by Robert Stacy McCain
Liberals are running around with their hair on fire, shrieking that the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling in Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard will necessarily produce a 21st-century Jim Crow, an idea so absurd that only liberals could possibly believe it. In fact, the safest prediction in the world is that nothing will change in the way the Ivy League and other “selective” universities choose their incoming freshman classes on the basis of racial quotas. It took more than 10 years for this lawsuit to make it all the way to the Supreme Court, by which time nearly every elite university (e.g., Columbia) announced that they would eliminate the SAT as a factor in determining admissions. They did this because SAT scores served as a crucial data point — an objective metric of academic qualification — cited by the Asian-American students who sued Harvard.
The Supreme Court just ruled against Affirmative Action. Why?
Because it is systemically racist.
Harvard applicants in the top academic decile have different chances of admission depending on their race:
– Asians: 12.7%
– Whites: 15.3%
– Hispanics: 31.3%
– Blacks: 56.1% pic.twitter.com/AhI6p4n14h— The Rabbit Hole (@TheRabbitHole84) June 29, 2023
Probably no one would object if the level of favoritism extended to “underrepresented minorities” was modest. However, as the data obtained as part of discovery during the lawsuit demonstrates, the “diversity” regime at Harvard involved extreme favoritism, so that if an Asian student and a black student had identical qualifications (as measured by SATs and GPAs), the black student was more than 4 times as likely to be admitted as the Asian student. There was a reason, after all, that the admissions process at Harvard (and other elite schools) was so secretive that it took a federal lawsuit to discover the facts. If people actually knew what was happening, they’d be outraged. And, as the data obtained in the lawsuit demonstrated, “diversity” was just a fancy word for racial quotas. Year after year, Harvard’s incoming freshman class was 14% black — never 11% or 17%, but always within a few decimal points of 14% — making it plain that the administration had settled on this as the “correct” number of black students to be admitted, and then arranged the process to achieve that quota. Asian students were most affected by this quota regime, as the Harvard administration clearly didn’t want to have “too many” Asian students, because that would deprive whites of the opportunity to soak in this carefully formulated bath of “diversity.”
The University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill was added as a defendant in the lawsuit because, although UNC-Chapel Hill is not nearly as “elite” as Harvard, it is the prestigious flagship of the state’s university system, and the admissions process there reflected a similar “diversity” rationale for what were, in fact, discriminatory racial quotas that favored “underrepresented” (black and Hispanic) minorities, while disfavoring Asians and whites. In all such cases, wherever the regime of “diversity” exists, it results in evaluating people not on objective measurements of individual merit, but rather on the basis of membership in racial groups. And this emphasis on group identity breeds and nourishes resentments that might not otherwise exist — the obsession with “diversity” actually causes racism, or at least aggravates it, rather than alleviating it.
Before I share a few of the ridiculous “hot take” reactions from liberals about the Supreme Court decision, let me first emphasize this prediction about the results of the ruling: NOTHING WILL CHANGE.
Harvard and other “elite” schools will continue doing exactly what they’ve been doing, and if they get sued again, so what? They don’t care. It’s not like Merrick Garland’s Justice Department is going to swoop down and send federal marshals to prevent Harvard from doing whatever it wants in pursuit of “diversity.”
Time to cut off their tax payer funded indoctrination centers by 100% spend he Money on housing homeless vets and their families and quit wasting it on those places
Ever notice how every time the left wants to compare something to a really bad example, it’s always a creation of the Democrats?
How diverse are these college professors and admin? Old white commies liberated(divorced or lesbian) hateful women sitting in the faculty lounge. No thought diversity allowed. A biology professor at a community college in San Antonio says he was fired for teaching students that sex is determined by X and Y chromosomes. It was ok for 20 years but no longer.
Churning out female engineers of submarines, and those that cant properly define woman.
And some who are so twisted its jaw dropping, 3 mansions…Obamas complained about being black and oppressed from luxury yacht in Greek islands.
The IVY has root rot.
Like the rest of the left, they are absolutely un-diverse, ANTI-diverse. Only one mindset is allowed and that is the acceptance of fascism.