Hot (as in controversial) off the press

A lengthy empirical study, entitled "A Systematic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools" by Professor Rick Sander comes out this week in the Stanford Law Review (Issue 2, volume 57). It concerns whether affirmative action has helped or hurt minority students (specifically black students) in the long run. Sander takes the position that more harm is done than good. Even before publication, the study had generated a lot of buzz because Sander posted a draft version in November. It was such a hot potato that Stanford has issued a FAQ about it. In addition, Sander posted raw data at this resource page. Also pre-publication, Sander had guest-blogged at The Volokh Conspiracy, a group blog featuring Sander's UCLA colleague, Professor Eugene Volokh, who introduced Sander thusly and commented further about Sander's study here. Sander's blog entries at Volokh are here, here, here, and here.

Here's some other early commentary: from another UCLA law prof, Professor Bainbridge; from The American Constitution society for Law & Policy blog; from Terry Eastland in The Weekly Standard here; and a full-scale rebuttal to Sander by Professors David L. Chambers, Richard O. Lempert both of the University of Michigan Law School, Professor Timothy T. Clydesdale of the College of New Jersey, and William C. Kidder, of the Equal Justice Society, entitled "The real impact of eliminating affirmative action in American law schools: an empirical critique of Richard Sander's Stanford Law Review study", which is slated to appear in a subsequent issue of the Standford Law Review.

UPDATE: Sander's reply to the Chambers et. al. critique.

More: Sander debates William Henderson, Associate Professor of Law, Indiana University.