Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions Process

Re:Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions... by thaumasiotes on Wednesday October 02, 2019 @11:17AM (#21137362)

> Every time the SCOTUS hears one of these cases they acknowledge that, but the justification is that these classes are/have been historically discriminated against and constitutional admissions which take race into consideration are a temporary measure to right these historical wrongs by leveling the playing field.

Actually, SCOTUS specifically identified this motivation ("right these historical wrongs") as improper and affirmative action programs premised on it are illegal. That is why affirmative action programs instead talk about "diversity" -- SCOTUS blessed "diversity" as an exercise of judgment by the school that would allow otherwise impermissible race-based admission.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions... by throwaway_law on Wednesday October 02, 2019 @11:40AM (#21137625)

No, that is wrong, the Justices are very clear about the historical context of these programs.

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) (link: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/539/306/)

>The requirement that all race-conscious admissions programs have a termination point "assure[s] all citizens that the deviation from the norm of equal treatment of all racial and ethnic groups is a temporary matter, a measure taken in the service of the goal of equality itself." Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co., 488 U. S., at 510

If it were about diversity as you claim, rather than righting historical wrongs of inequality, there would be no concept of a termination point of these programs as diversity would be an ongoing concern ad infinitum.

[ Parent | on HN ]