A conservative legal group backed by top allies of President Donald Trump is suing the University of Michigan and its flagship law journal, alleging its editor and article selection process illegally discriminates against white, male, heterosexual, and conservative applicants.
Filed late Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, the complaint targets the Michigan Law Review’s so-called “holistic review” process. The lawsuit claims the process favors women, racial minorities, and LGBT candidates while penalizing white and Asian applicants, especially those with conservative or Christian views, based on race, ideology, and religion.
“Illegal DEI practices permeate everything that the Michigan Law Review does,” the complaint stated, pointing to language in a job description for the role of the “Executive Development Editor,” which asks that the role should “facilitate” DEI values through “recruitment, journal culture, and scholarship.”
The lawsuit, brought by the group Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preferences, cites violations of Title VI, the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, and equal rights under the law. The group is represented by prominent lawyer Jonathan Mitchell and America First Legal, a conservative firm founded by Trump’s senior adviser Stephen Miller.
The 32-page complaint alleges the journal has abandoned merit-based criteria in favor of ideological and identity-based preferences that disproportionately exclude white, male, heterosexual, and religious contributors. FASORP says the Law Review’s opaque scoring of personal statements and writing samples masks discriminatory decision-making.
“No American should ever face discrimination based on their race,” said Gene Hamilton, president of America First Legal. “This taxpayer-funded institution is using secret committees to enforce illegal DEI quotas that reward identity over merit.”
FASORP said it represents three anonymous white male professors whose articles were rejected and a second-year law student who claims his application to join the journal was denied due to race and sexual orientation. The group previously sued Harvard University, New York University, and Northwestern University over similar practices.
The complaint seeks a court-ordered overhaul of the Michigan Law Review’s policies, an end to discriminatory selection standards, and a federal monitor to ensure compliance. It also calls for the suspension of federal funds until the university adopts race-neutral procedures.
The lawsuit is the latest in a series of high-profile challenges from America First Legal, which has mounted a national legal campaign since the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision striking down race-based affirmative action in college admissions. Since then, the group has expanded its legal strategy beyond academia, using the ruling as a springboard to challenge corporate DEI initiatives in the private sector.
Even before the high court’s landmark affirmative action decision, AFL filed employment discrimination suits against major companies, including Morgan Stanley and McKinsey & Company, alleging illegal race and gender quotas in hiring, training, and promotion. The group’s legal efforts have drawn praise from conservative lawmakers and watchdog groups that say AFL is restoring colorblind equality under the law.
The lawsuit against the University of Michigan arrives as left-wing civil rights groups pressure the university to maintain its DEI agenda. In April, groups including the Legal Defense Fund and National Women’s Law Center urged Michigan to resist “conservative attacks” on campus diversity initiatives.
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN TO CLOSE ITS DEI OFFICES
The Trump administration has made clear it will not fund DEI-based programs in federally supported institutions. The University of Michigan recently announced plans to shut down its central DEI office, though the plaintiffs in this case argue that this has not resulted in a total end to DEI policies at the university.
The Washington Examiner contacted the university and its law review program for comment.