Every year, millions of high school students across the country dream of attending America’s most selective colleges. In California, that goal may be harder to reach as pro-affirmative action lawmakers push for new ways to give certain groups a leg up in admissions.
As a high school junior in San Jose, I will be applying to college next year. Students like me are taking AP classes, building their profiles, and doing everything we’ve been told to help us get into the schools of our choice.
The system is far from perfect but the basic premise is that colleges will then, in good faith, try to weigh each applicant based on merit and context. No group receives an unearned advantage at the expense of others.
<a href="https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB7/id/3029617">California Assembly Bill 7</a> (AB7) blows a hole in that idea.
The bill, which recently passed in the Assembly by a 54–17 vote, would allow California public universities to consider whether an applicant is “a descendant of a chattel enslaved person of American chattel slavery.” It’s part of <a href="https://blackcaucus.legislature.ca.gov/news/california-legislative-black-caucus-introduces-2024-reparations-legislative-package">a broader reparations push</a> and now headed to the state Senate.
The bill’s author, Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, says it’s not about race but historic harm. “For decades, universities gave preferential admission treatment to donors, and their family members, while others tied to legacies of harm were ignored and at times outright excluded,” Bryan <a href="https://apnews.com/article/california-universities-slavery-descendants-admissions-4b0e84c27b40725a9f7929b230a591ca">told the Associated Press</a>. 
He’s right about history. The legacy of slavery has shaped socioeconomic outcomes for Black Americans. But that doesn’t mean all descendants of slavery are disadvantaged — or that ancestry should now serve as some kind of admissions shortcut.
That distinction seems to be missing from the conversation. What we’re left with is a bill that awards preference based on ancestry.
This bill proposes an eligibility line drawn by lineage. To be clear, the text does not use the words “Black” or “African American” but rather delineates a specific historical category, “descendants of U.S. chattel slavery,” without using racial language. It’s designed to sidestep Proposition 209, which banned racial preferences in 1996, and the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in Students for Fair Admissions that struck down affirmative action nationwide.
Legal scholars describe such policies as “race proxies”: mechanisms that dodge explicit racial language but preserve race as the decisive factor in practice. Courts have repeatedly scrutinized such end-runs: in Parents Involved v. Seattle, <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2006/05-908">the Supreme Court warned</a> against policies that look constructive but act as racial stand-ins.
The legal system has long treated ancestral classifications with the same suspicion as racial ones. In Hirabayashi v. United States, the 1943 case on Japanese-American internment, <a href="https://edge.sagepub.com/epsteinpowers11e/student-resources/chapter-5-interbranch-interactions/hirabayashi-v-united-states">the Court held</a> that “distinctions between citizens solely because of their ancestry are by their very nature odious to a free people whose institutions are founded upon the doctrine of equality.” Moreover, the express text of Proposition 209 includes “ethnicity” in its enumeration of protected categories as well as race.
The bill defines a “descendant of slavery” as someone whose ancestors were enslaved specifically in the United States, meaning it would exclude many Black students whose families came from Africa or the Caribbean after abolition. Meanwhile, someone who identifies as white but has traced a distant enslaved ancestry through DNA testing could, in theory, qualify. And we know these terms circle a ridiculously arbitrary line. African American activist Angela Davis <a href="https://www.today.com/popculture/tv/angela-davis-finding-your-roots-mayflower-ancestors-rcna71700">went on PBS’s</a> ancestry show Finding Your Roots only to find out she’s a descendent from Mayflower colonists. She was mortified.
But even if Bryan turns out to be right on the legal question, does the technical distinction between race and ancestry suddenly make it fair to those it excludes?
No. Ancestry-based preferences would still have effectively all the same downsides as other affirmative action policies: lack of individual assessment, blunt group categorization, and fairness concerns for everyone else. As Chief Justice John Roberts <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf">wrote in the SFFA majority opinion</a>: “College admissions are zero-sum. A benefit provided to some applicants but not to others necessarily advantages the former group at the expense of the latter.”
Even if preference is framed as reparative, someone else is paying the price.
There are better options to help marginalized students. California lawmakers could index Cal Grants to local cost of living. They could strengthen the UC/CSU admission guarantees for top students at public high schools. They could improve outreach around community college transfer guarantees or pass bills like <a href="https://www.padilla.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/BASIC-Act-One-Pager.pdf">the BASIC Act</a>, which would give colleges resources to help students cover food, housing, and health care.
This bill, by contrast, like other affirmative action-adjacent legislation before it, assumes inherited identity stands in for “lived struggle.” It doesn’t.
We don’t need another lecture on systemic inequality. We see the results of it in classmates of all backgrounds who stop aiming high because they don’t think college is for them, or can’t imagine paying for it.
The California Senate should reject this bill and pursue fairer solutions, rather than advancing a measure the Supreme Court is likely to strike down.
* * *
William Liang is a student journalist living in San Jose, California.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Stanford Graduate School of Business

I’m Preparing For College. California’s New Slavery Bill Could Change Everything.

I’m Preparing for College. California’s New Slavery Bill Could Change Everything.

Affirmative Action

American Universities

California

College

High School

Opinion

Sacramento

Slavery

The Justice Department confirmed Monday that the United States Naval Academy would no longer consider race in admissions, according to a court document. 
In a joint <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1403766/dl?inline=&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=govdelivery" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filing</a> with Students for Fair Admission, the Trump administration asked a federal appeals court to dismiss a lawsuit against the academy over a policy that allowed it to consider race during the admissions process. Students for Fair Admission, which sued the academy in October 2023, agreed that the suit was no longer needed due to policy changes implemented by the Trump administration. 
“This Department is committed to ending illegal discrimination and restoring merit-based opportunity throughout the federal government,” <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-addresses-racial-discrimination-lawsuit-challenging-race-based-admissions">said</a> Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “We are proud to partner with the Department of Defense to permanently end race-based admissions at the United States Naval Academy and ensure that admission to this prestigious institution is based exclusively on merit.”
The filing states that the lawsuit is now moot due to the policy change and asks that the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismiss a lower court&#8217;s ruling that kept race-based admissions in place. The policy allowed the academy to “consider race or ethnicity as one of many nondeterminative factors” for admission. 
This policy ended after President Donald Trump signed an executive order on January 27 that said that no one within the military should be given any advantage based on gender or race. 
In compliance with that order, Naval Academy Superintendent Vice Admiral Yvette Davids issued a memo in February saying that “at no point during the admissions process (including qualification and acceptance) should race, ethnicity, or sex be a factor for admission.”
The joint filing said that considering race and ethnicity for admissions does not contribute to military cohesiveness, lethality, recruitment, or national security. 
“It is the military judgment of the Department of Defense that recruiting and promoting individuals based on merit alone, and not based on their immutable characteristics, improves unit cohesion and performance,” the joint filing said. “The Department of Defense has now determined that neither the recruitment and retention of talented officers nor the legitimacy of the U.S. military are positively affected by the service academies’ consideration of race in admissions.”
Students for Fair Admission was the organization behind the landmark case where the Supreme Court ruled that affirmative action in higher education was unconstitutional and racially discriminatory.

US-POLITICS-EDUCATION-MILITARY

Naval Academy Promises To ‘Permanently’ End Race-Based Admissions

Courts

Department of Justice

Naval Academy

Pam Bondi

Politics

Supreme Court

Tennessee challenged the Department of Education on Wednesday over a program that offers specific funding only to schools composed of at least 25% Hispanic students, arguing that the initiative is unconstitutional.
Joined by the organization Students for Fair Admissions, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti <a href="https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/attorneygeneral/documents/pr/2025/2025-6-hsi.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sued</a> the Education Department over its Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI) program, which gives financial aid to institutions that have at least 25% Hispanic enrollment. In the suit, Skrmetti argues that the racial requirements of the program are arbitrary and violate federal law.
“The Department of Education cannot discriminate based on race or ethnicity — even when Congress orders it to. Yet under the Higher Education Act, the Department awards grants to colleges and universities only if they enroll a certain number of Hispanic students,” the suit says.
The lawsuit took aim at several aspects of the program, including the Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions grant <a href="https://www.ed.gov/grants-and-programs/grants-special-populations/grants-hispanic-students/developing-hispanic-serving-institutions-program--title-v#:~:text=The%20Developing%20Hispanic%2DServing%20Institutions,program%20quality%2C%20and%20institutional%20stability." target="_blank" rel="noopener">opportunity</a> and the Promoting Postbaccalaureate Opportunities for Hispanic Americans <a href="https://www.ed.gov/grants-and-programs/grants-special-populations/grants-hispanic-students/promoting-postbaccalaureate-opportunities-for-hispanic-americans" target="_blank" rel="noopener">initiative</a>. Both of these programs, Skrmetti argues, violate federal law because of their racial component.
The suit notes that no college in Tennessee qualifies as “Hispanic-Serving” because none have at least 25% Hispanic enrollment, even though some institutions, like the University of Memphis, have a high percentage of minority enrollment.
“The State of Tennessee operates many colleges and universities. Every one of them serves Hispanic students. Every one of them serves low-income students. But not one of them qualifies to receive grants under the HSI program. Why? Because they don’t have the right mix of ethnicities on campus,” the lawsuit says, noting that the 25% number was an &#8220;arbitrary ethnic threshold.&#8221;
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=wisepops&amp;utm_campaign=dad&amp;utm_content=fathersdaygiftpopups" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gift Dad an All Access Membership. Use code DAD40 at checkout to save 40%!</a>
Skrmetti said that the grant program was un-American and unconstitutional, and violated the recent Supreme Court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-issues-landmark-ruling-on-affirmative-action-at-universities">decision</a> to overturn affirmative action in admissions in Students For Fair Admissions v. Harvard.
“Treating people differently because of their skin color and ancestry drags our country backwards. The HSI program perversely deprives even needy Hispanic students of the benefits of this funding if they attend institutions that don’t meet the government’s arbitrary quota,” he said.
The Trump administration has pushed to remove diversity, equity, and inclusion mandates from the federal government and cut grants for organizations that promote racial ideologies. In January, President Donald Trump issued an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-illegal-discrimination-and-restoring-merit-based-opportunity/">executive order</a> directing his administration to ensure that any educational facility receiving federal dollars complied with the Students for Fair Admissions decision.

US-POLITICS-CONGRESS-EDUCATION-MCMAHON

Red State Sues Education Department Over ‘Arbitrary’ Racial Grant Program

Department of Education

Education

Tennessee

Trump Administration

U.S.

The Trump administration is pushing for all federal agencies to cancel or transition away from contracts with Harvard University by June 6.
Federal Acquisition Service Commissioner Josh Gruenbaum wrote in a Tuesday letter to all federal agencies to take steps to end any contract they might have with Harvard, accusing the university of engaging in racial discrimination in admissions and other discriminatory behavior. The contracts total approximately $100 million.
&#8220;We recommend that your agency terminate for convenience each contract that it determines has failed to meet its standards, and transition to a new vendor those contracts that could be better serviced by an alternative counterparty. Going forward, we also encourage your agency to seek alternative vendors for future services where you had previously considered Harvard,&#8221; Gruenbaum wrote in a letter obtained by The Daily Wire. &#8220;We look forward to assisting you with terminating or transitioning these contracts.&#8221;
The letter cites numerous examples of how the Trump administration believes Harvard violated federal law.
&#8220;As relevant here, GSA (U.S. General Services Administration) understands that Harvard continues to engage in race discrimination, including in its admissions process and in other areas of student life. The statistical evidence of Harvard’s racial discrimination in their admissions — as revealed in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard — is shocking, to say the least,&#8221; Gruenbaum wrote. 
The letter noted that admissions rates for the top academic performance varied widely by race. The administration said the admission rates for the highest academic decile were 56% for African Americans, 31% for Hispanics, 15% for whites, and 13% for Asians.
&#8220;Harvard has shown no indication of reforming their admissions process — to the contrary, Harvard now has to offer a remedial math course, which has been described as &#8216;middle school math,&#8217; for incoming freshmen. These are the direct results of employing discriminatory factors, instead of merit, in admission decisions,&#8221; Gruenbaum wrote. 
Gruenbaum added that Harvard was suspected of having racial preferences not only in admissions, but also in hiring.
&#8220;Harvard is suspected of engaging in a pattern or practice of disparate treatment in hiring, promotion, compensation, and other personnel related actions,&#8221; he wrote. 
He also cited &#8220;discriminatory practices&#8221; at the Harvard Law Review, which reportedly include expedited review for minority authors. The Trump administration previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-admin-launches-probe-into-harvard-law-review-over-treatment-of-white-contributors" target="_blank" rel="noopener">opened up</a> a probe into the journal last month.
The Trump administration has also taken issue with Harvard&#8217;s handling of anti-Israel protests, including the awarding of a $65,000 fellowship to a protester accused of assaulting a Jewish student.
&#8220;Harvard’s ongoing inaction in the face of repeated and severe harassment and targeting of its students has at times grounded day-to-day campus operations to a halt, deprived Jewish students of learning and research opportunities to which they are entitled, and profoundly alarmed the general public,&#8221; Gruenbaum wrote. 
More than $2 billion in federal funds for Harvard have been frozen as the university has pushed back on the Trump administration&#8217;s actions to crack down on DEI and campus activism.

Harvard University Campus

Trump Gives Deadline For Federal Agencies To Cancel Harvard Contracts

Donald Trump

Executive

Harvard University

Nearly two years after the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action, an Illinois medical school admits black and Hispanic students with lower average MCAT scores and GPAs than the average scores of white and Asian students it rejects, according to data shared with The Daily Wire.
An analysis of the academic scores of students admitted into Southern Illinois School of Medicine from 2019-2024 reveals that blacks and Hispanics are admitted to the school with much lower scores than whites and Asians, figures obtained by Do No Harm show. These apparently different academic standards continue despite the Supreme Court&#8217;s June 2023 decision to strike down affirmative action, leading to concern that the university is watering down the importance of academics in admissions.
This revelation comes as school leadership <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/unearthed-footage-exposes-medical-school-administrators-pledging-resist-trump-executive-orders" target="_blank" rel="noopener">promises</a> to &#8220;resist&#8221; and &#8220;fight back&#8221; against executive actions from the Trump administration cracking down on diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. A spokeswoman for the school told The Daily Wire that it was &#8220;committed to following the law and complying with the decisions of the Supreme Court.&#8221;
Comparing average GPAs and MCAT scores, Do No Harm found that whites and Asians generally need to score significantly higher than blacks and Hispanics to be admitted into the school. The MCAT is the standardized test that all prospective doctors must take to be admitted into medical school.
“In 2024, the average MCAT score of accepted Asians and whites (combined) was more than 4 points higher than that of accepted blacks and Hispanics (combined) — equivalent to a gap of about 14 percentile points. On GPA, accepted Asians and whites on average had 0.36 higher scores than accepted Blacks and Hispanics,” Do No Harm wrote in a summary of its analysis of the data. 
According to data from 2024, the average GPA score of students accepted into the Southern Illinois  School of Medicine, broken down by race, was: Hispanic (3.45), black (3.50), white (3.85), and Asian (3.89). For the MCAT (best score being 528), the average scores were as follows: Hispanic (503.5 &#8211; 58th percentile), black (505.7 &#8211; 65th percentile), white (509 &#8211; 75th percentile), and Asian (512.8 &#8211; 85th percentile).
&#8220;When comparing to the average scores of all accepted applicants, whites/Asians scored slightly above average while blacks/Hispanics scored significantly below average,&#8221; Do No Harm noted in its report.
The 2024 data also reveal that whites and Asians who were rejected had average higher MCAT scores and GPAs than blacks and Hispanics who were accepted. The average MCAT score for whites/Asians rejected was 505.7, compared to the 505.2 of blacks/Hispanics accepted. For GPA, the average for white/Asians rejected was 3.66 compared to the 3.50 of blacks/Hispanics accepted.
The data also show that 21 Asians with perfect GPAs were rejected in 2024.
&#8220;Of the 24 black or Hispanic applicants admitted in 2024, 17 had MCAT scores lower than the average white or Asian rejected applicant; 13 had GPAs lower than the average white or Asian rejected applicant,&#8221; Do No Harm noted. &#8220;In 2024, no Asian admitted student had an MCAT score below 503. Meanwhile, half of black admitted students (9 of 18) had an MCAT score below 503.&#8221;
These trends hold for every year from 2020 to 2024, with average rejection scores for whites/Asians being higher than average accepted scores for blacks/Hispanics, as Do No Harm noted that 2024 was &#8220;not an outlier.&#8221;
&#8220;Blacks and Hispanics were admitted with lower MCAT and GPA scores than whites and Asians in each of the past five years at the school,&#8221; Do No Harm reported. &#8220;A five-year average of SIUSOM’s accepted applicants shows that there was a difference of 0.34 GPA points between the two racial groups.&#8221;
The same could be found when comparing MCAT scores.
<div id="attachment_924279" style="width: 1175px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-924279" class="size-full wp-image-924279" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/Screenshot-2025-05-22-at-2.41.15%E2%80%AFPM.png" alt="" width="1165" height="621" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/Screenshot-2025-05-22-at-2.41.15%E2%80%AFPM.png 1165w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/Screenshot-2025-05-22-at-2.41.15%E2%80%AFPM-300x160.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/Screenshot-2025-05-22-at-2.41.15%E2%80%AFPM-1024x546.png 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/Screenshot-2025-05-22-at-2.41.15%E2%80%AFPM-768x409.png 768w" sizes="(max-width: 1165px) 100vw, 1165px" />Credit: Do No Harm.</div>
Paulette Dove, the senior counsel for Health Affairs for the Southern Illinois University system, said earlier this year that the affirmative action decision had a big impact on the school. 
“And then I just wanted to share one of the cases that had the biggest impact on SIU since I&#8217;ve been here, from a legal perspective, is the Students for Fair Admissions case that came out in 2023 and that was about looking at race and diversity and other issues in admissions and how that went about,&#8221; she said in a video shared with The Daily Wire, turning a faculty discussion on Trump&#8217;s executive actions.
&#8220;And I want you to know that those lawsuits were started in 2014 and we saw an outcome from the U.S. Supreme Court in 2023,&#8221; she added. &#8220;So, there is time to work through all of these issues that are coming up now, even though they feel urgent, and we will do our best to stay on top of those urgent things, but my best suggestion to you is to really stay the course for the time being.”
Ian Kingsbury, the director of research for Do No Harm, told The Daily Wire that he is skeptical that the university has complied with the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, saying that the school would be &#8220;pretty hard pressed to convince&#8221; someone that the admission data doesn&#8217;t reveal racial discrimination. 
On its website, the school lists a number of factors it considers in admission. These <a href="https://www.siumed.edu/md-admissions#selection-factors" target="_blank" rel="noopener">include</a> extracurricular activities, employment and volunteer experience, and area of residence, &#8220;with preference given to central and southern Illinois residents and those from rural, inner-city, or disadvantaged backgrounds.&#8221;
Kingsbury said that the school would have had to significantly deemphasize academics to get to its current situation.
&#8220;I understand that academic qualifications alone aren’t the only thing that should determine your admission to medical school. But in any sane and reasonable world, they should be extremely important,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Essentially, they would have to establish that the non-academic criteria that they are using, that it just so happens that their black and Hispanic applicants are that much better than their white and Asian applicants along those criteria.” 
Southern Illinois School of Medicine has received millions of federal dollars, <a href="https://budzinski.house.gov/posts/budzinski-announces-3-2-million-for-siu-school-of-medicine?utm_source=chatgpt.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">including</a> a $3.2 million grant in 2023, to improve its facilities. The school also currently has <a href="https://taggs.hhs.gov/searchaward" target="_blank" rel="noopener">multiple grants</a> from the National Institutes of Health, including hundreds of thousands of dollars to study drug addictions.
In January, President Donald Trump issued an <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 directed his administration to ensure that any educational facility receiving federal dollars was complying with the Students for Fair Admission decision. Earlier this month, the Department of Health and Human Services sent a letter to medical schools warning them of &#8220;unlawful&#8221; admission practices that look at race in admissions.
&#8220;It appears that many medical schools may have yet to come into compliance with the Supreme Court’s decision in SFFA,&#8221; the department wrote. &#8220;Medical schools found to be out of compliance with federal civil rights law may, consistent with applicable law, be subject to investigation and measures to secure compliance which may, if unsuccessful, affect continued eligibility for federal funding.&#8221;
Kingsbury said that there was a cultural problem across much of taxpayer-funded academia where they thought they were above oversight.
“This is a cultural problem in higher ed broadly, where they don’t feel that they’re responsive or accountable to any democratic authority,” he said. “It really is a problem across the academy. They think they should be running themselves without any concern for what the president of the United States says or what the Supreme Court of the United States says.”

Cropped of black doctor using digital tablet at workplace

Med School Caught Rejecting White And Asian Applicants With Better Scores Than Minorities It Accepts

Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI)

Illinois

medical school

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.

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

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

Executive Orders

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

Princeton University

Race

Racism

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

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

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

Menu