Trump on Tuesday rescinded a 1965 executive order signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson that required companies doing contract work for the federal government to institute “affirmative action” programs.
Trump, citing his duty as president to ensure civil rights laws are enforced, said in his <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-illegal-discrimination-and-restoring-merit-based-opportunity/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">executive order</a> that such policies have resulted in “disastrous consequences of illegal, pernicious discrimination that has prioritized how people were born instead of what they were capable of doing.”
This was part of Trump’s broader EO that eliminated diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs from the federal government. The EO also specifically refers to Executive Order 11246 (Equal Employment Opportunity). Federal contractors may continue to comply with the original EO for the next 90 days.
The media is unsurprisingly calling this a rollback of civil rights or “<a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/trump-guts-contractor-watchdogs-anti-discrimination-authority" target="_blank" rel="noopener">anti-discrimination power</a>,” but like DEI, affirmative action was always used to promote people based on race and not merit.
The Supreme Court in 2023 issued a landmark ruling stating that affirmative action policies – specifically those at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina – violated the law and caused discrimination rather than prevented it.
Harvard was found to have violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, while UNC was found to have violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-issues-landmark-ruling-on-affirmative-action-at-universities" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl=1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA.." target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl%3D1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA..&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1737044212122000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3mp2MZNwEXBk00lKmCtOss">CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT</a>
In 2013, National Review explained why the Johnson EO is legally questionable:
<blockquote>“It is wrong as a matter of law and policy for DOL’s Office of Federal Contracting Compliance Programs to require covered federal contractors to set goals and timetables whenever they have a certain degree of ‘underrepresentation’ among minorities and women. The regulations’ present approach is at odds with the current case law. It is quite clear that this use of classifications based on race, ethnicity, and sex will trigger judicial strict scrutiny; that mere statistical disparities are not sufficient to justify the use of racial classifications; and that, even if they were, there is no justification for goals and timetables to be triggered when women and minorities are ‘underrepresented’ but not when men and non-minorities are.”</blockquote>
The outlet went on to note that the stated reason for affirmative action programs – past discrimination – no longer applies since discrimination in the federal government has been outlawed since at least 1961. It has been prohibited everywhere since the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Following Trump’s executive order, his administration released a memo placing all DEI officials on paid leave by the end of the business day on Wednesday, The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-admin-to-put-all-federal-dei-officials-on-leave-by-end-of-day-tomorrow" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. It is unclear whether these employees will be reassigned or if a firing process will begin.

Donald Trump

Trump Rescinds Executive Order Forcing ‘Affirmative Action’ On Govt Contractors

Trump Rescinds Executive Order Forcing ‘Affirmative Action’ On Government Contractors

Affirmative Action

Executive

Executive Orders

Politics

Princeton University and Yale University both saw their percentages of Asian American freshman dip this fall despite the Supreme Court eliminating <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/affirmative-action" target="_blank" rel="noopener">affirmative action</a> in college admissions last year.
At Princeton, the percentage of Asian American freshmen dropped two percentage points from 26% last year to 24% this year.
At Yale, the decline was bigger at six percentage points, from 30% last year to 24% this year.
At both Ive Leagues, the share of black freshmen remained the same &#8212; 9% at Princeton and 14% at Yale.
Last year in June, the Supreme Court ruled against affirmative action in college admissions, declaring race-based admissions at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina unconstitutional and in violation of the Civil Rights Act.
Students for Fair Admissions, the group that sued over affirmative action, had pointed to the high test scores of Asian American and white applicants who were rejected.
The high court&#8217;s decision has had a profound effect on the admissions processes at universities across the country.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1724211156439000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2-L2DitSaIUj5wz8v0bgxx">Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.</a>
At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, (MIT) the percentage of black students plummeted in the wake of the court&#8217;s decision. The incoming freshman class this fall is only 5% black, down from an average of 13% in recent years, MIT <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/mits-share-of-black-students-plummets-after-affirmative-action-struck-down" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> last month.
Amherst College, a historic liberal arts in Massachusetts, also <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-09-04/yale-university-sees-drop-in-share-of-asian-american-freshmen?utm_source=twitter&amp;cmpid=socialflow-twitter-businessweek&amp;utm_content=businessweek&amp;utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&amp;utm_medium=social" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> that its percentage of black freshman students fell to 9% from 19% this year. Hispanic students also declined to 10% from 14% last year. Meanwhile, the percentage of white and Asian American students increased slightly.
At the same time, universities have scrambled to find other ways to diversify their student bodies.
Yale and Princeton both pointed to more students receiving financial aid. At Yale, more than 58% of students are now getting need-based financial aid.
“I am especially excited that the Class of 2028 includes the greatest representation of first-generation and low-income students on record, and that Yale College now enrolls more veterans than it has in many decades,” <a href="https://news.yale.edu/2024/09/04/new-undergraduates-begin-their-yale-college-journey" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> Jeremiah Quinlan, Yale’s dean of undergraduate admissions and financial aid.
“At Princeton we make big bets on human talent from all sectors of society,” Princeton Provost Jennifer Rexford <a href="https://www.princeton.edu/news/2024/03/29/princeton-trustees-set-2024-25-budget-increasing-spending-undergraduate-financial#:~:text=Between%20fiscal%20years%202022%20and,numbers%20of%20students%20receiving%20support." target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>.
Some schools moved away from considering standardized test scores as the argument that standardized testing harms minority students picked up steam. One Ivy League, Columbia University, permanently scrapped its standardized test requirement.
Some schools are also <a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-affirmative-action-college-admissions-1d37af28939a533551cff45fa577ceb0" target="_blank" rel="noopener">considering</a> requiring more essays for admissions to get a better idea of a student’s background, while others plan to recruit students from minority areas or admit more students transferring from community colleges.
A majority of Americans, 62%, oppose race-based college admissions, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-americans-think-college-admissions-should-not-consider-race-reutersipsos-2023-02-15/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to a Reuters poll last year.

Happy Asian woman in his graduation day.

Princeton, Yale See Smaller Share Of Asian American Freshmen Despite End Of Affirmative Action

Anti-Racism

Education

Princeton University

Race

Racism

Supreme Court

U.S.

Yale University

The percentage of black students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has plummeted in the wake of the end of affirmative action.
The incoming freshman class this fall is only 5% black, down from an average of 13% in recent years, MIT <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-08-21/mit-reports-drop-in-black-student-enrollment-for-incoming-class?cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-billionaires&amp;utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_content=billionaires&amp;utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&amp;utm_medium=social" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> Wednesday.
Hispanic students are also down to 11% from 15%, the school said.
Previously, about 25% of MIT undergraduates were black, Hispanic, Native American, or Pacific Islander, but that number has dropped to 16% for the incoming class.
Meanwhile, Asian American students are up to 47% from 41%, making up nearly half of the entire class of 2028. The percentage of white students stayed about the same at 37%.
Last summer, the Supreme Court declared considering race in admissions unconstitutional in a landmark ruling that targeted the affirmative action admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.
Students for Fair Admissions, the group that sued over affirmative action, pointed to the high test scores of Asian-American and white applicants who were rejected.
MIT’s dean of admissions, Stu Schmill, said Wednesday that the school has expanded its recruitment and financial aid initiative to &#8220;further improve access to the Institute for students from all backgrounds.&#8221;
&#8220;Despite these initiatives, and as we expected, there was still a decline in the proportion⁠ of enrolling first-years from historically under-represented racial and ethnic backgrounds⁠,&#8221; the dean said.
&#8220;If MIT cannot find a way⁠ to continue to draw on the full range of human talent and experience in the future, it may threaten the qualitative strength of the MIT education, both by a relative reduction in the educational benefits of diversity and by making our community less attractive to the best students from all backgrounds,&#8221; Schmill <a href="https://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/mit-after-sffa/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a> in a blog post.
A majority of Americans, 62%, oppose race-based college admissions, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-americans-think-college-admissions-should-not-consider-race-reutersipsos-2023-02-15/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to a Reuters poll last year.
Around the time of the court&#8217;s decision, universities scrambled to find other ways to diversify their student bodies.
Some schools moved away from using standardized test scores in the admissions process as the argument that standardized testing harms minority students picked up steam. Previously, a low SAT or ACT score meant automatic elimination at most top-tier schools.
Last year, Columbia University <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/universities-scrap-sat-scramble-to-stay-diverse-ahead-of-affirmative-action-ruling" target="_blank" rel="noopener">became</a> the first Ivy League school to permanently scrap its standardized test requirement, allowing hopeful applicants to skip the dreaded SAT and ACT.
Some schools are also <a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-affirmative-action-college-admissions-1d37af28939a533551cff45fa577ceb0" target="_blank" rel="noopener">considering</a> requiring more essays for admission to get a better idea of a student’s background, while others plan to recruit students from minority areas or admit more students transferring from community colleges.
Back in 1995, the University of California System Board of Regents banned affirmative action so UC <a href="https://edsource.org/2020/dropping-affirmative-action-had-huge-impact-on-californias-public-universities/642437" target="_blank" rel="noopener">adopted</a> roundabout ways of trying to identify minority students, such as through poor neighborhoods and family income.

In this photo illustration, Massachusetts Institute of

MIT’s Share Of Black Students Plummets After Affirmative Action Struck Down

MIT's Share Of Black Students Plummets After Affirmative Action Struck Down

Biden Administration

higher education

Massachusetts

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

A top American Federation of Government Employees official made life miserable for his employees while leading an office dedicated to ensuring that federal employees are not mistreated, an investigation found.
Jeremy A. Lannan, the union&#8217;s National Vice President for Women and Fair Practices (WFP), was tasked with &#8220;promot[ing] civil, human, and workers’ rights for the more than 700,000 federal and D.C. government employees represented by AFGE.” But an internal investigation obtained by The Daily Wire shows that Lannan frequently engaged in the type of behavior he was meant to prevent.
Lannan oversaw &#8220;a workplace where it is not uncommon for WFP employees to be demeaned… and intimidated,” an investigation by the Potomac Law Group found. AFGE hired Potomac to investigate Lannan after two employees complained about his leadership. The investigation also found turnover among Lannan’s employees was “extremely high.”
Lannan’s executive assistant told the Potomac Law Group that the union boss &#8220;acts like he owns me.” She said he uses a “fear factor” to manage his employees to the point where she had trouble eating or sleeping, and that he is “spiraling.”
Another subordinate, who manages cases in which the union fights for employees who say the federal government discriminated against them, said Lannan “may be Jekyll or Hyde on any given day” and is “losing it.”
She said she receives “barrages of emails accusing” her of being disrespectful of his position, and his “combative” “outbursts” are so common that she has sought therapy.
On May 7, AFGE National Vice President Arnold Scott charged Lannan with violating AFGE’s constitution by “bullying and creating a hostile work environment,” adding that “his retaliation against these employees for filing is conduct unbecoming a union member.”
“These charges are so serious that removal should be the penalty because of the legal liability that AFGE could face. There needs to be a clear message sent that this type of conduct will not be tolerated by officers of AFGE,” the charging document said.
AFGE and Lannan did not return requests for comment from The Daily Wire. Lannan is still listed on the web page listing the union’s top three leaders, and is <a href="https://jeremylannan.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">running for president</a> of the public-sector union in its election next month.
Appointed to his position in 2018, Lannan boasted that he was “making history” as the first man to oversee the woman-centric office. Lannan, who is gay, called himself <a href="https://www.afge.org/article/young-proud-and-leading-the-way/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">“my sister’s keeper,&#8221;</a> given his mandate to stop federal bosses from mistreating employees, particularly females. His official AFGE bio states that under Lannan&#8217;s leadership, &#8220;AFGE furthered its diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts by developing additional programs and constituency groups&#8221; including black, Asian, and Hispanic union members.
<div id="attachment_767547" style="width: 1098px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-767547" class="size-full wp-image-767547" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-dod.png" alt="Jeremy Lannan, national vice president, AFGE Women and Fair Practices, was the guest speaker for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Pride Month program held in the Frank B. Lotts Conference Center on Defense Supply Center Richmond, Virginia / Department of Defense" width="1088" height="603" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-dod.png 1088w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-dod-300x166.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-dod-1024x568.png 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-dod-768x426.png 768w" sizes="(max-width: 1088px) 100vw, 1088px" />Jeremy Lannan, national vice president, AFGE Women and Fair Practices, was the guest speaker for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Pride Month program held in the Frank B. Lotts Conference Center on Defense Supply Center Richmond, Virginia / Department of Defense</div>
Five additional employees told the Potomac Law Group that Lannan had treated them similarly, evidence of “a prevalent trend of employee mistreatment,” the report concluded.
One described a pattern of “erratic” behavior and “manipulation,” calling Lannan a “bully.” For example, she said at AFGE’s 2023 Legislative and Grassroots Mobilization Conference, Lannan “slammed his hand down&#8221; so hard “that the table shook.”
Another employee said Lannan frequently yelled and treated his employees as “indentured servants.”
Another employee said he “bullies, berates, and belittles” employees. Still another said he made “demeaning comments.”
In response, Lannan—whom the <a href="https://www.dla.mil/About-DLA/Images/igphoto/2002150343/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Department of Defense tapped</a> to lead a Pride Month celebration—denied the allegations, telling the investigator that one of the complainants had engaged in misconduct. Lannan also claimed that he &#8220;receives unfavorable treatment by AFGE&#8221; because he is gay, and called the investigation &#8220;an example of negative action being taken against him because he is gay.”
<div id="attachment_767553" style="width: 2570px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-767553" class="size-full wp-image-767553" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-campaign-scaled.jpg" alt="Union presidency campaign flyer / JeremyLannan.com" width="2560" height="1512" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-campaign-scaled.jpg 2560w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-campaign-300x177.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-campaign-975x576.jpg 975w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-campaign-768x454.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-campaign-1536x907.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/07/lannan-campaign-2048x1209.jpg 2048w" sizes="(max-width: 2560px) 100vw, 2560px" />Union presidency campaign flier / JeremyLannan.com</div>

American Federation of Government Employees National Vice President Jeremy Lannan / AFGE

Government Union’s Top Workers’ Rights Official Mistreated Employees, Probe Finds

Gay Rights

Labor Unions

Northwestern Law School made faculty job offers to only three white men in the last three years, passing over intellectual giants in favor of less qualified black females, including one who graduated &#8220;near the bottom of her class&#8221; and another who plagiarized when writing an exam, according to a <a href="https://media.aflegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/02114203/1-Complaint-7.2.2024.pdf">blistering lawsuit</a> filed on Tuesday.
Charging that “[f]aculty hiring at American universities is a cesspool of corruption and lawlessness,” the suit was filed by lawyers including <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/tennessee-isnt-backing-down-from-trans-surgery-ban-even-if-a-federal-judge-imposes-an-injunction" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jonathan Mitchell</a>, who was involved in the 2023 Supreme Court case on Harvard University admissions that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-issues-landmark-ruling-on-affirmative-action-at-universities" target="_blank" rel="noopener">blocked affirmative action</a>, and signals that similar lawsuits could be in store against colleges across the country.
The lawsuit delves into the details of Northwestern’s recent hiring to paint a picture of affirmative action that is not simply a tie-breaker between equals, but rather the near-total exclusion of highly qualified white males in favor of minorities with weak qualifications, and whose hiring typically ends in disaster.
“For at least the last twelve years, since the installation of then-Dean Daniel Rodriguez, the leadership of Northwestern Law School has propagated and enforced a mandate to hire as many non-white and non-male faculty candidates as possible,” it said.
The lawsuit says it was impossible for even the brightest legal minds to reach a classroom if they were white. Northwestern declined to even interview Eugene Volokh, a “prolific and internationally renowned legal scholar,” for a job, the suit said — adding that Vice Dean Emily Kadens “openly said that Professor Volokh would have been hired at Northwestern had he been anything other than a white man.”
Meanwhile, it hired Destiny Peery, a black woman who graduated from Northwestern Law &#8220;near the bottom of her class,&#8221; something Northwestern&#8217;s faculty was well aware of, and which ordinarily would be an absolute roadblock to being hired as a law professor.
By the time Peery came up for her three-year employment review, where the school decides to get rid of or promote junior faculty, Peery had published almost nothing, but fellow black professor Janice Nadler, who was in charge of the review, misled the committee by falsely claiming old dissertation chapters were actually new work.
After that was exposed, Nadler shifted gears to complain that because of her race, the school had given Peery so many speaking opportunities that she had no time to write. The committee voted to retain Peery, despite being &#8220;incensed&#8221; by Nadler&#8217;s dishonesty, the suit said.
At the five-year mark, when a final decision on tenure is made, Peery had still “failed to produce any scholarship that could warrant a tenured appointment,” and was warned not to seek tenure. Peery then accused “Northwestern of racism for denying her tenure, pretending that she was a victim of race and sex discrimination when racial preferences were the very reason she was hired in the first place,” the suit said.
No other college would put her on its faculty — but Peery found employment at Harvard Law School in a non-teaching position at its “Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race &amp; Justice.”
Similarly, Northwestern hired “another unqualified black woman named Candice Player, who (like Peery) failed to obtain tenure after proving herself incapable of producing scholarship that could justify a tenured appointment. Player also struggled in the classroom, and admitted to colleagues that she did not understand the material she was teaching and couldn’t handle the students’ questions. In one of her classes, Player gave a final exam in which she had plagiarized an exam hypothetical from another source, because Player was too lazy to write her own exam question,&#8221; the suit continued.
The plagiarism scandal led to her departure from Northwestern and “Player, like Peery, failed to obtain another academic appointment after leaving Northwestern.&#8221; She now works as Vice President of Advocacy, Public Policy and Street Outreach at Project HOME in Pennsylvania.
<div class="page" title="Page 10">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Then-Dean Rodriguez had &#8220;ramrodded Player’s appointment through the faculty by threatening to withhold bonuses from any professor who had the temerity to question the wisdom or legality of the appointment. Player would never even have been considered for a faculty appointment at Northwestern if she had been white or a member of a different race, and Player was hired over white male candidates who were vastly more capable and qualified than she was,” the suit said.
</div>
</div>
</div>
In 2018, Kimberly Yuracko was appointed dean of the law school at Northwestern in a process that was secret and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/law-school-pays-for-gay-dance-party-to-quell-uproar-following-diversity-offices-promotion-of-civility" target="_blank" rel="noopener">focused on identity politics</a> and the exclusion of men, with the white female Yuracko beating out a black female critical race theorist, who was runner-up, it added. 
In the 2019-2020 school year, Yuracko made a deal with a conservative professor that if the faculty greenlit her problematic appointments, she would see to it that a gay professor, Ilan Wurman, was hired, even though he is white. After her candidates were approved, Wurman was blocked, with then-Associate Dean Sarah Lawsky saying &#8220;at a faculty meeting that she opposed Wurman’s appointment to the faculty because he is a white man,&#8221; the suit said.
In 2022, the school hired Jamelia Morgan, a black woman from the low-ranked UC Irving with only four years of teaching, and gave her a $900,000 budget to start a “Center for Racial and Disability Justice.” The <a href="https://www.crdjustice.org/blog-posts" target="_blank" rel="noopener">center’s website</a> hasn’t published a journal article in a year and a blog post in six months, and the suit said it has hosted only two events.
In all, in 2023-24 Northwestern Law made six offers of employment, none of which went to white men. The prior year, it made nine offers, only one of which went to a white man (whose scholarship focused on promoting affirmative action).
In 2021-2022, it made six offers, two of which went to white men&#8211;but one offer was made to someone who had “zero chance” of accepting because he taught at a much higher-ranked school, perhaps a maneuver to make the statistics look less anti-white. The other worked in tax law, a specialty where there were few minority options, the suit said. 
Accomplished white men like Volokh and Ernie Young, a longtime Duke professor and Harvard Law grad, were “rejected in favor of candidates with mediocre and undistinguished records,” the suit said.
The suit was filed on behalf of a group called Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preferences, which says it consists of people who have standing to sue because they may have lost out on faculty jobs, represented by lawyers from America First Legal and Stone Hilton in addition to Mitchell&#8217;s firm. 
It said that for years, administrators have thought they could “flout” laws preventing discrimination based on race, but “the jig is up” after the Supreme Court clamped down on race-based decision-making in a 2023 case on Harvard admissions.
The <a href="https://media.aflegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/02114203/1-Complaint-7.2.2024.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Northwestern suit</a> was filed in federal court in the Northern District of Illinois against the law school as well as its current dean Hari Osofsky.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/schizophrenic-transgender-student-terrorized-top-law-school-ranted-about-gavel-dildos-sex-with-trumpies-in-his-own-law-journal">‘Schizophrenic’ Transgender Student Terrorized Top Law School, Ranted About ‘Gavel Dildos’ In His Law Journal</a>

Northwestern University

Affirmative Action Suit Details How Law School Blackballed Accomplished White Men, Opted For Unqualified Black Women

College

Illinois

Several weeks ago, I saw a news article proclaiming that it’s been four years since the death of George Floyd — and my head snapped. It certainly doesn’t feel like it’s been four years. When George Floyd’s death on a Minneapolis street hit headlines in May 2020, I was busy graduating high school, sans Pomp and Circumstance, and trying to figure out what exactly the future would hold. We were headlong into the COVID-19 lockdowns, and my schedule was, to say the least, very open. The video of Floyd’s death, and the pure unadulterated social rage that followed, served as a catalyst that would change the country forever. Americans were looking for a reason to be mad — and they found one.
The race-obsessive revolution that followed happened in two ways: suddenly and gradually. In the months after Floyd’s death, American cities descended into madness, with looters and vandals doing $1–2 billion worth of damage in the most expensive riot damage tolls in the past half-century. But you can’t riot forever; in many ways, the gradual incursions of America’s race revolution in the institutional space have been even more pernicious and laid the groundwork for a far more complex wave of social racialization.
I’m referring, of course, to DEI: programs for diversity, equity, and inclusions that’ve commandeered billions of dollars from the university to the boardroom and re-ignited fierce debates about the place of race in public life. Shortly after the death of George Floyd, such initiatives were everywhere. You’d be hard pressed to find a company in the Fortune 1000 that wasn’t having to explore the best way to approach the issues of racial and cultural conflict in the workplace: exploration to the tune of <a href="https://fortune.com/2024/02/16/esg-dei-branding-problem-diversity-inclusion-debate/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">$340 billion</a>. Corporate America pledged more than the entire 2024 budget of the Department of Education to treat a disease that they weren’t sure they had.
Yet here we stand, four years later, and times have changed. As a corporate analyst, who’s watched almost a hundred annual meetings and listened to thousands of corporate proposals, I see how the market for diversity officers is <a href="https://www.wsj.com/business/c-suite/chief-diversity-officer-cdo-business-corporations-e110a82f" target="_blank" rel="noopener">drying up</a>. Very few corporate proposals are seeking to form DEI commissions or move the goalposts on diversity — and an increasing number are actually asking companies to audit the legal and reputational risks that such programs have created. What happened? Did the corporate DEI movement simply get stamped out by greedy companies, happy to forego racial progress to make a buck? Or, does the movement itself bear some blame for grounding itself on the rocks?
I’ve interviewed both DEI critics and advocates, trying to find answers. I’ve listened to corporate activists, including at Walmart’s annual meeting last week, discussing how employees of color are still at risk and underprivileged in the workplace. I can sympathize with concerns about prejudice — and no doubt, sympathizing with concerns is how many corporate DEI initiatives began. Yet, the racializing solutions corporations have devised are quickly running up against reality. Just look at the case of Amazon, which recently had to deal with <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2024/05/31/dei-backlash-george-floyd-death-anniversary/73899737007/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">multiple lawsuits</a> over its <a href="https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/transportation/two-years-of-empowering-entrepreneurs-with-more-to-come" target="_blank" rel="noopener">diversity grant program</a> (piloted in 2020) that excludes white and Asian entrepreneurs. As the pendulum swings back towards normal, ordinary Americans are waking up and realizing how divorced from reality corporate ‘anti-racist’ solutions are.
I’m reminded of a conversation I had in Grand Rapids last year with a DEI practitioner who said, “DEI isn’t generally seen as ‘company first.’ HR is there to look out for the company and mitigate risk. And DEI can create some risk there.” When pressed, she further noted her discomfort with the fact that “DEI consultants are buying into the corporate and capitalist game.” If DEI practitioners view corporate structures, including the pursuit of fiduciary duty, as a game to be played, and openly admit that their practices create corporate risk… that’s a bit of a poison pill for a corporate department/initiative tasked with providing positive returns to shareholders. DEI’s most ardent advocates and supporters might like to believe that diversity initiatives are part and parcel of increasing brand value. But shareholders don’t seem to agree—and as DEI’s potential to create corporate risk increases, so does the skittishness of the people who rely on brand performance for return.
Four years after the death of George Floyd, America’s rejection of race radicalism is underway, from the Supreme Court to prominent academic institutions (even the faculty of Harvard are <a href="https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/6/4/dei-faculty-hiring-stopped/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">doing away</a> with mandatory DEI statements). As economist Glenn Loury told me days after the Court’s overturn of affirmative action, “People said there was going to be a racial reckoning after George Floyd. The real reckoning on race is this.” America’s DEI advocates didn’t fall victim to a series of unfortunate events or any such helpless situation. They walked into the boardroom unseriously, and assumed that the radicalism and real risk that came along with them wouldn’t matter to corporate America. Billions of dollars later, it’s abundantly clear: it mattered.
The corporate DEI movement’s wounds are overwhelmingly self-inflicted, and its eventual demise will be as well. I only wish it hadn’t taken us four years and hundreds of billions of dollars to arrive at this conclusion.
* * *
Isaac Willour is a corporate analyst at Bowyer Research. He can be found on X <a href="https://twitter.com/IsaacWillour" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@IsaacWillour</a>, and is an award-winning journalist whose work has been featured at outlets including USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times. He is a contributor with Young Voices.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Business people having meeting in conference room, sitting with laptops and discussing

The Fate Of The Racially Furious

Corporations

Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI)

Employers

George Floyd

Readers Pass

Over twenty Republican attorneys general are warning the American Bar Association that its diversity and inclusion standards may violate the Constitution. 
Led by Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, the Republican officials sent a <a href="https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/attorneygeneral/documents/pr/2024/pr24-47-letter.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">letter</a> Monday to the American Bar Association, the organization that accredits law schools across the country, saying that it needed to reconsider its diversity standards in light of the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/supreme-court" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Supreme Court</a>’s ruling on affirmative action. The letter said that the affirmative action decision “requires significant adjustments” to the bar association standards to make sure they aren’t treating law students and faculty differently based on race. 
“The rule of law cannot long survive if the organization that accredits legal education requires every American law school to ignore the Constitution and civil rights law,” Skrmetti said. “The American Bar Association has long pursued the high calling of promoting respect for the law and the integrity of the legal profession, and we call on the organization to recommit to those ideals and ensure that its standards for law schools comport with federal law.” 
A particular issue is the American Bar Association’s Standard 206 on diversity and inclusion. 
The standard <a href="https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/attorneygeneral/documents/pr/2024/pr24-47-letter.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">says</a> that schools should demonstrate “a commitment to diversity and inclusion by providing full opportunities for the study of law and entry into the profession by members of underrepresented groups, particularly racial and ethnic minorities.”
The standards are currently undergoing revisions, but the attorneys general said that the proposed alternatives still seemed to focus on race. 
“While we support the Council’s willingness to modify Standard 206, the proposed revisions reemphasize Standard 206’s problematic requirement that law schools engage in race-based admissions and hiring,” they wrote. “We urge the Council to modify its standards in a way that comports with federal law and with the ABA’s purported commitment to set the legal and ethical foundation for the nation.”
Skrmetti suggested that law schools across the country might be subject to civil rights lawsuits if they maintained their current diversity requirements. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
“If the standards continue to insist on treating students and faculty differently based on the color of their skin, they will burden every law school in America with punitive civil rights litigation,” he said. 
The attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Virginia all signed on to the lawsuit. 
New York <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-york-bar-associations-encourage-law-schools-to-bypass-scotus-affirmative-action-decision-report-finds?topStoryPosition=5" target="_blank" rel="noopener">bar associations</a> have already signaled they may attempt to bypass the SCOTUS affirmative action decision while the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/wisconsin-state-bar-must-keep-diversity-internship-open-to-all-after-lawsuit-from-conservative-group" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Wisconsin</a> Bar Association agreed to a partial settlement earlier this year over a &#8220;diversity&#8221; internship program.

Law and justice.

Republican Attorneys General Warn American Bar Association To Steer Clear Of Race-Based Initiatives

Tennessee

Students at one of the top medical schools in the country are failing basic medical competency tests – and whistleblowers at the school are blaming affirmative action policies.
Some faculty members shared emails and other information with <a href="https://freebeacon.com/campus/a-failed-medical-school-how-racial-preferences-supposedly-outlawed-in-california-have-persisted-at-ucla/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Washington Free Beacon</a>, which revealed that the University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) was admitting students based on race over merit, a practice that has been illegal in California since 1996. The outlet based its report on “written correspondence between UCLA officials, internal data on student performance, and interviews with eight professors at the medical school—six of whom have worked with or under Lucero on medical student and residency admissions.”
The result of the alleged race-based admissions policies has led to a marked increase in the number of students failing basic standardized tests.
&#8220;I have students on their rotation who don&#8217;t know anything,&#8221; a member of the admissions committee told the Free Beacon. &#8220;People get in and they struggle.&#8221;
Those who spoke to the Free Beacon placed the blame largely on Jennifer Lucero, who took over as the dean of admissions in 2020. In one example of the school allowing someone in based on race and not merit, Lucero reportedly became angry with another admissions officer who questioned whether the school should let in a black applicant whose grades and test scores were far below the school’s average.
&#8220;Did you not know African-American women are dying at a higher rate than everybody else?&#8221; Lucero reportedly asked, adding that &#8220;we need people like this in the medical school.&#8221;
The outburst concerned other admissions officials, prompting one to reach out to other committee members and to wonder “if this applicant had been [a] white male, or [an] Asian female for that matter, [whether] we would have had that much discussion.&#8221;
The same question had been raised since Lucero began her role as head of the medical school’s admissions in 2020. Since then, the school has dropped from <a href="https://www.uclahealth.org/news/release/national-ranking-places-david-geffen-school-of-medicine-at-ucla-6-in-research-11-in-primary-care" target="_blank" rel="noopener">6th</a> to <a href="https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-medical-schools/university-of-california-los-angeles-04010#:~:text=University%20of%20California%2D%2DLos%20Angeles%20(Geffen)%202023%2D2024,Medical%20Schools%3A%20Research%20and%20No." target="_blank" rel="noopener">18th</a> place in the U.S. News &amp; World Report’s rankings for medical research, and as many as 50% of students are failing basic standardized tests on emergency medicine, family medicine, internal medicine, and pediatrics. Large percentages are also failing basic tests in neurology, obstetrics/gynecology, and surgery as well.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1716644858001000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3bj36IVNtNrBzgK6q6NlAl">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Nationally, an average of 5% of students fail each test.
Professors told the Free Beacon that students simply aren’t prepared for the school. One told the outlet that a student in an operating room couldn’t identify a major artery when asked, and then berated the professor for asking her in front of everyone. Another professor said students finishing up their clinical rotations didn’t know basic lab tests.
&#8220;I don&#8217;t know how some of these students are going to be junior doctors,&#8221; the professor told the Free Beacon. &#8220;Faculty are seeing a shocking decline in knowledge of medical students.&#8221;
One admissions officer told the outlet that double standards in admissions are largely to blame.
&#8220;All the normal criteria for getting into medical school only apply to people of certain races,&#8221; an admissions officer said. &#8220;For other people, those criteria are completely disregarded.&#8221;
Four people who served on the admissions committee told the Free Beacon that the committee regularly admits black and Latino applicants with below-average GPAs and test scores, while white and Asian applicants must be near perfect to be considered.
Six people who’ve worked with Lucero told the outlet that she retaliates against those who question the qualifications of minority candidates, calling them &#8220;privileged&#8221; and throwing out accusations of racism. She’s even forced dissenters to take diversity training sessions for the alleged transgressions.
Lucero, who is also the vice chair for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) for UCLA’s anesthesiology department, has refused to use blind admissions, saying that even though California bans the use of racial preference in admissions, &#8220;we are not required to blind any information.&#8221; She’s also directly advocated for moving candidates up or down the residency rank based on their race, the Free Beacon reported.
Adam Mortara, who was the lead trial lawyer for the plaintiffs in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the landmark Supreme Court case that banned affirmative action, told the outlet that Lucero’s statements in emails could cause a legal issue for UCLA. Asking for information about a candidate’s race without any lawful cause is “presumptively illegal,” he said.
&#8220;You can&#8217;t have evidence of overt discrimination like this and not have someone come forward&#8221; to sue, he added.
Several complaints have been filed against Lucero to UCLA’s Discrimination Prevention Office, but no action has been taken.

University of California, Los Angeles

Up To Half Of UCLA Med Students Are Failing Basic Medical Competency Tests, Affirmative Action To Blame

Up To Half Of UCLA Med Students Are Failing Basic Medical Competence Tests, Affirmative Action To Blame

California

medical school

UCLA

New York bar associations are encouraging law firms and schools to bypass the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/supreme-court" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Supreme Court</a>&#8216;s landmark ruling overturning affirmative action and implement racial preferences for admissions, <a href="https://manhattan.institute/article/how-major-american-and-new-york-bar-associations-are-responding-to-students-for-fair-admissions?utm_source=press_release&amp;utm_medium=email" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to a new report. 
The American Bar Association (ABA), the New York State Bar Association (NYSBA), and the New York City Bar Association (NYCBA) all appear to tell law schools to “ignore” the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the Manhattan Institute reported on Thursday. The associations, writes researcher Renu Mukherjee, are advising schools to use methods that appear to be race-neutral, but are meant to still select for race.
“Law schools, for instance, are advised to continue granting admissions preferences to black and Hispanic applicants using methods that are race-neutral in theory but race-conscious in practice,” Mukherjee wrote. “Meanwhile, law firms are advised to simply continue their use of affirmative action; the bar associations suggest that because Students for Fair Admissions considered this policy only within the context of university admissions, the decision is inapplicable to employment.”
In the wake of the SCOTUS decision, the NYSBA recommended that universities evaluate race through means of “a non-racial goal or value being pursued by the university,” as well as to document race for “research and evaluation purposes,” the report found. It also recommended using low socioeconomic status, first-generation immigrant status, geographic location, or some kind of percentage plan as other admission factors.
Schools are also encouraged to end early admission policies to align with “broader institutional diversity and equity goals&#8221; as well as consider removing standardized testing measures like the LSAT from admission considerations. These recommendations came from a 93-page report produced by the NYSBA Task Force on Advancing Diversity released after the SCOTUS decision to overturn affirmative action for admission into schools.
The report noted that there were some race-neutral pipeline programs been developed and supported by the bar associations to help those from low and middle-income families get into the legal profession with tutoring, standardized test preparation, and mentoring.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
When asked if some pipeline programs might not be available for use by a group like white males, Mukherjee told The Daily Wire that if they did take race into account they &#8220;would be illegal and thus face challenge.&#8221; She added that the programs should be &#8220;open to ALL students, not just blacks and Hispanics.&#8221;
&#8220;Race-based scholarships and corporate diversity fellowships are merely affirmative action by another name,&#8221; the report said. &#8220;They suggest that individuals should be accepted by law schools or be hired in Big Law on account of skin color, as opposed to merit. In contrast, pipeline programs that offer academic support, test prep, mentoring, and career development opportunities prepare marginalized students to go toe-to-toe with their better-resourced peers; they provide these students with a sense of agency and accountability over their futures.&#8221;
Last month, the Wisconsin State Bar Association <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/wisconsin-state-bar-must-keep-diversity-internship-open-to-all-after-lawsuit-from-conservative-group" target="_blank" rel="noopener">amended</a> its definition of &#8220;diversity&#8221; for first-year law student clerk internship after it was sued by a conservative group that said the bar was discriminating against students based on race and sexual identity.

Supreme Court Rules Affirmative Action Is Unconstitutional In Landmark Decision

New York Bar Associations Encourage Law Schools To Bypass SCOTUS Affirmative Action Decision, Report Finds

Courts

New York

Republican attorneys general from five states have sent a letter to the biggest law firms in the U.S. telling them to end <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/racial-discrimination" target="_blank" rel="noopener">racial preference programs</a> or face accountability. 
On Tuesday, the <a href="https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2023-08/Letter_to_AM_100_Law_Firms_re_Race_Discrimination_Final.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">letter</a> was sent by Montana AG Austin Knudsen, Arkansas AG Tim Griffin, Iowa AG Brenna Bird, Kansas AG Kris Kobach, and Kentucky AG <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kentucky-ag-daniel-cameron-wins-gop-governor-primary-race" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Daniel Cameron</a> to the managing partners, chairs, and CEOs of American Lawyer (Am Law) 100 Firms, a ranking of the 100 biggest law firms in the country. It warned the firms that any discriminatory treatment for hiring violates federal law and that they could be sanctioned if they treat anyone differently because of their skin color. 
“Specifically, you owe a duty to refrain from discriminating on the basis of race, whether under the label of &#8216;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-dei" target="_blank" rel="noopener">diversity, equity, and inclusion</a>,&#8217; or otherwise. Put simply, differential treatment based on race and skin color, even for purportedly &#8216;benign&#8217; purposes, is unlawful, divisive, and exposes your firm to serious legal consequences, including potentially fines, damages, and injunctive relief,” the letter said. 
The letter referenced the June ruling from the Supreme Court that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-issues-landmark-ruling-on-affirmative-action-at-universities" target="_blank" rel="noopener">struck down</a> the racially-based acceptance policies of Harvard and the University of North Carolina where certain metrics favored minority students. Some Republicans have said that the Supreme Court ruling can be applied to hiring practices in the private sector, including at law firms. 
According to the Tuesday letter, racial discrimination for employment and promotions may be present in law firms, which they said would violate federal law. 
“These discriminatory practices include, among other things, explicit racial quotas and preferences in hiring, recruiting, retention, promotion, and advancement. They also include shocking race-based contracting practices, such as racial preferences and quotas in selecting suppliers, providing overt preferential treatment to customers on the basis of race, and pressuring contractors to adopt the company’s racially discriminatory quotas and preferences,” the AGs wrote. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1692980418669000&amp;usg=AOvVaw15MNQZ1U33fOZBroIc4gYb">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
The letter cited the racial quota for leadership and staff positions at Baker McKenzie, a prominent Chicago law firm. In addition to quotas, the Republicans warned that DEI programming could also be illegal. 
“Activities that utilize racial segregation, race stereotyping, and race scapegoating may violate civil rights laws because they can create a hostile environment and/or involve activities that result in different treatment on the basis of race. This is particularly true when participation in such exercises is compulsory,” the Republicans said. 
The firms were advised to end any “unlawful race-based quotas” or face accountability.  “If you choose not to do so, know that you will be held accountable — sooner rather than later — for treating individuals differently because of the color of their skin,” the letter said. 
Last month, 13 Republican attorneys general sent out a <a href="https://ag.ks.gov/docs/default-source/documents/corporate-racial-discrimination-multistate-letter.pdf?sfvrsn=968abc1a_2" target="_blank" rel="noopener">similar warning</a> to Fortune 500 companies, again pointing to the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. President &amp; Fellows of Harvard College.

President Trump Has Rally In Kansas

Republican AGs Tell Nation’s Top Law Firms To Stop Racial Preference Hiring Or Face Accountability

Republican AGs Tell Nation's Top Law Firms To Stop Racial Preference Hiring Or Face Accountability

Montana

Racial Bias

Racial Discrimination

Social Issues

The Biden administration released new guidance on Monday for higher education institutions to legally consider a student&#8217;s race during admission in the wake of the U.S. <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-issues-landmark-ruling-on-affirmative-action-at-universities" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Supreme Court ban on affirmative action</a>.
&#8220;This is a moment of great urgency in higher education,&#8221; Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona <a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/white-house-promotes-paths-to-college-diversity-after-gutting-of-affirmative-action/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told</a> reporters Monday morning.
Just before the nation&#8217;s highest court broke for recesses at the end of June, SCOTUS issued a landmark ruling that said race-based admissions programs at Harvard University violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the University of North Carolina programs violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Students for Fair Admissions sued the elite schools, accusing them of unfairly factoring race into their admissions processes, pointing to the high test scores of rejected Asian-American and white applicants. The group argued that Harvard violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination by schools that receive federal funding. In the other case, the group accused the UNC of violating the 14th Amendment&#8217;s equal protection clause by considering race in its admissions process.
&#8220;We know what has happened at colleges when individual states have banned affirmative action in the past,&#8221; Cardona reportedly said during a press call on Monday. &#8220;Fewer students of color applied, and fewer students of color were admitted. We cannot afford that kind of backpedaling on a national scale.&#8221;
The decision now profoundly affects the admissions processes at universities across the country. But despite the nation&#8217;s highest court eliminating universities&#8217; ability to accept applicants based on race, some have <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/universities-react-to-scotus-affirmative-action-ruling-harvard-vows-to-find-loophole" target="_blank" rel="noopener">indicated</a> that they would search for a loophole in the ruling.
&#8220;Although this decision changes the landscape for admissions in higher education, it should not be used as an excuse to turn away from long-standing efforts to make those institutions more inclusive,&#8221; associate attorney general Vanita Gupta <a href="https://www.insidehighered.com/news/admissions/traditional-age/2023/08/14/biden-administration-issues-guidance-affirmative-action" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reportedly</a> said at a news conference. &#8220;Race can be relevant to a person&#8217;s life or a lived experience, and may impact one&#8217;s development motivations, academic interests or personal or professional aspirations. That impact can still be considered.&#8221;
The Department of Education and the Department of Justice published <a href="https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/ocr-questionsandanswers-tvi-20230814.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">guidance</a> outlining available legal resources for colleges and universities to take other steps to achieve a diverse student body based on a range of factors, including race and ethnicity.
According to the question and answer portion of the document, federal officials said the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision &#8220;does not require institutions to ignore race when identifying prospective students for outreach and recruitment, provided that their outreach and recruitment programs do not provide targeted groups of prospective students preference in the admissions process.&#8221;
Some examples federal officials detailed include offering affinity clubs with race-related themes, considering how an applicant&#8217;s race has shaped personal experiences, and re-evaluating admissions preferences for students with legacy status or donor affiliation.
&#8220;With respect to admissions practices themselves, especially for the upcoming cycle, the Departments encourage colleges and universities to review their policies to ensure they identify and reward those attributes that they most value, such as hard work, achievement, intellectual curiosity, potential and determination,&#8221; the administration wrote in the &#8220;Dear Colleague&#8221; <a href="https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-20230814.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">letter</a>.
Attorney General Merrick Garland told the Associated Press in a <a href="https://apnews.com/article/affirmative-action-college-admissions-race-e8566608a1b9ce4efc7db6de41759ad1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">statement</a>, &#8220;Ensuring access to higher education for students from different backgrounds is one of the most powerful tools we have to prepare graduates to lead an increasingly diverse nation and make real our country&#8217;s promise of opportunity for all.&#8221;
Students for Fair Admissions has not responded to requests for comment.

US President Joe Biden White House Reproductive Healthcare Access

Biden Administration Issues Racial Diversity Guidance For College Admissions Post SCOTUS Affirmative Action Ban

Department of Education

Department of Justice

Harvard

Columbia Law School removed a questionable admission requirement for transfer students on Monday after <a href="https://freebeacon.com/campus/columbia-law-school-said-it-would-require-applicants-to-submit-video-statements-in-the-wake-of-affirmative-action-ban-then-it-backtracked/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Washington Free Beacon</a> inquired that the application process appeared to have a portion used to bypass the U.S. Supreme Court ban on affirmative action.
Just before SCOTUS broke for recesses at the end of June, a landmark ruling from the court said race-based admissions programs at Harvard University violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the University of North Carolina programs violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. The decision now profoundly affects the admissions processes at universities across the country.
But despite the nation&#8217;s highest court eliminating universities&#8217; ability to accept applicants based on race, some have <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/universities-react-to-scotus-affirmative-action-ruling-harvard-vows-to-find-loophole" target="_blank" rel="noopener">indicated</a> that they would search for a loophole in the ruling.
On Monday morning, Columbia Law School&#8217;s admissions page reportedly said all transfer applicants must submit a 90-second video statement addressing random questions &#8220;to provide the Admissions Committee with additional insight into their personal strengths,&#8221; according to the Free Beacon.
But the video statements from transfer applicants only appeared on the law school&#8217;s website after the Supreme Court ruled against affirmative action policies.
Columbia&#8217;s decision &#8220;has all the hallmarks of a willful effort to evade the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act,&#8221; Edward Blum, the founder of the nonprofit legal advocacy organization Students for Fair Admissions, told the Free Beacon. &#8220;What is a 90-second video supposed to legitimately convey that a written statement could not?&#8221;
Blum&#8217;s organization took the legal challenge to the nation&#8217;s highest court after accusing the so-called elite universities of unfairly factoring race into their admissions processes. The group pointed to the high test scores of rejected Asian American and white applicants. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled against Harvard and UNC.
Following the Free Beacon&#8217;s report, a law school spokesman claimed the application&#8217;s video statement component — which was first introduced before the Supreme Court ruling in a pilot program — had been a misunderstanding. By 6:00 p.m. on Monday, officials removed the portion from the school&#8217;s website.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
&#8220;Video statements will not be required as part of the Fall 2024 J.D. application when it becomes available in September,&#8221; the law school told the Free Beacon in a statement. &#8220;It was inadvertently listed on the Law School&#8217;s website and has since been corrected.&#8221;
Campus Reform, a watchdog group, reported that some colleges have drummed up other ways to inquire about a students&#8217; race, including Sarah Lawrence College in New York, which asks applicants how the SCOTUS ruling has personally affected them, according to the <a href="https://nypost.com/2023/08/01/columbia-university-claims-video-requirement-on-application-was-an-accident/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">New York Post</a>.
&nbsp;

Sumpreme Court Rules Affirmative Action Is Unconstitutional In Landmark Decision

Columbia Law School Removes Application Requirement From Website After Report Exposes ‘Willful Effort To Evade’ Affirmative Action Ban

Columbia Law School Removes Application Requirement From Website After Report Exposes 'Willful Effort To Evade' Affirmative Action Ban: Report

SCOTUS

University of North Carolina

Menu