Stephen Miller’s legal campaign against what he perceives as discriminatory practices at New York University’s Law Review has hit a significant roadblock. A federal judge in Manhattan recently dismissed the lawsuit, which had accused the prestigious publication of bias against white men. The lawsuit had claimed that the Law Review’s consideration of sex, race, gender identity, or sexual orientation in its selection process was unfairly discriminatory.
In his ruling, Judge Vernon Broderick emphasized that the Law Review’s practices did not constitute unlawful discrimination. “Although the Law Review considered sex, race, gender identity, or sexual orientation before the Supreme Court’s decision in SFFA, nothing about this practice was unlawful,” Judge Broderick wrote. He further elaborated that the practices of the past “do not and cannot give rise to a plausible inference of discrimination today.” The complete opinion can be read here.
This dismissal could have broader implications, particularly as institutions navigate the landscape of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives post the Supreme Court’s ruling in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. However, as pointed out by several legal analysts, this ruling does not preclude future lawsuits that challenge the application processes or editorial decisions of the Law Review based on similar grounds. For more context on these issues, a detailed analysis is available on Above the Law.
Miller’s recent activities also include a lawsuit against Macy’s for discriminatory hiring practices, adding another layer to his legal strategies that seek to challenge DEI initiatives in various institutions. This trend of litigation highlights an ongoing legal and social debate surrounding affirmative action and diversity policies in educational settings and beyond.
For a complete overview of the dismissed lawsuit and its potential implications, you can refer to the report by Bloomberg Law here.