⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Seventh Circuit hears Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preferences challenge Northwestern University over law-school hiring and law-review selection. The group alleges that race and sex preferences disadvantage its white male members when competing for faculty appointments and publication. Its complaint relies on three unnamed law professors. According to the complaint, two had told Northwestern faculty contacts that they wanted lateral appointments, and all three intended to submit scholarship to the law review. The group seeks court orders changing future hiring and journal-selection practices, rather than damages for a particular past job rejection. The appeal concerns whether those claims can go forward. Article Three standing concerns a plaintiff's personal stake: a concrete injury linked to the defendant that the requested court order can redress. That is separate from whether the complaint states a legally valid discrimination claim. Listen for whether the descriptions of the unnamed members and their plans sufficiently connect the challenged practices to a future injury. Questions about experienced professors moving between law schools are also distinct from questions about entry-level applicants, or students seeking places on a law review. Keep those threshold issues separate from deciding whether discrimination actually occurred.

FASORP v. Northwestern University (No. 26-1349) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued November 5, 2026.