There
are
multiple
ways
to
earn
a
slot
in
University
of
Michigan
Law
Review.
Grading-on
is
the
dream,
but
law
students
that
fall
on
other
points
of
the
curve
still
have
a
path
to
victory.
While
the
lesser
known
noting-on
is
an
option,
the
lion’s
share
of
people
that
didn’t
get
in
on
their
grades
alone
are
admitted
based
on
the
write-in
process.
Chances
are
you
know
what
that
entails
if
you’re
a
regular
ATL
reader
—
you
get
assigned
an
annoying
packet
to
work
through,
you
submit
your
less
than
stellar
grades
along
with
a
personal
statement
and
wish
for
the
best.
The
personal
statement
is
meant
to
offer
each
applicant
a
second
shot
at
the
Law
Review.
Your
application
is
already
a
little
scuffed
by
virtue
of
not
automatically
being
eligible
from
your
grades
alone:
the
work
you
show
in
the
write-on
process,
coupled
with
the
tales
of
loving
hard
work
and
not
being
paid
for
that
you
crammed
in
your
personal
statement,
are
meant
to
flesh
out
your
odds
and
provide
a
second
bite
at
the
apple.
But
that
isn’t
how
FASORP
sees
it.
Instead,
they
view
the
personal
statement
as
a
dastardly
tool
that
roots
meritocracy
out
of
the
selection
process
in
favor
for
wanton
race
and
sex
based
discrimination.
Is
that
what’s
actually
happening?
Probably
not;
the
group
has
fought
and
failed
twice
in
similar
suits
against
NYU
and
Harvard,
but
why
suffer
the
burden
of
writing
better
personal
statements
when
you
can
sue
another
big
name
law
school?
Reuters
has
coverage:
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.
I’ll
give
credit
where
it’s
due:
the
last
time
Stephen
Miller
&
Co.
tried
to
represent
an
anonymous
white
male
who
wanted
to
make
law
review
they
didn’t
even
wait
for
him
to
apply
first.
Progress!
This
really
does
scream
of
throwing
spaghetti
at
the
wall
until
something
sticks.
If
the
Michigan
case
doesn’t
go
how
FASORP
wants,
they’ll
just
donate
more
resources
toward
the
same
lawsuit
they
have
against
Harvard
until
they
get
what
they
want.
If
that
doesn’t
do
it,
maybe
they’ll
take
the
witch
hunt
to
Columbia?
In
the
meantime,
I’ll
leave
the
unnamed
rejected
professors
and
students
with
a
bit
of
advice
many
Black
children
have
grown
up
knowing:
Who
knows?
Maybe
you
would
have
got
your
article
published
or
accepted
on
to
law
review
if
you
were
just
a
stronger
applicant?
Better
luck
with
your
future
endeavors.
Stephen
Miller
Takes
Break
From
Suing
Gay
Pop-Tarts
To
Sue
NYU
Law
Review
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
is
learning
to
swim, is
interested
in
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.