Undoing Obama’s affirmative action directive for schools
When something is done by administrative order, it can be undone by administrative order. That’s been happening a lot lately.
The most recent example is this:
The Justice Department will scrap seven guidance documents issued by the Education Department under the Obama administration that called on school superintendents and colleges to consider race when trying to diversify their campuses, the New York Times reported. The administration will restore George W. Bush-era guidance that “strongly encourages the use of race-neutral methods” in admissions, the Times said.
The administration has given this explanation:
“The executive branch cannot circumvent Congress or the courts by creating guidance that goes beyond the law and — in some instances — stays on the books for decades,” Justice Department spokesperson Devin O’Malley told CNN in a statement. “Last year, the Attorney General initiated a review of guidance documents, which resulted in dozens of examples — including today’s second tranche of rescissions — of documents that go beyond or are inconsistent with the Constitution and federal law. The Justice Department remains committed to enforcing the law and protecting all Americans from all forms of illegal race-based discrimination.”…
Last year, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that he was ending the practice of the Justice Department issuing “guidance documents” that have the “effect of adopting new regulatory requirements or amending the law,” without going through the formal rulemaking process. As a result, 25 documents were rescinded in December…
Tuesday’s reversal also does not affect what a school decides to do on its own within the confines of current Supreme Court precedent, but civil rights groups swiftly reacted with disappointment.
You can bet they did.
I think they’re also scared of what will happen with the current lawsuit against Harvard brought by Asians alleging discrimination against them in admissions based on race. Affirmative action designates winners and losers, and is one of many attempts at fairness that introduces a different sort of unfairness.
This is a good move. It doesn’t force the colleges to decide one way or the other; it just removes the heavy Federal hand making them decide to discriminate based on race. They’re still free to admit whomever they please.
As a woman who was in college in the late 1970s, when things were already swiftly changing, I applaud this move. Because “affirmative action” was never meant to be an endless program. At some point, you have to say, Enough! let’s try riding the bicycle without training wheels. We’ve been doing it for what, 40 years?
Then we’ll see what happens. Merit and accomplishment should be the qualifications. In fact, that was the women’s lib’s original beef: not that “50% of [____] aren’t women, unfair!” but “So and so is very talented/intelligent and she can’t get a look-in: that’s unfair.” It wasn’t about these darn quotas.
And, not for nuttin’, but let’s hear it for the Constitution!
Beverly,
When I was young, I complained and complained till my dad took the training wheels off my bike. Then I complained because I couldn’t ride it. My mom quickly had enough, took me outside, set me on the bike, and gave me a push. I was glad to be able to ride it without falling off, but I was angry that my mom was right. She usually was, but it took me a while to figure that out.
No one is giving these people a push today.
Beverly:
We’ve been doing it [affirmative action] for what, 40 years?
50 years. When I was in high school in the ’60s I was aware of summer enrichment programs at universities for “inner city” high school students. Several years later: the 1969 letter from a Yale Law School prof predicting some consequences of affirmative action.
https://heterodoxacademy.org/the-amazing-1969-prophecy/
Gringo Says:
July 3rd, 2018 at 4:39 pm
Wow.
But who could have foreseen all those unintended consequences (if they were unintended…)
“I close with two short excerpts from Judge Fleming’s extraordinary letter:
The American creed, one that Yale has proudly espoused, holds that an American should be judged as an individual and not as a member of a group. To me it seems axiomatic that a system which ignores this creed and introduces the factor of race in the selection of students for a professional school is inherently malignant, no matter how high-minded the purpose nor how benign the motives of those making the selection….
The present policy of admitting students on two bases and thereafter purporting to judge their performance on one basis is a highly explosive sociological experiment almost certain to achieve undesirable results.”
Affirmative Action has been, and cannot avoid being, racist / tribalist.
The Dem party has been effectively putting people into tribes, and then encouraging them to feel like and be “victims”, and call for some kind of “social justice”. The Social Justice Bullies claim to support the victims, like the poor, but seem far more interested in being destructive & vindictive, like against the rich or against the “privileged.”
Finally, “justice” is an uncertain reaction to injustice. Despite the huge desire for justice, for most crimes and injustices, there is no just way to achieve justice. Often there is not even agreement on what justice is. For the most common thief, yes, return of stolen goods, and prison. (Is that really justice?) Most victims of thieves do NOT get their stuff back — tho insurance helps.
Murder? Rape? Disfigurement?
Prior discrimination? Or being a member of a group that was previously discriminated against?
One of the worst things about AA is the idea that some individual today, can be given not-fully-earned benefits today, based on prior mistreatment of OTHER individuals who were members of a group.
No American can honestly say “we were slaves” — yet, many blacks claim this, and some even think this. Ancestors are different than descendants. Sons are NOT guilty of the sins of their fathers.
Throughout the world, where there is tribalism, and solidarity of people today with group injustices of the past, there are calls for unjust responses today because of “justice”. These calls for unjust actions are wrong, and civilization destroying.
Amazing how all of Obama’s Leftist Executive orders, and other Executive ordered but non-legislative actions (his vaunted “Accomplishments,” and his equally vaunted “Legacy”)—-putting into place policies which he knew never had a chance of being approved by Congress and of becoming the law of the land (because he knew they were too Leftist, too radical)–are so easily undone!
They’re melting away like the wicked Witch in the Wizard of Oz–“help me, I’m melting.”