Even Harvard's Law Review Discriminates; 3000 Pages Prove It

WASHINGTON - June 29, 2025 - PRLog -- It appears that the Harvard Law Review also discriminated: both in rejecting many submitted articles by white male authors - a charge backed up by some 3000 pages of documents, and the testimony of a former member - and also in selecting which students are granted the very valuable privilege of being permitted to join the Review.

This evidence has proven to be strong enough to trigger formal investigations of illegal discrimination by both the federal Departments of Education and Health and Human Services; and a finding of violation of federal law could jeopardize federal funding.

The Harvard Law Review should be the last place open and deliberate (and especially documented) discrimination is not just permitted but encouraged, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf.

In other words, since the primary arguments for employing racial preferences in deciding which high school students to admit to a prestigious university have little if any relevance is selecting among graduate students who have already been admitted to a very selective law school, preferences based upon race, even if arguably justified in other situations, should have no place here, argues Banzhaf, who has won several cases involving discrimination against African Americans.

It's even more serious when articles are rejected for publication in the Review because of the author's race, says Banzhaf, since the law professors, judges, and other legal luminaries who submit articles have typically been engaged with law for many years, and have therefore been able to provide more than ample evidence of their individual legal abilities without regard to their race; something students competing for a prized position on the usually Review cannot do.

Yet a recent study showed that: . . .

Similar studies have shown that  . .,

One would certainly hope that those law students most likely to go to prestigious and highly lucrative legal positions would not violate the law long after the Supreme Court's decision outlawing racial preferences at universities, and be so dumb and blatant as to put it in writing where it almost certainly would be uncovered by any subsequent investigations or litigation, says Banzhaf.

Indeed, says Banzhaf, known for conceiving and promoting novel legal actions - these Harvard Law  Review disclosures and resulting federal investigations may encourage other former and current law review editors to leak evidence of illegal discrimination at their own law schools.

It might even encourage - and also provide ammunition for - otherwise qualified students who were passed over for membership on law reviews because of illegal discrimination to sue both the university and the law-student editors who perpetrated it, be predicts.

http://banzhaf.net/   jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com  @profbanzhaf