotherhood Week — National smile at one another hood week — be nice to people who are inferior to you. It’s only for a week, so have no fear. Be grateful that it doesn’t last all year.”