The current issue of the Stanford Law Review has an empirical analysis of the impact of affirmative action in law school admissions on black students, written by UCLA Law Professor Richard Sander, which concludes that the "costs of preferential admissions appear to substantially outweigh the benefits."  Sander's thrust is that black law students would perform better, achieve higher class ranking, and pass the bar at greater rates, were they to attend less prestigious schools.

Can you say "incendiary?"  That's why the debate hosted by Legal Affairs between Sander and my good friend and colleague Associate Professor William Henderson of Indiana University Law School/Bloomington is such an important one, and why Bill's opening point (in what is a remarkably civilized discussion) is essential to approaching the issue:

I don't think the legal academy will reach any constructive conclusions on your study until we are capable of having exchanges that are driven primarily by data rather than ideology.

Wouldn't a "data-driven" debate of this issue of consummate public importance be fascinating? I personally don't have much optimism it can be pulled off, but all of you who care about this issue deserve to take a look and understand the contours of the evidence.