UPDATE: The catfight that went national.
We don’t know what the fight was about, exactly, but at least one mutual acquaintance is pretty sure it was about a boy. The Harvard tipster tells us:
Stephanie’s close friend Yelena Shagall forwarded the email out after Stephanie confronted her because Yelena had slept with a mutual friend’s ex-boyfriend. During this fight, Yelena told Stephanie she would “ruin her life.”
I did say that I sensed some envy as the cause of this, didn’t I?
E-mail on race sparks a furor at Harvard Law. The email.
I absolutely do not rule out the possibility that African Americans are, on average, genetically predisposed to be less intelligent. I could also obviously be convinced that by controlling for the right variables, we would see that they are, in fact, as intelligent as white people under the same circumstances. The fact is, some things are genetic.
The clarification she sent out later.
I absolutely do not rule out the possibility that African Americans are, on average, genetically predisposed to be less intelligent. I could also obviously be convinced that by controlling for the right variables, we would see that they are, in fact, as intelligent as white people under the same circumstances. The fact is, some things are genetic. African Americans tend to have darker skin. Irish people are more likely to have red hair.
Okay, this is a private email and it is taken from a conversation. I’m not defending her, but doesn’t she have the right to free speech? Why was a private email routed by someone that got the Black Law Student Association underwear in a knot?
“I just hate leaving things where I feel I misstated my position,’’ Grace wrote. “I absolutely do not rule out the possibility that African-Americans are, on average, genetically predisposed to be less intelligent.’’
The lengthy e-mail, sent to her two dinner companions six months ago, ignited an Internet firestorm this week when it was leaked and first reported Wednesday by the legal blog abovethelaw.com, followed by other websites.
I thought that law school was where you learned to take an argument and discuss it? It stands to reason that if you have a different opinion, you would (behave like a grown up) take the discussion to the table. I’m a bit perplexed about why this incredibly bright and diverse group would air a private email in public?
I could be wrong here, but I smell jealousy here. Stephanie Grace apparently is quite the law student.
Grace, an editor of the Harvard Law Review, is headed for a federal clerkship in California with Ninth Circuit Court Judge Alex Kozinski. She graduated from Princeton University in 2007 with the highest honors and obtained a degree in sociology, according to the university’s registrar. A Princeton website said Grace conducted research on how the racial composition of one’s freshman year roommates influences behaviors, attitudes, and perceptions in subsequent college years.
Did she read Michelle Obama’s thesis? And why is the mommy Dean involved?
Minow called the incident “sad and unfortunate’’ but said she was heartened by the student’s apology. She added: “We seek to encourage freedom of expression, but freedom of speech should be accompanied by responsibility.’’
Grace issues an apology for a private email that was leaked around the world.
On Wednesday, Grace sent an apology to leaders of the Black Law Students Association, the president of the student government, Minow, and several faculty members.
“I am deeply sorry for the pain caused by my e-mail. I never intended to cause any harm, and I am heartbroken and devastated by the harm that has ensued. I would give anything to take it back,’’ Grace said in the apology, obtained by the Globe.
If this is what law school is all about, I have to wonder where these children will eventually find work? Silly me, I know the answer already…the government.
Perhaps, Ms. Grace is “misguided” in her thoughts? That would be the same term that POTUS used about those racists misguided folks in Arizona earlier in the week. Just my opinion, but she should be allowed to express herself in private however she believes.

April 30, 2010 at 12:37 pm
It’s not simply a matter of one person exercising free speech as much as it is a person who is set to clerk for a federal judge exercising poor subjective thought processes and even poorer judgement in putting her thoughts into an email.
It is also indicative of an undercurrent at top legal schools: that the non-whites at the schools did not get there by an assessment of intelligence as much as a quota system.
It was stupid for Stephanie Grace to say, moronic for her to write and now she gets to experience the benefit of her stupidity.
April 30, 2010 at 1:52 pm
I’m quite opposed to anyone (let alone a third year law student) taking a private email and making it public for precisely the reasons that you are stating.
Don’t you believe that she should have the right to keep her emails private? How do you know that she will not change her opinions and views while in law school. She is very young. You do not know what growth will take place in the next few years. yet you wish to punish her because of her beliefs? Who will debate and discuss with her now that you have labeled her?
I assume you would prefer this person to “just think” about those ugly thoughts and never say them to you outright. Perhaps, she is growing and questioning what she believes already. We will never know, will we? Instead we make an example out of her because we wish to break her.
What shall you do about others that share these same thoughts, and have them deeply ingrained into every fiber of their being? By behaving as judge, jury and executioner, there will be no discussion. There will be no growth. You will never truly know who is with you or against you. How will you destroy them? Being a minority, I must ask you if you have ever thought about your own prejudices and how you affect the world?
As a clerk, she is in no position to do anything of significance. She would easily experience the quick wrath of a federal judge if and when she made her beliefs known.
You must be perfect, otherwise you would never state something like this. So you will punish her by branding her. There seems to be a great lack of wisdom in your argument to chastise and punish her for what should have been a private thought.
Get over it. Whether it is said to your face directly or indirectly, your responsive actions will speak volumes. If you are there because of a quota system, then you must change the atmosphere by your actions. Ms. Grace would have been placed in time out soon enough because of her perceptions. This lynching will not quench anyone’s thirst for vengence. If anything, it forces me to believe that those who made the quota cut are just that and nothing more. Isn’t that what no one wants to be thought of? How sad.
April 30, 2010 at 1:15 pm
I defend her both her right to the privacy of her incredibly stupid email and her right to be an ignorant racist moron.
I also defend the right of anyone learning of her incredibly stupid ignorant racist email to judge her accordingly by the content of it.
April 30, 2010 at 1:59 pm
I see a “gunner” attitude at play here to take down a first year female. I do believe that there should have been discussion and not a lynching of this student. We all have a right to “free” speech and her email should not have been given to the world. That was punishment, that was not discourse.
April 30, 2010 at 2:41 pm
“I see a “gunner” attitude at play here to take down a first year female.”
I would not be surprised. One sees an ever expanding misogyny in all places; much of it by design and for a purpose beyond mere localized exercises of misogyny imo.
I can imagine few circumstances in which I would leak an email and this is not one of them. (If people’s lives depended on it I would).
However, one is making a big mistake if one thinks the contents of their emails are always considered private or protected: http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2010/when-courts-no-longer-consider-email-be-private-what-left
I am having a hard time mustering any sympathy for this privileged moronic racist girl. The thought this idiot could be a judge some day is not at all palatable.
I do not believe her adversaries are jealous, I believe they are disgusted with her; but as you said, I could be wrong, I don’t know any of these people.
I have many views that are not held by a majority of people I meet: but I stand by my views openly. I do not say one thing in private and another in public.
She said it, but she sure backed down in a hurry rather than try to defend her precambrian style philosophy of evolution. That indicates to me that she knows it’s racist and indefensible, she just likes the idea of it anyhow.
Nom says: no pass here for the brat.
April 30, 2010 at 3:37 pm
I think that there should have been discourse Nom. That is the only way to grow. We don’t know what her background is. Someone once said that today’s environment is a very different playing field and “free speech” is not so much “free” any more. I think she wanted to discuss this only because she wrote the email. If she really was true to those beliefs, her nose would have stuck in the air with an “I don’t care what anyone thinks.” That is why I believe that it was wrong to open the emails and disseminate them.
I think she would have been called to task long before she ever got out of law school personally. I would prefer that someone was open about their beliefs and discuss them early on rather than find out that this is how a SCOTUS member feels later on.
April 30, 2010 at 5:38 pm
well you are kinder than I, no doubt about it: jmo her “idea” (I use the term loosely) should have been refuted for her back in grade school; seriously, does this girl not grasp that the belief women are too stupid to go to law school is not exactly ancient history? 2003 was only the 50th year anniversary of Harvard Law’s (founded in 1817) first women grads! how can she not get it?? the mind boggles.
April 30, 2010 at 5:58 pm
Oh Nom, you keep cracking me up!! lol
April 30, 2010 at 1:17 pm
I defend
herboth heroops need to learn to read before sending
April 30, 2010 at 3:18 pm
Did Obama write that?
April 30, 2010 at 3:38 pm
Who knows…his stuff has never been published.
April 30, 2010 at 4:33 pm
LOL
Touche!
Then I am going to assume he did!
April 30, 2010 at 5:40 pm
I thought Favreau wrote for him, or perhaps his teleprompter had acquired a rudimentary artificial intelligence.
Now I’m embarrassed.
April 30, 2010 at 6:05 pm
Ahahahahaha, you’re killing me Nom.
April 30, 2010 at 8:49 pm
The third year student has a chip on his/her shoulder along the lines of “I’m gonna expose you and teach you a lesson.” How cocky, arrogant, and supremely self-confident. Instead of using it as a teaching lesson in countering the mentality, the third year student took it as a ticket to notoriety, exposing his/her willful malice to hurt someone (probably for the rest of their career, sadly), instead of using it as an opportunity to help someone overcome their bigoted mentality and make their social and work interactions and possibly even their caseload, more meaningful and beneficial for society.
Bigots can learn lessons and mend their ways. Malice is ingrained and used as an ugly power ploy over others.
April 30, 2010 at 9:41 pm
Salient words of wisdom.
May 1, 2010 at 12:06 am
I’ll agree that malice is a character trait that is harder to fix than bigotry, but I’m thinking anyone who can reach their 20′s and still have “ideas” of racial superiority is pretty freaking well beyond the probability of rehabbing, herself.
And who knows whether this is the first sign the girl was a racist clueless moron? I’m thinking not. Maybe somebody just had their fill of her.
May 1, 2010 at 6:55 am
She could have led an extraordinarily sheltered life, we don’t know. Yes, this was a most assuredly a case of enough is enough and beta jealousy. Law review is filled with alphas.
May 1, 2010 at 5:17 am
[...] Private “Racist?” Email Unleashes Hell @ HLS [...]
May 2, 2010 at 5:08 pm
As Above the Law editor David Lat notes, Judge Richard Posner has written similar things and is often welcomed to Harvard to speak:
“In Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline,” Posner defended Charles Murray and Harvard’s Richard Herrstein, authors of “The Bell Curve,” writing that their discussion of race and IQ was, at worst, a “rhetorical mistake.” There ought to be nothing controversial, Posner continued, about the propositions that 1) a black-white IQ gap exists and 2) it has genetic as well as sociological roots.”
Similarly, Peter Singer in ‘A Darwinian Left’ notes that not all inequality is necessarily due to unfairness.
David Friedman in his post ‘Who is Against Evolution?’ notes the irony of those who believe in evolution but refuse to consider its implications.
Also, Harvard Psychology Professor Steven Pinker in his Edge Essay notes that “Groups of people may differ genetically in their average talents and temperaments”.
http://www.edge.org/q2006/q06_3.html