Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette Op-Ed: Arkansas First, by Robert Steinbuch (Arkansas-Little Rock):
At the University of Arkansas-Little Rock, 85 percent of all students are from Arkansas, and 90 percent of undergraduate students are Arkansans. … [T]he University of Arkansas-Fayetteville–which justifiably boasts on its webpage that it reached a new high for the number of Arkansans it enrolled, for the fourth year in a row–soundly ends its mission statement with “all in service to Arkansas.” Well said!
These data demonstrate a commitment to the foundational principle—articulated by, among others, Justice Clarence Thomas in an early affirmative-action case from Michigan—that the mission of state universities is to serve their residents.
Thomas wrote in the Michigan case: The only cognizable state interests vindicated by operating a public law school are, therefore, the education of that State’s citizens and the training of that State’s lawyers. …
James Campbell’s address at the opening of the Law Department at the University of Michigan on October 3, 1859, makes this clear: ‘It not only concerns the State that every one should have all reasonable facilities for preparing himself for any honest position in life to which he may aspire, but it also concerns the community that the Law should be taught and understood . . . . There is not an office in the State in which serious legal inquiries may not frequently arise . . . . In all these matters, public and private rights are constantly involved and discussed, and ignorance of the Law has frequently led to results deplorable and alarming … . [I]n the history of this State, in more than one instance, that ignorance has led to unlawful violence, and the shedding of innocent blood.
The [Michigan] Law School today, however, does precious little training of those attorneys who will serve the citizens of Michigan. In 2002, graduates of the Law School made up less than 6% of applicants to the Michigan bar even though the Law School’s graduates constitute nearly 30% of all law students graduating in Michigan. Less than 16% of the Law School’s graduating class elects to stay in Michigan after law school. Thus, while a mere 27% of the Law School’s 2002 entering class is from Michigan only half of these, it appears, will stay in Michigan.
In sum, the [Michigan] Law School trains few Michigan residents and overwhelmingly serves students, who, as lawyers, leave the State of Michigan. By contrast, Michigan’s other public law school, Wayne State University Law School, sends 88% of its graduates on to serve the people of Michigan. It does not take a social scientist to conclude that it is precisely the Law School’s status as an elite institution that causes it to be a waystation for the rest of the country’s lawyers, rather than a training ground for those who will remain in Michigan. The Law School’s decision to be an elite institution does little to advance the welfare of the people of Michigan or any cognizable interest of the State of Michigan.
Thomas is undeniably correct. Public universities, including ours in Arkansas, function to improve the lives of state citizens. Our taxpayer-funded colleges’ raison d’être is to provide affordable, high-quality education to Arkansans-—fostering an able workforce and informed citizenry. This ensures that the state’s investment in higher education directly benefits Arkansas through increased skilled workers, local employment, and tax contributions.
This emphasis on training Arkansans at state institutions is especially important when it comes to professional schools. Arkansas is critically short of doctors, dentists, and attorneys, particularly in rural communities. …
When universities stray from this core mission by admitting too many out-of-state students in search of additional tuition revenue at the expense of serving the needs of the local community, they face justified pushback. The University of California system, for instance, encountered such criticism, prompting the state legislature to demand that public universities focus on Californians. Legislators have a funny way of insisting that state institutions serve, well, state citizens. Go figure.
As one analysis aptly notes, public schools are naive when they seek to attract out-of-state applicants for the purpose of feathering their beds. This mainlining of cash may seem appealing—in the short term—to administrators who’ve sampled the narcotic of easy money, but it risks transforming state universities into “crass, moneymaking operations . . .
When universities stray from this core mission by admitting too many out-of-state students in search of additional tuition revenue at the expense of serving the needs of the local community, they face justified pushback. …
Arkansas’s commitment to prioritizing in-state students is a model of stewardship. By focusing on Arkansas first, our universities uphold their purpose: to educate and empower those building our state’s future.
Editor’s Note: If you would like to receive a daily email with links to legal education posts on TaxProf Blog, email me here.
