of
Michigan
Law
School
(via
Getty)
It
didn’t
take
long
after
SFFA
v.
Harvard
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’t
even
apply
or
when
FASORP
tried
to
sue
Northwestern
on
behalf
of
White
professors,
who
again,
didn’t
even
apply.
FASORP
is
back,
and
this
time
they’re
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.
Here’s
a
snippet
of
the
email:
Doubtless
there
are
some
1Ls
who
have
been
intending
to
trumpet
their
demographic
characteristics
in
the
“personal
statements”
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.
First
things
first:
what’s
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’m
basing
what
follows
on
a
Michigan
Law
Review
application
packet
from
2014
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’t
the
big
determinant
when
it
comes
to
selection:
The
Law
Review
has
no
GPA
cutoff.
An
applicant’s
performance
in
the
Writing
Competition
is
a
more
significant
factor
in
the
selection
process
than
her
GPA.The
Law
Review
application
process
is
blind.
Student
reviewers
will
only
see
an
applicant’s
Competition
ID
number.
No
member
of
the
Law
Review
will
know
what
combination
of
factors,
including
grades,
led
to
any
individual’s
acceptance
to
the
Law
Review.
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’m
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
“diversity
bonus”
as
FASORP
is
trying
to
frame
it.
For
example,
here’s
a
series
of
examples
I
whipped
up
that
FASORP
and
the
like
may
see
as
“clear”
racial
smoking
guns
that
are
just
people
trying
to
give
examples
of
things
that
would
show
their
strong
work
ethic
or
cooperative
attitude:
-
I’ve
been
a
member
of
the
Girl
Scouts
ever
since
I
was
a
pre-teen.
That
instilled
in
me
a
sense
of
communal
belonging
and
a
value
in
sharing
the
work
load
with
my
friends.
And
while
I
didn’t
expect
it
to
shape
me
this
far
out
in
my
life,
I’ve
noticed
how
that
training
has
encouraged
me
and
members
of
my
study
group
to
remain
focused
in
our
study
sessions.
-
My
uncle
was
a
Pastor
at
First
African
Baptist
Church.
Each
Sunday,
his
sermons
came
off
as
effortless,
but
in
the
days
prior,
I’d
see
him
spend
days
preparing
for
sermons,
rehearsing
them,
and
editing
his
notes.
That
taught
me
that
polished
work
takes
a
lot
of
elbow
grease.
I’ve
carried
that
sentiment
with
me
ever
since.
It
was
especially
helpful
in
helping
me
win
my
first
Urban
Debate
League
Debate
Tournament.
-
As
a
female
veteran,
I’ve
overcome
a
lot
of
what
you
could
call
high-stakes
team
work
exercises.
From
them,
I’ve
learned
that
the
best
leaders
are
the
ones
that
get
their
hands
dirty
and
work
with
you.
Commanders
who
bark
orders
might
get
the
job
done,
but
on
balance
they’re
really
bad
for
morale.
That’s
why
I
do
what
I
can
to
make
sure
that
whoever
is
on
my
team
is
able
to
keep
a
level
head
and
buckle
in
for
the
hard
times
without
letting
the
stress
get
to
their
heads
and
weigh
us
all
down.
Based
off
of
these
faux
personal
statement
excerpts,
you
can
assume
that
these
applicants
are
members
of
a
protected
class.
The
third
example
just
comes
out
and
says
it,
but
you
can
infer
from
the
first
example
that
the
applicant
is
a
woman
and
from
the
second
that
the
applicant
is
Black.
You
can
also
infer
from
these
three
examples
that
these
would
be
people
you’d
be
willing
to
work
150
hours
with
on
top
of
your
usual
law
school
course
load
as
the
application
packet
warns.
Now,
why
in
the
hell
would
you
pick
someone
with
a
higher
writing
competition
grade
and
a
poor
to
average
personal
statement
when
you
could
pick
from
one
of
the
candidates
above
—
even
if
they
didn’t
score
the
highest
on
the
written
component?
Put
differently,
what
if
the
people
with
higher
written
scores
got
thrown
in
the
“generally
unpleasant
to
be
around”
bucket?
What
if,
and
stick
with
me
now,
their
immediate
tendency
to
conclude
that
there
must
have
been
some
plot
to
steal
what
was
rightfully
theirs
is
symptomatic
of
their
curmudgeonly
entitlement?
There’s
no
guarantee
that
the
three
fake
students
above
would
get
in
on
just
the
personal
statement
alone
—
and
I’m
sure
there
are
a
bunch
of
applicants
at
Michigan
whose
compelling
stories
and
good
writing
scores
go
hand
in
hand
—
but
to
paint
the
application
process
as
a
mechanical
assessment
of
highest
GPAs
and
highest
writing
scores
doesn’t
just
miss
the
point,
it
shows
a
failing
to
appreciate
the
criteria
for
acceptance
that
the
Law
Review
is
going
for.
Because
again,
even
if
they
didn’t
get
the
highest
score,
by
completing
the
application,
they’ve
shown
that
they
can
do
the
work.
Sounds
qualified
to
me!
And
to
that
you
might
say,
“Well
if
I
were
the
one
making
the
decisions,
I
would
have
picked
someone
else!”
Here’s
the
kicker,
you
aren’t!
And
hating
from
outside
of
the
club
just
makes
you
look
more
insufferable.
In
fact,
you
might
be
better
off
channeling
some
of
that
spite
into
soft
skills
so
that
you’ll
have
better
odds
the
next
time
you’re
in
the
running
for
a
gig
that
has
camaraderie
as
a
make
or
break
component.
You
can
read
the
full
threat
message
on
the
next
page.
Earlier:
Northwestern
Law
School
Sued
For
Having
ONLY
83
Percent
White
Faculty
Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s.
He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
cannot
swim, a
published
author
on
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected] and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.