When the online self-described “legal tabloid” Above the Law reported on Stephanie Grace’s now infamous e-mail—which suggested that African-Americans are predisposed to be less intelligent—two weeks ago, they should have been able to predict the blogosphere storm that would ensue. Shortly after Above the Law’s post, which attempted to keep the author of the e-mail and the individual who forwarded it anonymous, Gawker released their names and pictures to the public. Public Internet sentiment comes out strongly against Grace, a third-year Harvard Law School student, and calls are even being made for her federal clerkship to be revoked. We find these attacks on Stephanie Grace, based on a leaked private e-mail, to be distressing and alarming. It is inappropriate that her identity and future have now been made topics of very active and very public debate.

Although we strongly disagree with the content of Grace’s email, we do not think that her clerkship should be revoked. Although Grace’s actions do demonstrate a lack of judgment, the e-mail’s release was beyond her control. Gawker and other sites are now reporting that the message was actually forwarded a while after it was initially sent. With this in mind, the public shaming of Grace may not have been motivated by wholly pure intentions. Thus, we find it entirely illegitimate for students at HLS to target Grace alone. Surely the individuals who leaked her private e-mail to the campus and to the press deserve significant condemnation. We are dismayed that her private e-mail was exposed in such a manner and hope that people are able to continue to express non-politically correct views (that do not constitute hate speech or pose a clear and present danger) in order to provoke discussion and awareness.

By no means are we attempting to trivialize the content of Grace’s e-mail. The assumptions contained within it are offensive, misguided, and fundamentally false. However, Grace’s e-mail should have been handled very differently. Numerous articles argue that race is largely a social construct, and that intelligence does not appear to be influenced by racial genetic differences.

Leaking the private, albeit imprudent, e-mail to the public has invited a barrage of undeserved, venomous criticism against both Grace and the University itself. Bloggers and commentators have made unfair and inaccurate mischaracterizations of the Harvard community based upon the statements of a single student. Harvard University is committed to racial, cultural, and socioeconomic diversity and acceptance; the actions of Stephanie Grace are not emblematic of the institution as a whole. It is worth noting that this e-mail garnered so much attention, especially from the press, because it was written at Harvard. Had such a message been forwarded at other institutions, it is questionable whether it would have generated the same reaction. It is frightening that, as Harvard students, our private e-mails and thoughts are available for public and potentially venomous scrutiny. Further, the power that blogs such as Gawker and Above the Law have to publicly tarnish reputations is disconcerting. Despite their existence in a journalistic grey area, bloggers should be held more accountable for the power that they wield and, as such, must act responsibly.