Federal Lawsuit Slams Michigan Law Review Over “Illegal” DEI Policies

HomePolitics

Federal Lawsuit Slams Michigan Law Review Over “Illegal” DEI Policies

University Of Michigan
University Of Michigan (File)

A new lawsuit has been filed against the Michigan Law Review Association and the University of Michigan, along with several of its officials, alleging that the prestigious journal engages in illegal race and sex discrimination in its selection of members, editors, and articles for publication.

The complaint, filed by the organization Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preferences (FASORP) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, seeks to enjoin these practices and ensure compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws.

The complaint asserts that the Michigan Law Review (MLR) “flouts ” federal laws, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, by implementing race and sex preferences. It further claims violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1981, prohibiting racial discrimination in contracts, and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

READ: Hegseth Under Fire: “More Balls” Than You, Michigan Senator Charges In Fiery Hearing

According to FASORP, the MLR’s alleged discriminatory practices include:

Holistic Review Committee: The lawsuit claims that the MLR’s “Holistic Review Committee” awards “illegal race and sex preferences to women, racial minorities, homosexuals, and transgender people” when selecting new student members. It alleges that applicants from these “preferred demographics” are chosen over “heterosexual and non-transgender white men with better grades and better scores on the components of the Law Review’s writing competition.” The complaint specifically names Heather Jane Foster (Editor-in-Chief), Nathaniel B. Magrath (Managing Editor), Delpha Carpenter (Executive Development Editor), and four unnamed “John Does” as members of this committee.

Personal Statements: The complaint states that the MLR “invit[es] students to submit a 750-word ‘personal statement’” where applicants are “permitted but encouraged to identify their race, sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity.” These statements are allegedly used to award higher scores to “preferred demographics.”

READ: Fiancée Fatally Stabbed: Michigan Man Arrested After Calling 911 On Himself

Article Selection: FASORP asserts that the MLR “consciously and intentionally discriminat[es] in favor of inferior manuscripts submitted by women, racial minorities, and homosexual or transgender authors, while rejecting better manuscripts submitted by heterosexual and non-transgender white men.”

Citation Policies: The lawsuit claims the MLR’s production manual instructs editors to prioritize citing sources by “authors who are traditionally underrepresented in legal academia” and “historically marginalized identities” over articles by white men. The complaint highlights a specific instruction from the Volume 123 Production Manual that reads: “MLR prefers to cite authors who are traditionally underrepresented in legal academia. When suggesting a source, please use your best efforts to locate a source that gives voice to historically marginalized identities.”

Executive Development Editor Role: The complaint points to the job description for the Executive Development Editor, currently held by Delpha Carpenter, which explicitly states the role “leads the journal’s diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts” and is “passionate about equity issues.” FASORP argues these “diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts” subordinate “quality and academic merit.”

READ: Michigan-Based Meijer Recalls Dark Chocolate Almonds Over Hidden Allergen Hazard

The lawsuit seeks various forms of relief, including:

  • A declaration that the defendants are violating federal anti-discrimination laws and the Equal Protection Clause.
  • A permanent injunction prohibiting the defendants from considering race, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity in the selection of members, editors, articles, or citations.
  • An order compelling the MLR to adopt “colorblind and sex-neutral practices” based solely on “academic and scholarly merit.”
  • The appointment of a court monitor to oversee MLR’s selection processes.
  • An injunction preventing the University of Michigan from accepting federal funds until the court monitor certifies compliance.
  • Nominal damages, along with costs and attorneys’ fees.

The lawsuit was filed by attorneys Jonathan F. Mitchell of Mitchell Law PLLC, Benjamin M. Flowers of Ashbrook Byrne Kresge Flowers LLC, and Ryan Giannetti of America First Legal Foundation.

This case is expected to draw significant attention as it directly challenges Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives within a prominent legal institution in light of recent Supreme Court rulings on affirmative action.

Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.

Connect with us: Follow the Tampa Free Press on Facebook and Twitter for breaking news and updates.

Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.

Login To Facebook To Comment