More legislating morality from the bench: US federal judge rules in favor of Harvard. Shocker, right?
A lawsuit, backed by President Donald Trump's administration, had challenged Harvard's use of race in determining admissions, part of a decades-old push to boost minority enrolments at America's oldest university.
Federal Judge Allison Dale Burroughs said in a long-awaited decision that while Harvard's admissions process is not perfect, it was right, for now, to factor in race to form a diverse student body.
"The rich diversity at Harvard and other colleges and universities and the benefits that flow from that diversity will foster the tolerance, acceptance and understanding that will ultimately make race-conscious admissions obsolete," she said.
The case was filed in 2014 by Students for Fair Admissions, a group led by conservative white activist Edward Blum, who previously attacked the affirmative action policies at the University of Texas.
Love that subtle journalistic characterization there, eh? "Conservative White Activist", real smooth. The byline is AFP New York, just so you know the type of hipster dickweeds they hired.
But, obscene journalistic bias aside, what's being celebrated here is literal racial discrimination against more qualified candidates in favor of less qualified ones. That is, not to put too fine a point on it, using race as the determining factor for admission.
Back in the good old days it was all A-OK because it was only discrimination against white kids, which is always good in the minds of Lefties. But lately Harvard has been discriminating against Brownies too, because Indian and Asian (Chinese/Japanese/Korean/Vietnamese etc.) kids are showing up with SAT and high school marks in the A+++ range, over 95%. Harvard has basically said that if you have a 95%+ GPA and you're a Brownie, they don't want you. They will take a black or Hispanic kid with an 80% first. Because Diversity!!!11!
Real, live, racial discrimination.
The Federal court of the USA just said they're good with that.
So, if your kid is a brownie or a whitey and has a fucking 98% GPA because they worked their ass off, but for some reason still wants to get into Harvard to rub shoulders with the 80 percenters, you're going to need to have them dye their hair pink and claim to be transgender. Because tranny is the new black.
The Phantom
Update: Welcome Instapundit! Thanks for the linkage Sarah Hoyt!
The Phantom
Update: Welcome Instapundit! Thanks for the linkage Sarah Hoyt!
5 comments:
I wonder if Harvard is actually admitting actual minority students according to those guidelines.
In an odd way, I suspect they're using affirmative action as a shield to block kids with actual academic merit, meanwhile stretching and twisting the standards to admit the children of the connected and powerful.
the benefits that flow from that diversity will foster the tolerance, acceptance and understanding
As far as I can tell, these alleged "benefits" are pretty much just an article of faith. Of course kids learn better in a diverse environment because we can't bear the thought that it might be otherwise.
In reality, diversity seems to be a neutral factor at best. There are benefits and drawbacks to it, just like there are benefits and drawbacks to a more homogeneous environment. It's not a bad thing, but it doesn't seem to be something worth violating the law to seek out.
Joe,
When the "college admissions" scandal broke out, it seemed pretty clear that the crime of Huffman, Loughlin, etc. wasn't that they'd bribed their kids way into college but that they bribed the wrong people.
"When the "college admissions" scandal broke out, it seemed pretty clear that the crime of Huffman, Loughlin, etc. wasn't that they'd bribed their kids way into college but that they bribed the wrong people."
Not only that, but they were guilty of being the wrong sort of people as well. There's a class system, and faded D-list actors are fairly low in the hierarchy*. They're guilty of not keeping their place.
*Redstate Biblethumpers are considered to be uncouth barbarians and violent savages.
Zsuzsa said: "As far as I can tell, these alleged "benefits" are pretty much just an article of faith."
They certainly react like the most doctrinaire of old Victorian ladies when anyone questions their faith in "Diversity!!!" This irony is certaily lost on them as well. ~:D
You do realize, of course, that the judge in this case was appointed by Obama. Thus the (foregone) decision.
Post a Comment