Conservative group sues Michigan Law Review, claiming racial discrimination
June 18 (Reuters) - A conservative legal group sued the University of Michigan's flagship law journal on Wednesday, claiming its process for selecting student editors and scholarly articles illegally discriminates against heterosexual white men by giving preference to women, minority, gay and transgender applicants.
In a lawsuit filed in a Michigan federal court, the group called Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preference said it represents three unnamed tenured or tenure-track white male heterosexual law professors whose submitted articles were rejected by the Michigan Law Review. The group is also representing an anonymous white male incoming second-year Michigan law student who has applied to be a member of the law review—a competitive position that helps bolster law student resumes.
FASORP has unsuccessfully sued two other top law reviews in recent years. A third case is pending.
The group is represented by prominent conservative Jonathan Mitchell and lawyers from America First Legal—a group headed by Stephen Miller, President Trump's deputy chief of staff.
The Michigan Law Review 'has implemented a corrupt and illegal scheme of race and sex preferences to select its student members,' according to FASORP's complaint.
The law school did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the suit Wednesday, nor did the Michigan Law Review Association, which is the student-run non-profit that runs the law review.
The suit was not unexpected. FASORP emailed Michigan law students in March, threatening to sue if the law review did not end preferences in member and article selection and saying it would subpoena the personal statements of law review applicants. Interim Michigan Law Dean Kyle Logue called FASORP's email 'threatening, harassing, and inappropriate' in a subsequent message to students and said the law review is legally permitted to consider applicants' personal statements.
FASORP's complaint alleges the law review uses students' personal statements to award positions to women, minorities, gay and transgender applicants over more qualified heterosexual white male students. And the law review is 'intentionally discriminating 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,' according to the complaint.
FASORP made similar arguments when it sued New York University's top law journal in 2023 on behalf of a white male law student. That case was dismissed the following year. FASORP also unsuccessfully sued the Harvard Law Review in 2018 and has a pending lawsuit against the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, claiming it discriminates against white men in faculty hiring and on its top law journal.
Read more:
NYU law school dodges white man's lawsuit claiming law review discrimination
Northwestern law school sued for discrimination against white men in faculty hiring
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
20 minutes ago
- The Independent
Iran's judiciary says at least 71 were killed in Israel's attack on Tehran's notorious Evin prison
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
The Beatles and Kinks would be howling about tax in Labour's Britain
'If you get too cold, I'll tax the heat / If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet / Cause I'm the taxman / Yeah, I'm the taxman.' Those lyrics by George Harrison are from Taxman, the first song on the Beatles' Revolver album, released in 1966. That same year, the Kinks released Sunny Afternoon, with Ray Davies' blunt first line: 'The taxman's taken all my dough.' Artists and songwriters are often ahead of the curve – quite literally in this case. For it wasn't until 1974 that US economist Arthur Laffer drew a line on a napkin capturing what Harrison and Davies were saying: as tax rates rise beyond a certain point, entrepreneurs and wealth creators get cheesed off. They then do less – or move overseas – and the broader economy suffers. What become known as the Laffer curve, sketched at a smart Washington restaurant during a dinner with Republican Party bigwigs, had a profound impact on policymaking in America and elsewhere. Its core idea – that there's an optimal tax rate that maximises revenue, beyond which higher rates lower total revenues by stifling economic activity – was adopted by Ronald Reagan, a showbiz-star-turned-policymaker, as he entered the White House in 1981. Laffer's insight fed into 'supply-side economics' – the school of thought that finally countered post-war 'big state' ideology. It's no good just borrowing and spending more government money in a bid to boost growth if the tax burden crushes genuine commerce. Reagan's Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 sparked much howling from vested interests grown fat on state largesse. But it cut income tax significantly – and the US averaged 3.5pc annual growth for the rest of the decade, rescuing the world's biggest economy from 1970s stagnation. Approaching the first anniversary of this Labour Government, UK tax revenues are heading for 38pc of GDP, the highest tax burden since the early 1960s – above levels which riled the Beatles and the Kinks. Yet the public finances are extremely precarious. The Government borrowed £148bn during the fiscal year that ended in April, £61bn more than the Office for Budget Responsibility estimated when that same fiscal year started. It's important to remember the vast scale of that 12-month forecasting error during current rows over whether Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, has a single-digit-billion buffer in the national accounts in four years' time – the 'fiscal headroom' that dominates political discussion. Arguing obsessively about contingencies of less than 1pc of public spending which may or may not exist in 2029 is pure displacement activity. Our political and media class meanwhile all but ignores today's stark realities – an annual debt interest bill that's twice yearly defence spending and gilt yields consistently way above those seen during Liz Truss's mini-Budget crisis of October 2022. Yes, it's important to rein-in our runaway benefits bill. Even before the Government's latest cave-in, spending on sickness and disability benefits was set to rise sharply by the end of this decade, from under £50bn to well over £70bn a year, albeit by a few billion less after Labour announced its welfare reforms. Now that Sir Keir Starmer has folded, even that minor slowdown in the rate of increase of benefit spending won't happen. The only way to fix the public finances is to get growth going, so tax revenues rise and our vast 100pc-of-GDP-plus debt burden, and near-crisis-level debt service costs, fall as a share of national income. But Labour's tax rises since last July have crushed economic activity, curtailing tax revenues and weakening the public finances further – a sure sign we're beyond the peak of the Laffer curve, with yet higher tax rates set to prove even more counter-productive. The disastrous rise in employers' National Insurance contributions (NICs) has hammered hiring, undermining NIC revenues overall. Employment has fallen every month since the policy was unveiled in last October's budget, by an astonishing 109,000 in May alone, the month after this tax on jobs was introduced. During that same autumn Budget, Reeves raised capital gains tax from 10pc to 18pc for basic-rate taxpayers and 20pc to 24pc for those paying the higher rate. The Office for Budget Responsibility has since sharply downgraded capital gains tax (CGT) revenue forecasts, wiping £23bn off the projected tax take by 2030. Labour indulged its ideological fantasies by loading more taxes on non-dom international financiers based in the UK. Now multiple billionaires have fled and foreign direct investment projects have fallen to a two-decade low – imagine the jobs and tax revenues we've lost. Building on Tory mistakes, Labour increased taxes even more on North Sea drilling, killing off countless energy extraction projects, again destroying valuable revenue streams. Then there's the spiteful imposition of VAT on school fees which has seen four times more pupils withdrawn by cash-strapped households than ministers predicted and countless school closures – another case of more taxation destroying ambition and enterprise, hitting revenues overall. Back in the early 1980s, inspired by Laffer and Reagan, Margaret Thatcher's Tories lowered tax rates, setting Britain on a path to recovery. David Cameron and Theresa May's governments gradually cut corporation tax (CT) from 28pc in 2010 to 19pc by 2017, with CT revenues hitting 2.7pc of GDP by 2019, up from 2.1pc a decade earlier when the tax rate was much higher. Taxation is complicated – the historical and contemporary examples above are subject to other factors, too. But evidence of many decades shows that countries where the state is relatively small grow faster and are more prosperous, with those consistently spending beyond their means collapsing into crisis. The Beatles and the Kinks didn't leave the UK for tax purposes, unlike the Rolling Stones. But their songs captured the national mood, speaking for the silent majority, a mood that prevails today. Taxation is far too high – and raising tax rates even more will only compound Britain's fiscal and commercial weakness.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Trump FINALLY gets a question he respects as president grins from ear-to-ear after big week on Wall Street
Donald Trump gushed over a reporter's question about whether he 'outsmarted' the financial markets with his industry-shaking tariffs. The president grinned from ear-to-ear as a reporter asked him for his reaction to Apollo Global Management chief economist Torsten Sløk saying Trump may have 'outsmarted everyone' with his tariffs. 'Mr. President, a leading global economist just did a one-eighty and says your tariff plan, you may have outsmarted everybody with it. What is your message?' the reporter asked. Trump smiled as he responded: 'I love this. I love this question. This is the favorite. This is the best question I've ever been asked because I've been going through abuse for years on this. 'Because, as you know, we're taking in hundreds of billions of dollars, no inflation whatsoever.' The reporter added in a follow-up question for Trump's 'message to critics who think your tariff plan caused a recession?' 'I think they should go back to business school,' Trump responded. 'It's so obvious. It's so obvious. I mean, we're taking in billions and billions of dollars from China and a lot of other countries.' It came as Wall Street continued its recent rally this week, with the S&P500 and Nasdaq hitting all-time closing highs on Friday. In Sløk's report that Trump appeared to enjoy, the economist speculated that Trump would keep tariffs below his most aggressive rates to ease market uncertainty while using them as leverage to get better trade deals. 'Maybe the strategy is to maintain 30% tariffs on China and 10% tariffs on all other countries and then give all countries 12 months to lower nontariff barriers and open up their economies to trade,' he wrote. The report came as Trump's 90-day pause on 'reciprocal tariffs' is set to come to an end early next month. Sløk said that Trump should consider extending the deadline to a whole year, which he said would give the global markets time to adjust to a 'new world with permanently higher tariffs.' 'This would seem like a victory for the world and yet would produce $400 billion of annual revenue for US taxpayers,' he said. 'Trade partners will be happy with only 10% tariffs and U.S. tax revenue will go up. 'Maybe the administration has outsmarted all of us.' Trump shocked the global markets in April as he introduced a raft of 'Liberation Day' tariffs, but the gamble may have paid off as markets soared in recent weeks and the US signed a number of trade deals with foreign nations The soaring stock market numbers came as trade deal hopes fueled investor risk appetite and economic data helped solidify expectations for rate cuts from the U.S. Federal Reserve. The rise came even after Trump terminated trade negotiations with Canada in response to its digital tax on technology companies. 'This market's been pretty resilient,' said Chuck Carlson, chief executive officer at Horizon Investment Services in Hammond, Indiana. 'Investors are riding momentum and looking for breakouts.' 'They don't want to get caught on the wrong side of this thing,' Carlson added. 'Many investors already have missed out. And now you have the S&P flirting with an all-time high.' While tariffs have yet to affect price growth, inflation continues to hover above the Fed's 2% annual inflation target. A separate report from the University of Michigan confirmed consumer sentiment has improved this month, but remains well below December's post-election bounce. Financial markets have priced in a 72% likelihood that the Fed will implement its first rate cut of the year in September, with a smaller, 21% probability of a rate cut coming as soon as July, according to CME's FedWatch tool. Washington and Beijing reached an agreement to expedite rare-earth shipments to the U.S., a White House official said, well ahead of the July 9 expiration of the 90-day postponement of U.S. President Donald Trump's "reciprocal" tariffs. Additionally, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the Trump administration's trade deals with 18 of the main U.S. trading partners could be done by the September 1 Labor Day holiday.
