Recent Posts1
Health/Education / Re: Harvard head apologises as scathing reports on campus prejudice released
« Last post by mountaineer on Today at 06:48:38 pm »A Mass Leak Showed the Harvard Law Review Assessed Articles for DEI Values. Some Authors Say That’s Not a Problem.
After a massive leak, the Harvard Law Review was accused of using a racially conscious and ideologically discriminatory rubric to evaluate article submissions. But many of the authors whose works were evaluated in the leaked documents didn’t see it that way.
By Megan L. Blonigen and Caroline G. Hennigan
Harvard Crimson
June 29, 2025
After a massive leak, the Harvard Law Review was accused of using a racially conscious and ideologically discriminatory rubric to evaluate article submissions. But many of the authors whose works were evaluated in the leaked documents didn’t see it that way.
By Megan L. Blonigen and Caroline G. Hennigan
Harvard Crimson
June 29, 2025
Quote
The Harvard Law Review — a student-edited publication that is America’s most prominent law journal — has found itself engulfed in a public battle over accusations that it unfairly boosted Black and Latino authors.The hits just keep coming from America's wokest and most bigoted university.
Since April, the Washington Free Beacon, a right-wing news site, has published a steady drumbeat of leaked documents from the Law Review’s article submission process, which the Free Beacon alleged documented discrimination against white and Asian authors. In the months since, three federal agencies — the Department of Health and Human Services, the Education Department, and the Justice Department — opened investigations into the allegations.
And then, on June 19, the Free Beacon dropped a bombshell: nearly 2,300 pages showing how the Law Review’s editors evaluated article submissions.
The Free Beacon claimed they had clear evidence that the Law Review’s editors used a racially conscious and ideologically discriminatory rubric. But many authors whose articles were discussed in the leak said they saw nothing to object to in the Law Review’s process — even as others agreed that the process considered race in pernicious ways. ...
