{"id":113008,"date":"2025-04-01T15:42:45","date_gmt":"2025-04-01T23:42:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/04\/01\/totally-serious-and-not-made-up-group-hijacks-michigan-law-listserv-to-preserve-evidence-and-expose-unworthy-students\/"},"modified":"2025-04-01T15:42:45","modified_gmt":"2025-04-01T23:42:45","slug":"totally-serious-and-not-made-up-group-hijacks-michigan-law-listserv-to-preserve-evidence-and-expose-unworthy-students","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/04\/01\/totally-serious-and-not-made-up-group-hijacks-michigan-law-listserv-to-preserve-evidence-and-expose-unworthy-students\/","title":{"rendered":"Totally Serious And Not Made-Up Group Hijacks Michigan Law Listserv To \u2018Preserve Evidence\u2019 And Expose \u2018Unworthy\u2019 Students"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
University of Michigan Law School (via Getty)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

It didn\u2019t take long after SFFA v. Harvard<\/em> before the right set aim to widen what the holding makes unconstitutional. There have been several feints against law reviews with shady standing issues, like when Stephen Miller tried to sue NYU Law Review on behalf of someone who didn\u2019t even apply<\/a> or when FASORP tried to sue Northwestern on behalf of White professors, who again, didn\u2019t even apply.<\/p>\n

FASORP is back, and this time they\u2019re targeting Michigan Law. Somehow, the organization found a way to email everyone at the school a glove to the face, accusing their Law Review of unconstitutional racial preferencing and threatening to doxx whoever they ultimately find to be unworthy. <\/p>\n

Here\u2019s a snippet of the email:<\/p>\n

\n
\n

Doubtless there are some 1Ls who have been intending to trumpet their demographic characteristics in the \u201cpersonal statements\u201d that they submit to the Law Review, in the hopes of obtaining a diversity bonus and stealing a place on the journal from a more deserving student with better grades and better scores on the writing competition. We strongly suggest that you reconsider this strategy, despite the past success of others who have used their race, sexual proclivities, or gender non-conforming behavior to obtain positions on the Law Review that they did not deserve. FASORP will subpoena every personal statement in discovery, and if we uncover evidence that you obtained your spot on the Law Review through race or sex preferences then you be exposed as a DEI hire on social media. FASORP will also notify your future employers that your Law Review credential is tainted and should be disregarded. <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

First things first: what\u2019s with all this harping on skipping over students with better grades? Surely the FASORP bros read the prospective applicant packet before they typed up all this whining. Full disclosure, I\u2019m basing what follows on a Michigan Law Review application packet from 2014<\/a> and am making the assumption that the text of more recent application packets has been consistent. With that out of the way, the Law Review goes out of the way to make it clear that grades aren\u2019t the big determinant when it comes to selection:<\/p>\n

\n
\n

The Law Review has no GPA cutoff. An applicant\u2019s performance in the Writing Competition is a more significant factor in the selection process than her GPA.<\/p>\n

The Law Review application process is blind. Student reviewers will only see an applicant\u2019s Competition ID number. No member of the Law Review will know what combination of factors, including grades, led to any individual\u2019s acceptance to the Law Review.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Besides the writing competition scores, the Law Review clearly states two other factors that applicants will be evaluated for: a strong work ethic and a cooperative and enthusiastic attitude. Now, I\u2019m going to say this as plainly as I possibly can for all the readers out there: writers can mention (or give grounds for inferences about ) race without trying to appeal to some \u201cdiversity bonus\u201d as FASORP is trying to frame it. For example, here\u2019s a series of examples I whipped up that FASORP and the like may see as \u201cclear\u201d racial smoking guns that are just people trying to give examples of things that would show their strong work ethic or cooperative attitude: <\/p>\n