trivially, i’m happy to discriminate in favor of, e. g. , people who are fluent in french and english if i want to hire a french and english translator.

Or in the context of say, admissions, i would expect to see discrimination on academic merit in the field of study for a program you’re applying to. If you were an outstanding undergraduate who majored in like, the archaeology of medieval germany, you should expect to have a very hard time getting into a graduate program in high energy physics.

(tangentially i happen to know a MD/PhD whose undergrad was performance ballet, but she double-majored as a physical chemistry major and did piles of lab work too, and thus didn’t have any troubles)

If we're being pedantic, the whole point of the admissions process is to discriminate. The question is, discriminate on what basis?

Undoubtedly they discriminate on the basis of grades and test scores, but also on the basis of things like extracurriculars. Whether or not race should be a part of this equation is the heart of this debate.

Discrimination based on academic record, aptitude testing, extracurricular activities, personal recommendations, athletic record, etc. is presumably acceptable.

Also known as Merit.