Jump to content

US Supreme Court declares race-based affirmative action unconstitutional


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Also this


Suppose that you have two doctors you can go to. They both went to the same school. Beyond that all you can tell is that one is an Asian man, the other is a black man. But you know that the school that gave them their degrees was willing to accept dramatically lower MCAT scores from black applicants, and presumably they also were more lenient on black students after application.

Now it’s possible that the black doctor didn’t need those accommodations and is actually much smarter and a much better doctor than the Asian doctor. But the only information you have tells you that it is also possible that the black doctor is underqualified, while this is not possible for the Asian doctor. So the rational decision is to choose the Asian doctor.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the subject of not happening still, look for these mechanisms to bypass restrictions against race based discrimination in order to promote more race based discrimination. 


1. “[A]lready schools like Harvard are suggesting they will skirt the ruling by considering applicants’ experience with race as opposed to the applicants’ race itself. These games are not surprising and have been in the works for months.”

2. “[T]he evidence of discrimination, not the discrimination itself, will be eliminated. Already, there is a trend to dispense with the standardized testing that proved the discrimination against students of Asian descent. Many universities have eliminated mandatory SAT testing, and professional schools are now toying with eliminating the LSATs and the MCATs. Without standardized testing to keep the process honest, discrimination will increasingly take place behind closed doors in higher education and elsewhere using “holistic” approaches similar to what Harvard developed in the 1920s to limit Jewish enrollment, and are now used against Asians.

3. “Offloading the discrimination onto third parties is yet another method to evade accountability. For example, we recently filed a civil rights complaint over SUNY-Albany’s participation in a Black-only fellowship program at the Albany Public Library using a private foundation grant. Similarly, we filed a complaint regarding a Providence new teacher loan forgiveness program open only to non-Whites funded by the Rhode Island Foundation, and a Missouri State University business boot camp supported by private funding that excluded only White males. Offloading discrimination is no legal excuse, but it’s become a favored maneuver.

4. “Another tactic is to disperse DEI programming in response to budget cuts or department elimination. At the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville, there is an effort to transfer DEI personnel and programs to other areas of the university. DEI will still exist, but in a different form and place. Creating moving targets will become more common.

5. “Word games are another ploy, with “first generation,” “historically underrepresented group” or “marginalized populations” serving as crude proxies for race and skin color.”

6. “Technology is yet another emerging evasion. Algorithms operating unseen will be used to manipulate pools of applicants to achieve desired quotas. And it will not be limited to academia; this has already spread to corporations and the government. We are seeing signs that even artificial intelligence is under pressure to return desired quotas. The Biden White House has jumped aboard the equity train claiming AI discrimination, thus justifying manipulation of AI parameters to achieve racial quotas.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...