It goes without saying that even hearing these cases is a show, or more accurately a sham. The right-wingers are acting as a super-legislature rather than a court. They might as well just dispense with the pretext of hearing cases entirely and start issuing edicts on Fox News issues du jour. A corrupted court indeed unhinged and unmoored from precedent.
7 Likes
You are raising actual points here, aside from the steaming heap of odorous excrement thatâs the right wing of SCOTUS. The point is, the gender gaps are the biggest gaps. I have been working in education statistics since the Eighties. Whether it be that for every 100 girls, 54 boys take AP/Honors courses in Arts/Music . . . through that for every 100 women in federal prison, there are 1,333 men in federal prison.
The college stats fall in-between:
100 girls / women who are enrolled in graduate schools, 73 boys / men are.
100 girls / women who earn a bachelorâs degree, 74 boys / men are.
The list goes on. None of this excuses the evident intent to harm non-white kids. But we at least need to be honest and accurate about the situation at hand.
6 Likes
I was wondering if this might end up being a case of the horses and barn doors. Probably some institutions wonât hesitate to regress, but I would imagine that there are many that have decided to commit to a more equitable environment, irrespective of the law requiring them to be so. The whole âscientific research studies are showing the benefits of diversity and reducing groupthink, so we should remain focused on equity, diversity and inclusion, regardless.â
If Universities refuse to acknowledge what the studies are showing, they really have little business calling themselves âeliteâ institutions of learning.
6 Likes
âI guess we just take it for granted now that overruling prior decisions solely because of a change in the composition of the Court is perfectly normal and okay now.â
Itâs not okay, it is just the way it is now. They behave as if there is no need to respect precedent if it conflicts with their ideology.
10 Likes
2 Likes
Yep, the whole point of AA was to desegregate, and with this court (remember Roberts âthe way to stop being racist is to stop being racistâ), any notion of enforcing that proactively is impossible. Their intent is to leave only so-called âcolorblindâ laws on the books (âmeritâ or some such euphemism) that in effect resegregate.
4 Likes
Man literally both-sidesâd diversity and segregation. I am speechless.
By the end of this calendar year the clock may be rolled back to the 1950s re: policies aimed at improving racial equity. Think about that.
5 Likes
This is going to be a repeat of Abortion for the GOP. This will do nothing but thank White Male admissions to any of the top 30 schools.
3 Likes
Tank, not thank
Appointing Justice Jackson was a brilliant and prescient move on Joeâs part.
19 Likes
The difference in attitudes - from rationality, civility and respect for the law and for attorneys arguing in front of them to snarky disdain and dismissal.
Also, the differences in sentence structure and depth of expression.
Exhibit âAâ for the need for affirmative action- raising the bar for white dudes.
5 Likes
And the GOP is going to regret that decision. White males are going to fall further and further behind
3 Likes
I think you are missing the thrust of the right wing push here. Yes, many institutions have to come to realize that the diversity is a valuable thing for them and would like to push it. Those are the defendants in this case. The schools who want to keep using race as one of many factors. Racists, however, are saying âno, you canât do that! Thatâs racist!â and, well, they should know. So they are trying to get to SC to rule that a private institution (say, Harvard) cannot even ask about race in the admission process as long as they take a dime of federal money (research grants, etc). So it doesnât matter if Harvard âgets itââŚthe point is to not let them keep a foot in the modern world and try to get better. The SC is going to order them back to the early 19th century come hell or high water.
7 Likes
Is this true? Justice Jackson was very explicit about this point in the redistricting case. I find it hard to believe at least she wouldnât bring it up now.
However itâs also worth noting that correct as you are, this has never been used as a legal justification for AA. It has always been justified as being another factor in which to holistically judge an applicant, specifically to diversity the student body.
1 Like
Partly. I think she was making a very general comment that some kids can tell stories about their (poor, rich, rural, urban, etc) upbringing on their application but others canât mention their race if that happens to be one of their lenses of identification. Not sure how that would work in practice: keyword scans of applications and some algorithm tosses any that mention race?
3 Likes
Iâm so frustrated at this strawman/fallacy that there must be an arbitrary endpoint to considering race in admission, but literally not for anything else.
7 Likes
That did seem like the way the argument was moving, but I canât understand how the USSC has the authority to enforce that prohibition.
3 Likes
I said elsewhere. But the GOP is going to regret this. Asian studentsâ SATs are about 150 points higher than whites. If GPA and SATs are all that is left (I am ignoring legacies and straight out buying the kid in), white kids are toast at the top schools.
8 Likes
Right. The culture has so shifted to diversity - certainly corporations, and more universities than elites. They will thumb their noses at this nonsense. Not to say people wonât get hurt - they will - but the Supreme Court is now far removed from the sensibilities of most Americans.
6 Likes