The article used by Adam Hamby (as noted in his description box) with a link to the court papers:
https://news.yahoo.com/critical-race-theory-day-court-192100365.html
A few highlights from the court:
“There’s a big difference between prohibiting racial discrimination and endorsing disparate impact theory. It’s the difference between securing equality of opportunity regardless of race and guaranteeing equality of outcome based on race. It’s the difference between color blindness and Critical Race Theory.”
“Prohibiting racial discrimination means we must be blind to race. Disparate impact theory forces the opposite: it requires us to look at race - to check for racial imbalance and then decide what steps must be taken to advance some people at the expense of others based upon their race.”
Rev. Martin Luther King and laws crafted upon his vision were also compared to Ibram X. Kendi’s vision and the stance of CRT.
An explanation:
Ibram X Kendi: “A racist policy is any measure that produces or sustains racial inequity between racial groups.”
Also him: “The only solution to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only solution to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only solution to present discrimination is future discrimination.”
CRT is the kryptonite to Observe, Test, Confirm.
As the court noted: “Disparate impact theory is evidence of racial imbalance is evidence of racial discrimination. But this presumption of innocence runs into a bedrock principle of our legal system. We ordinarily assume innocence, not bigotry.”
So not this is “law of the land”, right?
Just like they got ‘gay marriage’ by judicial fiat?
There is racial inequality (B). Let’s observe, test, confirm, come at this with a variety of hypotheses, and see what is causing it (A). A to B.
CRT: No. There is inequity, therefore racism. B to A.
Bump