Posted on 01/24/2022 8:45:57 AM PST by Bruce Campbells Chin
BREAKING: The Supreme Court agrees to hear a pair of cases that challenge the race-based affirmative action policies for admission at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. The cases likely will be argued next term.
“I think the fat lady is finally about to sing on race-based preferences. And the ripple effects on the entire DEI agenda may be huge.”
Don’t be surprised if admissions committees at Universities begin to shift from overtly race based selection to other criteria that are highly correlated with being black.
During a work annual review, I was asked if I was aware of the company’s AA and EO policies. I told my reviewer that while I believe the two terms are mutually exclusive of each other, for the sake of the interview, my answer is yes.
I'm out of "the biz" now, but from what I can recall, many of the EEO policies have been supplanted by DEI policies. Technically, race discrimination in employment is still illegal, but there has been an erosion of that more recently with the emphasis on "diversity". Sort of a wink-wink/nudge-nudge that they're not given hiring preferences...but they really are.
Any institution that gets a penny of government subsidy should not be allowed to discriminate. That should also include the government itself.
Yes...but the Civil Rights Act of 1964 also bars discrimination on the basis of race for private employment and education.
here’s the problem:
the racists at Harvard and UNC want lots of blacks and Hispanics and so award them points
So, Harvard is 15 percent black, and 13 percent Hispanic because of affirmative action, and 25 percent Asian because of the opposite of affirmative action.
This would appear to leave 52 percent of the admission slots for whites, but not really.
Because a lot of the 52 percent is reserved for “legacies” (sons and daughters of alums) and children of “whales” (potential big donors).
Maybe a quarter of the seats are available to non-privileged whites.
Well, what if it were illegal to cap enrollment of Asians? Then maybe Asians go from 25 percent to 40 percent. And the seats available to non-privileged whites go from something like 25 percent to something like 10 percent.
That would NOT be politically acceptable at a public university, and might not be palatable at a private university either.
Hence, capping Asian enrollment is needed to keep non-privileged whites thinking they have a chance. Lifting the cap on Asians would make it clear that non-privileged whites are screwed at elite colleges.
"The way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."
There has essentially been a three justice swing since the Court last considered this issue, and it has been in our direction.
Supreme Court has to crack down on serial violators of discriminatory admissions, the Ivy League schools, and not only rule their discriminatory admissions process unconstitutional but appoint an overseer going forward to supervise their admissions process since they have a history of discriminating. The corrective process should require all names of applicants to be redacted during the admissions process and all questions as to race, religion or ethnicity of applicant be prohibited, Force the process to be color blind by blindfolding the admissions counsellor when it comes to the race of applicant.
The Court almost never gets involved in drafting actual enforcement mechanisms. What they'll generally do is issue an order reversing the lower court, and direct it to implement the SCOTUS ruling.
That’s because a case for whites is a non-starter these days. The point is that it is only color (here, Asian is not quite ‘color’ enough given their groups’ successes) that decides and not capability.
Affirm action has been speared repeatedly by the courts. But each individual school has kept it up just daring anyone to come after them. A legal firm that wants to make it their thing to jam the issue school by school could probably make some money..
As well it should.
You could probably bust 90% of the major law firms in this country for unlawful racial hiring preferences. But that edifice will start to crumble if these two cases go the way I think they will.
I think the Dems would secretly want it struck down, to motivate the Left to try any and every means to put a Dem majority in power that would change the law in favor of Affirmative action.
I don’t think so — racial preferences have never been all that popular, and in fact are still illegal for most employers, including government. If the Supreme Court comes out and says “content of character, not color of skin”, that’s a genie the left will never get back in the bottle.
Now this is a game changer.
Makes me wonder why this is coming up now.
Asians are considered “white” now.
Kind of funny how that classification keeps growing.
For instance, I found out recently that Portuguese were not considered white a while back.
The timing isn’t anything unusual. It’s just based off when the lower courts reach their decisions. The timing is built in to the pre-existing rules for when appeals, etc., must be filed.
We’ve lost a generation of potentially great Doctors, denied entry into Med School based upon race.
..................................................
That is an issue almost never discussed in any public forum, yet it’s patently obvious that the quality of medical care in this country has badly deteriorated over the last few decades. You’ve touched here on one of the major reasons that has happened.
Funny how she likes to have it both ways. Not sure it’s going to work out like that.
.............................................
Interesting post. Thanks for sharing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.