Sept 22 (Reuters) - A non-profit group opposing race-based education policies has filed more than a dozen U.S. civil rights complaints this year against universities, challenging the legality of offering minority scholarships, summer study and residency programs to promote racial diversity.
The challenges are part of a growing campaign against diversity initiatives after a U.S. Supreme Court landmark ruling in June outlawed use of race in college admissions, commonly known as affirmative action. Conservative activists say the decision should extend to all educational programs, and some groups have also challenged corporate diversity policies.
Asshats like these may sing a different tune when lawsuits targeting legacy scholarships and the like start popping up.
Lol these asshats didn’t go to college…
Yes they fucking do.
The Conservative apparatus around streamlining young Conservative thinkers through the pipeline of elite universities is profound.
These fucks all go to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and the like. It’s a major part of how they have power, the networking that comes from all this. They do it using deep pocketed donors, legacy admissions, and all kinds of scholarships and Federalist Society-style influence. That’s why it is SO important to them to keep anyone who grew up outside of that system – like a black kid who grew up poor in a city – WAY the fuck out.
They already are. Legacy admissions are rightfully being targeted. Honestly they should have done away with those before even starting affirmative action.
Being a legacy admit tells us that you grew up with all kinds of advantage in your favor to get into the school. You were more likely to have connections, know the bueracratic ins-and-outs, know how to cater your application to what the university likes, etc. . Being legacy means your test scores should almost inherently be treated as less impressive than identical scores from a non-legacy because the non-legacy almost certainly showed more grit and effort to get to the same place.
Which is the same exact logic as how being an underrepresented minority student should almost certainly weight your scores more strongly than someone with identical scores from an over represented social group since it almost certainly took more grit and effort to get to those scores for someone starting from that point of disadvantage. On the same logic that someone who grew up dirt poor and self-studied has shown far more grit than the rich kid who had a team of tutors. The former put blood, sweat, and tears into getting that A. The latter is a loser if he DIDN’T get the A.
And this plays out in reality, which is why affirmative action rules have been shown to increase academic performance of schools that have them. They get better students by pursuing those policies.
All that to say, they should’ve gone after legacy admits INSTEAD of affirmative action. But they didn’t because Students for Fair Admissions was not really concerned with helping Asian kids get into elite universities. They were after affirmative action because Edward Blum is a hardline anti-black neoconservative and works to repeal any laws designed to ensure black representation or participation in the American political system. It’s the same people that brought Shelby to the SCOTUS and is still actively trying to strike down the Voting Rights Act.
Money is speech according to the supreme court. These groups cannot dictate how private organizations hand out money.
The idea that Supreme Court justices – ESPECIALLY conservative Supreme Court justices – even pretend to have ideological consistency is absurd. They never have and the aren’t going to start any time soon.
Never forget about how the known segregationist Rehnquist invented the Major Questions Doctrine purely in order to ignore the laws passed by Congress and replace the legislature with the bench just because he felt like it. And the same people that will endlessly call for states rights or declare inconvenient political questions strictly the purview of Congress will happily invoke it again and again any time their own political preferences are being ignored. Like Roberts just making the fuck up that Congress’s authorization to regulate pollution doesn’t allow the EPA to regulate pollution on a fully moot case they had no business even granting cert to, much less ruling on.
Fuck, I wish people understood just how utterly depraved and corrupt the SCOTUS is. There is zero reason to expect ANY legitimate rulings out of it. It does not and nearly never has cared about the law or civil rights.
A good book on this is A People’s History of the Supreme Court. People think it had legitimacy because they tend to remember the few good rulings that helped Civil rights (Brown v Board of Education, Roe v Wade), but a lot of it’s decisions have been pretty terrible for the people in the US, from their decisions on slavery, segregation (before Brown), the Bush/Gore election results, every decisions they have made lately, etc.
People don’t seem to grasp just how fucked that EPA case, and it’s consequences are. Chevron deference is out the window. Defeats the entire purpose of having regulatory agencies staffed by experts in their respective fields.
Which, of course, is their intention. Dismantling the “administrative state.” The fact that so many poor and middle class people have been fooled into fervently supporting these ghouls is so fucked up.
naah its only speech when evil corporations are lining the pockets of corrupt politicians. Here there is probably some reason as to why giving money to help disadvntaged kids get an education is not speech because these kids cannot influence politics directly or some bs.
That would be true if they cared about consistency and weren’t massive hypocrites.
It says a lot that they go after things like this and not legacy admissions.
Affirmative action helps certain races and hurts certain races. It makes it harder for Asian kids to get into good schools simply because of their race. It’s racist to think that every Asian kid had a good upbringing and rich parents. Affirmative action is (well-intentioned) racism that will not fix systemic racism and it alienates people that probably encountered certain degrees of racism and hardship themself.
Looking at metrics like net worth would be a much more intelligent path forward. Rich kids don’t need help getting into school, poor kids do. It doesn’t matter if those poor kids are Asian, black, white, or whatever. Look at money, not skin color. It’s not that hard to treat people equally regardless of their skin color.
I assume they’ll go after the United Negro College Fund next.
A non-profit group opposing race-based education policies
That’s a lot of words to say “racists”.
Like, I know they don’t teach the Civil War and Reconstruction with any nuance in the South and most rural counties, but damn. And I say this as someone who grew up in North Carolina. It took me an embarrassingly long time (early 20s) to understand why AA was important. But it’s 2023 now; it’s a lot easier to get that info.
Gutter trash
They’re so racist.
“challenging the legality of offering minority scholarships, summer study and residency programs to promote racial diversity.”
Why would a person even do such a thing? That’s terrible
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Sept 22 (Reuters) - A non-profit group opposing race-based education policies has filed more than a dozen U.S. civil rights complaints this year against universities, challenging the legality of offering minority scholarships, summer study and residency programs to promote racial diversity.
The challenges are part of a growing campaign against diversity initiatives after a U.S. Supreme Court landmark ruling in June outlawed use of race in college admissions, commonly known as affirmative action.
The Equal Protection Project of the Legal Insurrection Foundation, headed by Cornell University clinical law professor William Jacobson, filed the complaints with the U.S. Department of Education’s civil rights office.
Advocates say race-conscious programs are necessary to combat institutional and societal disadvantages facing minority students, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s decision.
The state’s Republican attorney general sent a letter instructing all colleges in Missouri, including private schools, to adopt race-blind standards for admissions, scholarships, employment and other programs.
In July, the office confirmed it had opened an investigation into whether Harvard discriminates against minorities by favoring “legacy” applicants with ties to donors or alumni, following a complaint filed by civil rights groups.
The original article contains 674 words, the summary contains 187 words. Saved 72%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Advocates say race-conscious programs are necessary to combat institutional and societal disadvantages facing minority students, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s decision.
I’m amazed at how I’ve never actually heard from one of these advocates. I get all the arguments for these programs. I’m just surprised I’ve seen journalists, benzo psychologist, tons of cage fighters all giving me reasons to oppose this stuff. Its shocking the only time I’ve heard people support it is either comments online or what I learned in a sociology class decades ago.
Why have we not seen a sociologist or really any other advocate with experience doing these circuits like podcasts or other media that educate on these things.
they do. It is just that they dont create outrage and clickbait shit for morons and thus dont get pushed on youtube, instagram and tiktok.
The way social media works currently is to push idiotic voices for nasses of idiots than sound reasoning to sound people. Also having a sociologist weighing pro and cons, looking into detailes and nuances and forming a qualified opinion takes much longer and much more brain energy to follow, than some jacked up guy yelling into the camera how the liberals want to turn all white men into black gay trans furries or something.
There should be a jacked up guy in a blazer screaming that socioeconomic barriers shouldn’t be divided along race but somehow it is and how this relates to a proper meritocratic society
Is helping a specific group of people discrimination? Even when it’s focused on race?
I don’t think so, especially if it’s based on other factors like past historical events and continued consequences of that.
If it was putting a race over another it would be. Like if a scholarship rated Native Americans above Caucasians through a score to see how likely they would receive it.
Though I would admit affirmative action always gave me mixed feelings.
There are two types of people who support them. The people who need help and are angry that other people get help that they don’t, and racists.
I have trouble faulting the child of a white single mom on welfare who can’t qualify for any other scholarship. That’s a hard life, and they’re angry that someone else is getting help. I don’t agree, but I get it.
But everyone else, who isn’t desperate and is just annoyed that they don’t get their own special white scholarship? Racists.
If you want a race-free world, you first start by stop favoring one race over another.
Which is exactly what Affirmative Action did
AA did the exact opposite.
It made race a deciding factor for a whole lot of college admission choices or job offers and such.
It put race at the head of a decision that should be otherwise be decided by merit. When you decide things by merit, you end up favoring one race over another. These decisions should be race-blind. Pick the best damn candidate.
When Obama was first elected, we had some talking about a post-race world. Great! So why the hell should we continue to discriminate against certain groups simply because of the color of their skin.
