This seems like one of those questions that only a handful of people in the country could give a satisfactory answer to. After all, not many people have the opportunity to dedicate their lives to a cause, even one so deserving as striving towards racial equality in the United States legal system. I'm personally invested in supporting new medical research for Alzheimer's, but what plan can I have for tackling this issue? I'm personally invested in ending child hunger in the U.S. as well, but outside of donating money and spending some free time in my local soup kitchen what more can I "personally plan to do" about this issue? I obviously don't consider myself to be racist, and I don't consciously act in a way that continues institutionalized racism, but I'd guess that you wouldn't find that sufficient to fulfill point A that you listed above. I guess my question is what are you doing for A and B that I could do that wouldn't require me to make racial representation in the legal system the focal point of my life? (I realize that since you just went away this isn't an ideal time to post this, but I hope you'll find the comment eventually).
On the topic of discriminatory jury selection I think it's important to note that race is not the only thing discriminated against. The ADAs in my county for instance exclude teachers and professors from juries whenever possible. I think that so long as you are allowed to strike jury members there will always be DAs and PDs that run the numbers and determine that certain groups are statistically likely to decide against them, and respond by excluding those groups from juries. Maybe you'll disagree with me but I bet that if African Americans were statistically more likely to convict than Whites (the opposite of what is currently the case) jury selection biases on that count would reverse. This is not to say that discriminatory jury selection is not a problem, I'm just pointing out that there are more factors at play on this topic than have been raised so far in this thread.
I don't think it's a question that only a handful of people are in a position to address. (The students entering law schools are the ones maintaining much of what exists. Institutional racism and discrimination has to be maintained by someone for it to continue. Therefore, law students can do something about it.) As far as what's a satisfactory answer? Any answer that speaks to what an individual plans to do or doesn't plan to do would be satisfactory for my question about personal accountability/contribution.
Considering this country's history and current state regarding questions of race, I think everyone should ask themselves why race is rarely studied in formal educational environments, and who benefits when it doesn't take place? There is nothing in our past or present that suggests folks are just going to naturally "get it." Most American students have never studied race, have never studied its meaning, implications, or impact on the society around them, and yet superlative academic distinctions and classifications of intellectual superiority have been given out and ingrained in the minds of people that are positioned to run a country that operates differently than the one they've come to know.
Everyone can seek out conversations or literature centered around or inclusive of questions regarding race. Folks can realize that mastering subjects that never address race, does not inherently make them qualified to be experts on institutions and policies that were created in a racialized context, and that are maintained in a racialized context. Again, there's no reason for ppl to repeatedly assume they "get it," or will "get" what they should get, just b/c they're good ppl, mean well, are smart, or have a few minority friends and/or family members. If folks are honest with themselves, many will realize that they have put out very little effort to make sure they are in proximity to qualified minorities that spend their lives studying and speaking to issues regarding race and equality.
When you change the conversation from what "We should do is..." to "What I will do is...," it's easy to see why the "problem" is likely to continue for a very long time.
My personal commitments aside (I don't want to out myself or end up like Fred Hampton, not yet anyway), everyone can:
1) Position his/herself to a) be approached by URMs or b) seek out URMs offline for the purposes of offering guidance on the lsat/law school process. This can be as simple as sending a routine email to remind family, friends, or organizations that you're available and willing to be connected to URMs that may be thinking about going this route. There are many ways that this step could be done without making it "the focal point" of one's life.
(this somewhat requires understanding that underrepresentation in top law schools and law-related careers limits individual and institutional progress.)
As for your second paragraph/point, the damage that is done to to URMs, and Black communities more specifically, is widespread, documented, and ongoing. The same can't be said for teachers or professors that are being removed from juries. The link in my previous post addresses the problem more thoroughly.