SPIKED! The Stanford Law Review pulled articles giving the wrong side from a gay rights symposium issue, according to this report from Stanley Kurtz. I likely disagree with the spiked articles and agree with the ones they kept in — I’m pretty pro-gay-rights, as InstaPundit readers know — but that’s no excuse. This is just plain tacky behavior, and has the effect of making what’s left of the issue less credible.

UPDATE: A several readers write to say that it’s the Stanford Law & Policy Review, not the Stanford Law Review that’s involved. That’s a different journal. Reader Marty Lederman adds: “Don’t know whether the behavior was “tacky” or not — what if the anti-gay articles were miserably bad and/or horrifyingly hostile and bigoted? (Not saying they were — I haven’t read them; but if they were, what would be wrong with spiking them?).” Well, nothing. Though presumably they were solicited by the review in question (which is how symposium issues work) meaning that such is rather unlikely. And how likely is it that all such articles would just happen to be miserably bad or horrifyingly bigoted?