Today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two cases that could shake the Liberty College industrial complex. It will no doubt renew the argument to wrap up the land’s Supreme Court.
Fortunately, we should wait until next summer when decisions are made on both cases to deal with mass unrest and violence.
Today’s topic deals with the role of affirmative action in higher education, specifically admissions. What started out as one case is now arguing in two separate but related cases before the Supreme Court.
Admissions policies at the University of North Carolina and Harvard are facing scrutiny. Plaintiffs for Fair Admissions contend that their practices discriminate against white and Asian American students.
Let’s take a closer look at these cases and what they might mean for the future of American students.
When Clarence Thomas voted against affirmative action at SCOTUS, it was awesome to see this freak.
– Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) October 31, 2022
It is crucial to understand the fundamental differences between these two institutions of higher learning and why the case is divided into two parts. First, the University of North Carolina is a public university.
Public agencies are bound by the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. However, Harvard is a private institution.
Support conservative voices!
Sign up to receive the latest information Political news, insights and commentary delivered straight to your inbox.
So, what are the key components of Title VI for the UNC case? Title VI prohibits agencies receiving federal funds from engaging in racial discrimination.
The arguments against universities are also somewhat nuanced. For UNC, the argument is that the university discriminates against white and Asian applicants in favor of black, Hispanic and Native American applicants.
Harvard is accused of using subjective criteria such as likability, courage and kindness as factors that specifically discriminate against Asian applicants when weighing admissions for minority applicants.
The two cases were separated from the original single case thanks to the newest judge, Ketanji Brown Jackson.she avoided oneself She was withdrawn from the Harvard case because of her involvement on one of the university’s boards.
Students at Harvard and the University of North Carolina gathered in front of the Supreme Court to protest as SCOTUS prepares to rule that it must be illegal.
— Yao Ming (@IamBarryYao) October 31, 2022
It is widely believed that courts would at least choose to narrow the influence of higher education institutions on applicants’ ethnicity. At best, they can completely eliminate the ability of these learning places to use race as a factor.
Imagine living in an age where race is not a factor in judging your abilities!
Why do the left think the world as they know it will end with another Supreme Court ruling next summer? Given that both cases were upheld in lower courts, many thought we would see another historic Supreme Court decision.
You see, the Supreme Court doesn’t need to hear these cases because the lower courts rule in favor of the defendants. If they hear this appeal, at least some justices will lean the other way.
However, Justice Elena Kagan does not appear to be one of these justices, statement:
“I think part of what it’s about being American and believing that America is diverse is that, in fact, our institutions reflect who we are as a people.”
Interestingly, I think being an American means more than mere skin color.
This is of course not the heart of the problem, but @Harvard University data mentioned in passing #SCOTUS very bad.
For example, a large number of inheritance admissions, and 80%+ students from wealthy families. Whatever the case, this needs to change (but probably won’t).
— Guy Rube (@Guy_A_Rub) October 31, 2022
Of course, the main argument for the university to maintain its affirmative action practice is the D word…diversity. Justice Clarence Thomas dropped a real truth bomb on this argument, statement:
“I’ve heard the word diversity many times, but I don’t know what it means. It seems to mean everything to everyone…”
In response, UNC Representative Ryan Park explain This diversity “reduces groupthink” and, as he puts it, “produces more effective results in the search for truth.” Anyone who thinks there isn’t a massive free groupthink on college campuses in this country should come check out a bridge I’m selling at a premium.
Brad Wilcox, professor of sociology at the University of Virginia Say:
“…The main message students hear from faculty, administrators and staff is progress.”
We may need more diversity in teaching to reduce groupthink. But the type of diversity needed is diversity of thought.
Everyone agrees that affirmative action in the NBA will destroy basketball, and affirmative action in the NFL will destroy football. It turns out that affirmative action in engineering and medicine has similar effects: that shouldn’t surprise anyone.
— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) October 31, 2022
not even worth it
I have two young children; my daughter showed a talent and interest in math and science at an early age, and my son showed a similar talent even as a toddler. So, of course, I’m excited. Still, I’m not overly excited about the prospect of them going to college…and certainly not staying on campus.
But you might say that living on campus and experiencing diversity is critical to the educational experience. For the price parents have to pay, it is necessary that they learn the craft of their choice and expand their intellectual flexibility and abilities through strict disagreement.
But that’s not what happens in college anymore. according to In a 2021 College Pulse survey of more than 37,000 college students, 80 percent admitted to self-censoring their opinions and ideas on campus.
as Justice Thomas explain correctly:
“When parents send their kids to college…they don’t necessarily send them there to have fun or feel good or anything like that. They send them there to study physics or chemistry.”
This tweet reminds us that affirmative action is racist.
– Steven Crowder (@scrowder) October 31, 2022
Harvard’s invitation Available to black students with a SAT score of at least 1100. To be invited to apply, if you are white or Asian American, you must score at least 1310 and 1350, respectively.
Heck, that doesn’t seem fair at all.
Judge Alito presented a hypothesis for the plaintiffs. He asks an applicant who has moved from an African country to rural and predominantly white North Carolina, and describes in an admissions essay how he or she faces a different culture—is that a measure of acceptance by colleges?
This led to Justice Kagan bite back:
“Race is part of culture, and culture is part of race, isn’t it?”
I don’t think she must be wrong. Still, I think she’s oversimplifying, actually, showing a little racism in such a broad argument. Being black doesn’t mean you’re doomed to grow up in poverty and have a bad education.
Just because you’re white or Asian American doesn’t mean you’re lucky enough to be blessed by your parents who paid for tutoring, love you unconditionally, and have endless wealth and opportunities. Life experience doesn’t always correlate with skin color. Skin color does not automatically indicate life experience.
There’s a new secular religion in America that says your identity is based on race and gender; if you’re black, you’re inherently disadvantaged, and if you’re white, you’re privileged. It’s tearing us apart. Ending affirmative action is a good first step towards restoring unity. pic.twitter.com/2KFCHE2g2y
— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) October 31, 2022
Pay attention to these cases and how the left reacts to them. Do we want to continue living in a country where people’s access to higher education and other opportunities is measured by the color of their skin?
Or do we want to be judged on our abilities? They call it… equality.
Now is the time to support and share your trusted resources.
Political Insider ranked third Feedspot “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”