Harvard Pushes Back Against Law Review Discrimination Claims
Harvard Law Review (HLR) is defending against the charge that it considered race and sex in selecting articles. The Washington Free Beacon writes that internal memoranda from the HLR describe editors referencing a “Rotopool rubric” that includes queries regarding the race of the writer and other protected classes—used to eliminate roughly 85% of the submissions.
Out of 461 memos reviewed, the report found 61 instances where editors discussed race or gender of article sources and six involving the authors themselves. One editor reportedly rejected a piece by an Asian American scholar, citing a need for more Black and Latino/Latina authors.
As a reaction, Harvard released a three-page fact sheet to refute the allegations and said the Law Review makes no recommendations or selections based on gender or race. The university also pointed out that author names remain anonymous during the initial review and decisions are reached collectively by all the editors.
But legal commentators note that since HLR is a part of Harvard and funded by the federal treasury, it arguably falls within the prohibition of Title VI and Title IX against race and sex discrimination. Some even think the practices of the HLR would be violating the prohibition on race-sensitive contracting decisions in Section 1981.
Harvard insists on its editorial procedures being merit-oriented and that recent coverage in the media inaccurately represents its policies. Nevertheless, the matter reflects expanding legal attention toward diversity and inclusion practices in the field of academic publishing.
