BC Law Alum Criticizes Admissions Policies Toward Veterans

In a recent edition of the Massachusetts Lawyer Weekly, Brian Cook (BC Law ‘85) criticizes the lack of preference given to military veterans in the admissions process at BC.

This year, I was asked by a student whom I did not know well to write a letter of recommendation to BC. I met him and heard his story and could not wait to help him. He was not the son of an alumnus or a politician or a wealthy business leader. He was a veteran who had served his country and luckily returned, albeit disabled, with a renewed sense of place and interest in studying law after being in a world where there was no rule of law.

This experience changed him. He improved his grades, took the LSATs and applied to law schools. He was accepted at nearly every school he applied to except BC. In fact, BC Law, the school that spoke comfortably from Chestnut Hill about public service and lawyers who made a difference, did not even wait-list him.

When I inquired about his application, I was told that BC does not “track” veterans or even know how many of its class are veterans. The school certainly doesn’t know how many of its applicants or admits are disabled veterans.

Cook does not specify other schools to which the cited applicant was admitted, or the GPA/LSAT combination that was presented in the application. 

While BC Law may not grant veterans preference like the federal government does, the school-wide Non-Discrimination Policy states: “Boston College commits itself to maintaining a welcoming environment for all people and extends its welcome in particular to those who may be vulnerable to discrimination, on the basis of their race, ethnic or national origin, religion, color, age, gender, marital or parental status, veteran status, disabilities or sexual orientation.”  Still, Cook implies that veterans receive unequal treatment in the admissions process at BC Law compared to other groups identified in the Non-Discrimination Policy.

I would be impressed if I discovered that the admissions process was blind. Unfortunately, the number of politicians, wealthy or influential business leaders and other “unpolitically-correct-to-mention” categories are certainly entered into the admissions decision, but a kid who was sent to the Middle East or Afghanistan while BC undergrads drink vodka from an ice sculpture at the BC-Notre Dame football game is not “tracked.”

I must say I am not a big fan of these wars, nor am I a very big fan of the military in general. But I do acknowledge the sacrifice made by these young people, which allows me to live a quiet, safe life in a country far from military action. As such, I do not have a problem with them receiving special rates on mortgages or assistance with law school admissions.

I am sorry to say that I am no longer a big fan of BC. The law school not only failed to admit Adam; it failed to recognize his sacrifice in the worst way – it ignored it.

Based on past welcome addresses by the administration to incoming 1L’s at orientation (e.g., Classes of 2006, 2007, 2010) military service appears to be a recognized soft factor for admissions, even if no publicly-stated policy to that effect exists.

Question of the Day: What role should veteran status play in law school admissions?