Law Journal Bans Questioning “Systemic Racism”

Think that the left is wrong and that “systemic racism” is more a figment of its CRT-induced fever dream than any actual facts?



Well, you’re probably right, but that also means that, if for some reason you planned on writing for it, you’re not allowed to write for Emory’s law review.

Apparently, University of San Diego’s Larry Alexander attempted to write an article critical of Emory professor Michael Perry’s “disparate racial impact theory.” According to Just the News, “The essay challenged Perry’s early argument that the courts should expand human rights through a “noninterpretive” approach to the Constitution, using a “religious” and “prophetic” framework.

Then, he was given several edits that, he claims, he was told he “could take or ignore.” But, when he decided to ignore those edits that related to his argument against systemic racism, he found out that the edits were not, in fact, optional and that the Emory Law Review would not publish his work without them.

He described that as “shameful censorship” to Just the News.

Further, reporting on the exchange, Just the News reported on emails between Alexander and the woke law journal. In its words:

"*" indicates required fields

Do you believe the FBI was planting evidence during the Mar-A-Lago raid?*
This poll subscribes you to our premium network of content. Unsubscribe at any time.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The editorial board “unanimously stated they do not feel comfortable publishing this piece as written,” editor-in-chief Danielle Kerker Goldstein wrote to Alexander, and it must be “greatly revised” to be published. 

He must not only remove the third section but also add more on “the merits” of Perry’s work to the first two sections, she wrote. Also on the chopping block: Alexander’s “objectifying term[s] ‘blacks’ and ‘the blacks’ … the discussions on criminality and heredity” and “the uncited statement that thankfully racism is not an issue today.”

Alexander flatly refused. “I cannot believe the censorious tone you are taking towards an invited symposium participant,” he wrote. “You don’t have to agree with what I’ve written, but what I’ve written I stand behind.”

Emory, for its part, denied that any censorship had taken place. Rather, it said in a statement that:

“The editorial board’s requested changes were not intended to censor the author, but rather to ask that the author address concerns regarding the degree to which the submission met the quality and sourcing standards of the Journal and properly focused on the impact of Professor Perry’s scholarship”

However, going against Emory’s argument is the fact that, as Just the News reports, “The journal editors didn’t specify what was false or below scholarly standards, which suggests they oppose scholarly work that “describe[s] true states of affairs” if it’s hurtful or unnecessarily divisive.”

Were the problem really one of scholarship, as Emory’s statement implied, wouldn’t the edits have been related to the scholarship?



Whatever it decides to call them, the edits were clearly meant to stifle any criticism of systemic racism, a concept that many leftists use to back their “equity” agenda.

By: Gen Z Conservative, editor of GenZConservative.com. Follow me on Parler and Gettr.

Notice: This article may contain commentary that reflects the author's opinion.