If the problem is too many guns, explain this...    
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Image of the Day: If Too Many Guns Is the Problem, Explain This

If the problem is too many guns, explain this...

 

 …[more]

August 12, 2019 • 11:59 am

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Affirmative Action Is Unconstitutional, Unpopular and Based Upon a False Pretense of "Diversity" Print
By Timothy H. Lee
Thursday, August 24 2017
According to universities and their corporate and government apologists, official discrimination is required to achieve a critical mass of diversity of perspective. It's impossible to take that rationalization seriously, however, when colleges remain one of the most non-diverse institutions in American society.

"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."  

Although just ten years old, the words of Chief Justice John Roberts writing for the majority in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 have already ascended into the pantheon of expressions of America's elusive ideal of a colorblind society offering equal justice under the law. 

The Declaration of Independence, our nation's founding document, deliberately elevated that ideal in its opening words that, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."  Although its author Thomas Jefferson imperfectly fulfilled that ideal, as all human beings do, it nevertheless created the foundational principle on which America grew to become the most prosperous and powerful nation in human history. 

Before a century had passed, more Americans sacrificed themselves for that ideal in the Civil War than in any other war in our history, including World War II. 

And in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War, that ideal finally obtained legal force when enshrined into the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.  Government was thenceforth prohibited from discriminating among its citizens on the basis of race. 

A century later, that same prohibition was extended to private enterprises via the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 

Yet state-sanctioned racial discrimination persists 53 years later, despite over two centuries of toil to eradicate it. 

According to a lawsuit filed by Asian-American organizations against some of the nation's most prestigious universities, Asian-Americans must score 140 points higher on their SAT exam than white admission applicants, 270 points higher than Latino applicants and 450 points higher than African-American applicants. 

Because state-sponsored racial discrimination so violates our stated principle of a colorblind society, courts have imposed strict standards upon its practice.  Over four decades of halting precedent, the Supreme Court has allowed universities to discriminate in favor of applicants on the basis of race and ethnicity in pursuit of the ostensible goal of "diversity." 

According to universities and their corporate and government apologists, official discrimination is required to achieve a critical mass of diversity of perspective. 

It's impossible to take that rationalization seriously, however, when colleges remain one of the most non-diverse institutions in American society. 

As just one example, last year Econ Journal Watch examined voter registration records for faculty at forty leading American universities.  Among 7,243 professors surveyed, Democrats outnumbered Republicans by a 12-to-1 ratio, 3,623 to 314. 

Accordingly, universities' "diversity" pretense is self-evidently false. 

Moreover, it's not as if affirmative action apologists were disregarding the colorblind ideal and legal mandate in the name of public popularity.  According to Gallup, Americans oppose affirmative action in the name of "diversity" by nearly 3-to-1: 

Americans continue to believe colleges should admit applicants based solely on merit (70%), rather than taking into account applicants' race and ethnicity in order to promote diversity (26%).  These findings suggest Americans would disagree with the Supreme Court's recent decision in Fisher v. University of Texas, in which the Court essentially ruled that colleges can continue to consider race as a factor in their admissions decisions to increase diversity on their college campuses. 

Moreover, that differential has actually increased by 2 points since the same question was surveyed in 2003 and 2013.  Even African-Americans favor admission based solely on merit rather than consideration of race by a 50% to 44% margin, while the disparity among Latinos stands at 61% to 26%. 

Thus, racial discrimination in the name of "diversity" doesn't just contravene constitutional text and two centuries of struggle toward a colorblind society, it also remains widely unpopular.  It merely serves the interest of those stubbornly committed to identity politics in America. 

Fortunately, the Department of Justice under Attorney General Jeff Sessions is preparing to begin "investigations and possible litigation related to intentional race-based discrimination in college and university admissions," according to The New York Times.  It can't come a moment too soon. 

Armies of university administrators, government bureaucrats, lawyers and social activists depend upon perpetuating the practice for their livelihoods, fanning the flames of grievance on demonstrably false logic. 

But their interest should not be allowed to prevail over constitutional mandate and popular will any longer. 

Question of the Week   
What is the Dust Bowl?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"It needs to be stressed that Tlaib and Omar aren't mere 'critics' of Israel, as the media incessantly claims. Critics would find fault with policies of the nation's government -- which, in Israel's case, has oscillated from left to right, from hawkish to dovish, for more than 70 years. Critics have been traveling to Israel forever. Critics of Israel serve in the nation's parliament and openly and…[more]
 
 
—David Harsanyi, The Federalist
— David Harsanyi, The Federalist
 
Liberty Poll   

With competing economic indicators widespread and the trade war with China ongoing, what condition do you think the U.S. economy will be in a year from now?