119
submitted 1 year ago by ZeroCool@feddit.ch to c/politics@lemmy.world

Sept 22 (Reuters) - A non-profit group opposing race-based education policies has filed more than a dozen U.S. civil rights complaints this year against universities, challenging the legality of offering minority scholarships, summer study and residency programs to promote racial diversity.

The challenges are part of a growing campaign against diversity initiatives after a U.S. Supreme Court landmark ruling in June outlawed use of race in college admissions, commonly known as affirmative action. Conservative activists say the decision should extend to all educational programs, and some groups have also challenged corporate diversity policies.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] autotldr 2 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Sept 22 (Reuters) - A non-profit group opposing race-based education policies has filed more than a dozen U.S. civil rights complaints this year against universities, challenging the legality of offering minority scholarships, summer study and residency programs to promote racial diversity.

The challenges are part of a growing campaign against diversity initiatives after a U.S. Supreme Court landmark ruling in June outlawed use of race in college admissions, commonly known as affirmative action.

The Equal Protection Project of the Legal Insurrection Foundation, headed by Cornell University clinical law professor William Jacobson, filed the complaints with the U.S. Department of Education's civil rights office.

Advocates say race-conscious programs are necessary to combat institutional and societal disadvantages facing minority students, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's decision.

The state's Republican attorney general sent a letter instructing all colleges in Missouri, including private schools, to adopt race-blind standards for admissions, scholarships, employment and other programs.

In July, the office confirmed it had opened an investigation into whether Harvard discriminates against minorities by favoring "legacy" applicants with ties to donors or alumni, following a complaint filed by civil rights groups.


The original article contains 674 words, the summary contains 187 words. Saved 72%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Advocates say race-conscious programs are necessary to combat institutional and societal disadvantages facing minority students, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s decision.

I'm amazed at how I've never actually heard from one of these advocates. I get all the arguments for these programs. I'm just surprised I've seen journalists, benzo psychologist, tons of cage fighters all giving me reasons to oppose this stuff. Its shocking the only time I've heard people support it is either comments online or what I learned in a sociology class decades ago.

Why have we not seen a sociologist or really any other advocate with experience doing these circuits like podcasts or other media that educate on these things.

[-] tryptaminev@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

they do. It is just that they dont create outrage and clickbait shit for morons and thus dont get pushed on youtube, instagram and tiktok.

The way social media works currently is to push idiotic voices for nasses of idiots than sound reasoning to sound people. Also having a sociologist weighing pro and cons, looking into detailes and nuances and forming a qualified opinion takes much longer and much more brain energy to follow, than some jacked up guy yelling into the camera how the liberals want to turn all white men into black gay trans furries or something.

[-] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There should be a jacked up guy in a blazer screaming that socioeconomic barriers shouldn't be divided along race but somehow it is and how this relates to a proper meritocratic society

this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
119 points (96.9% liked)

politics

19097 readers
2764 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS