A conservative group opposed to diversity initiatives has launched a legal battle against the University of Michigan and its student-run Michigan Law Review, claiming that straight white cisgender men are being unfairly discriminated against.
Faculty, Alumni, & Students Opposed to Racial Preferences (FASORP), a non-profit group advocating for “meritocracy in academia”, filed the lawsuit in a federal court in Detroit this June. The group alleges that the Law Review’s selection process violates federal civil rights laws, including Title VI and Title IX, by giving preference to applicants based on race and gender.
The lawsuit claims that just 40 percent of Michigan Law Review staff are chosen based purely on scores assigned by student editors. The remaining 60 percent, according to FASORP, are selected by a “Holistic Review Committee”. Applicants are allowed to submit a 750-word personal statement, which FASORP says encourages candidates to disclose personal attributes such as race, gender identity, and sexual orientation.
FASORP argues that this system is designed to ensure a particular demographic mix of students, prioritising women, non-Asian minorities, and LGBTQ+ individuals. “The members of the Holistic Review Committee rig the holistic-review process to ensure that the eventual makeup of the incoming Law Review members contains what the committee members regard as a sufficiently ‘diverse’ number of women, non-Asian racial minorities, and homosexual or transgender students,” the complaint reads.
The allegations align with recent federal scrutiny of college admissions practices. In February, Craig Trainor, acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the Department of Education, warned universities that considering race—even through student essays or extracurricular activities—could jeopardise their federal funding.
The University of Michigan responded by reaffirming its legal compliance. “The University remains steadfast in its commitment to following the law,” a spokesperson told the Detroit Free Press, adding that the institution will “vigorously” defend itself against FASORP’s claims.
FASORP is reportedly representing four members in this case—all white, straight, cisgender men. Three are law professors at accredited universities who say their academic articles were rejected by the Michigan Law Review. The fourth is a student who has applied to join the journal. However, none of the individuals are named in the suit.
The Free Press notes that FASORP faced a similar setback in 2019 when a comparable lawsuit against the Harvard Law Review was dismissed. In that case, a judge ruled that the group lacked standing because it failed to identify the individuals it was representing.
