How We Got Our Antiracist Constitution: Canonizing Brown v. Board of Education in Courts and Minds claremont.org - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from claremont.org Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Sociology and political science Prof. Anthony Chen kicked off the Institute for Policy Research’s Fay Lomax Cook fall colloquium series with a talk Monday. In the discussion, he contextualized the June U.S. Supreme Court decision: Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. He said the decision reflects the counter-majoritarian difficulty ―.
jonathan turley is a fox news contributor and george washington university law professor. and he joins us now, jonathan, great to see you this evening. thank you. will: you heard of that clip, harvard say, we will be looking for new ways to pursue the ill-defined goal of diversity. what do you think will be the response of not just harvard and not just north carolina, but universities at large in response to the supreme court ruling? i think they re going to attempt to use race in a different way. after this decision of 77, the supreme court said it was getting rid of affirmative action and admissions, but would allow an exception for the use of race as one factor. what the universities did, they achieved essentially, same result, using the diversity rationale. that is why the court continually pushed back. it s actually sort of fascinating, is that after this decision came down, there was a human cry from university saying that
jonathan turley is a fox news contributor and a george washington university law professor and he joins us now. and it s great to see you this evening. you heard in that clipneontribu> say we will be looking for new ways to pursue the ill defined goal of diversity. what do you think will bsaell b the response of not just harvard and not just north carolina, but universities atjut large in response to the supreme court s ruling ? well, i think they are goingi tn to attemptk to use race in a different way after the key decision in 77, the supreme court said that it was getting rid of affirmative actiond of admissions, but would allow anod exception for the use of raceor is just one factor. what the universities did is that they they achieved essentially the same result using that diversity rationale. that s why the court continually pushed back. what s actually sort of fascinatin g is that after this decision came down, there was
of tidal wave proportions. in other words, by calling into question, by holding constitutionally suspect, as in unconstitutional, the diversity rationale, or the use of diversity, what you are going to see is perhaps diversity, equity, and inclusion offices are closing. companies are rolling back their commitments to diversity, which has consequences and implications for a great many people, not merely african americans, not merely latinos, but a variety of other ethnic groups and women. among the most prominent beneficiaries of affirmative action have been white women. when we think about, say, any of the cable networks, major newspapers, where they were when affirmative action started, we didn t see the diversity on television and in print that we see today. the consequences here could be devastating, likely devastating. california has yet to recover