There are many ways to prove that Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity (SR) is not valid. For example, the mixing of space and time coordinates predicted by the Lorentz Transformation (LT) is not consistent with the Law of Causality. Moreover, the combination of the FitzGerald-Lorentz length contraction of objects in motion and the corresponding time dilation of moving clocks derived from the LT is not compatible with Einstein’s equal light-speed postulate of SR.  The way in which different journals have reacted when presented with manuscripts that deal with these problems with SR is the subject of the present discussion.  Some journals simply have promptly forwarded such manuscripts to referees and thereupon published them, but one of them has rejected the same papers without the benefit of outside advice.  The possible reason for this distinctive behavior is analyzed and attributed to the reluctance of some mainstream journals to admit that their previously unqualified support for Einstein’s theory is not justified by the facts.