|
- Fox News contributor Lara Trump on Paul Pelosi’s attacker David DePape, whose copious blogging explicitly ties him to Lara’s political party
|
|
|
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments today in two cases that seek to end affirmative action, or race-conscious admissions in higher education.
-
The cases in question are Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina. Cameron Norris, a lawyer for SFFA, argued that racial classifications “increase racial consciousness,” and “cause resentment,” by “treating people differently based on something they can’t change.” The last major affirmative case the Court heard was Fisher v. University of Texas, where it held that numerical quotas for racial groups were unlawful, but taking into account race as one factor among many to achieve educational diversity was legal. Students for Fair Admissions is an organization led by conservative hard-liner and failed politician Edward Blum, who is White, and argues that one of his chief objections to the practice is that it hurts Asian American students. How brave, how altruistic.
-
Blum and other anti-affirmative action activists have strived to use race-conscious admissions to pit Asian students against Black and Latino students (for the implicit benefit of White students). But many Asian American students and graduates of elite institutions showed up outside of the Supreme Court today to oppose overturning race-conscious college admissions, such as Harvard Kennedy School graduate student Jonathan Loc, who said, “If [Edward Blum] was really with the Asian American community at Harvard, he would be advocating for a multicultural center, advocating for ethnic studies, advocating for more diverse professors.” Many Asian American students who support affirmative action believe that admissions offices do not use racial identity as a central decision-maker but rather a “contextualizing factor.” Echoing this sentiment, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said it would be odd if admissions officers could consider factors like whether applicants are parents, veterans or disabled — but not if they are members of racial minorities. That has, she said, “the potential of causing more of an equal protection problem than it’s actually solving.”
-
The Court’s right-wing majority made its antipathy to affirmative action clear early and often. What was perhaps less expected was the hand-wringing over basic definitions of widely-used terms. Justice Samuel Alito responded to the usage of the term “underrepresented minority” by asking, “What does that mean?” and adding that college admissions are “a zero-sum game” in which granting advantages to one group necessarily disadvantages others. Justice Amy Coney Barrett kept asking what the “end point” will be for considering race in college admissions. Justice Clarence Thomas said, “I've heard the word diversity quite a few times, and I don’t have a clue what it means.” Beautiful. Take a bow, Conservative justices! Inspired performances.
|
|
|
Much of SFFA’s arguments hinge on the assertion that Asian Americans are discriminated against in elite higher education admissions, despite the fact that the district judge and the court of appeals found no such evidence.
-
There’s an elephant in the room that none of the conservative Justices nor anyone railing against affirmative action seems to want to discuss: legacy students. A 2019 report from the National Bureau of Economic Research showed that 43 percent of White students admitted to Harvard from 2009-2014 were either recruited athletes, legacies, applicants on the “dean’s interest list” (aka the children of wealthy donors) and children of faculty and staff. More pointedly, a whopping 75 percent of the White students admitted under those privileged categories, particularly legacies, would have been rejected had they not been given those bonus points. The acceptance rate for legacy students at Harvard is about 33 percent, compared with the school’s overall acceptance rate of under six percent. But the Edward Blums of the world deem this kind of affirmative action acceptable.
-
Across all elite universities, admissions rates for legacies are about 31 percent higher than official admissions rates for all applicants. Princeton has reported that legacy applicants are admitted at roughly four times the rate of overall applicants. And who does that benefit? Overwhelmingly, wealthy White students, who already have marked advantages on the road to success. Elite institutions are a powerful force for social mobility for underrepresented racial and socioeconomic minorities, but study after study concludes that wealthy White students who go to mid-range or state universities still become as successful or more successful than minority graduates of elite institutions. This is what made the 2019 “Operation Varsity Blues” cheating scandal especially infuriating for so many: the knowledge that those rich White students would have been successful regardless.
In today’s arguments, both sides invoked Brown v. Board of Education, which deemed school segregation unconstitutional. Should the Court side with SFFA when it hands down its decision in June, on the basis of a profound and intentional misreading of Brown, it may be the beginning of a domino effect that topples other civil-rights gains and desegregation efforts.
|
|
|
If you’ve ever messaged a friend about a manager who won’t stop texting after hours or a co-worker who keeps posting weirdly suggestive Austin Powers GIFs in Slack - you’re not alone. On Crooked Media’s newest podcast, Work Appropriate, author and host Anne Helen Petersen sets out to find solutions to these oddly specific yet completely universal listener-submitted questions. Whether you work in an office chair or a sixth grade classroom - the problems may be limitless but so are the solutions!
Listen to new episodes of Work Appropriate every Wednesday, wherever you get your podcasts. Check it out!
|
|
|
Psychotic billionaire Elon Musk has already made major changes at Twitter since officially taking over the company Friday. After firing most of the company’s senior executives, Musk dissolved its board of directors, another step towards consolidating his control. Remaining Twitter employees continue to be left in the dark about plans for the company, or potential mass layoffs, which Musk promised investors earlier this year. Seemingly acknowledging skepticism and concern, Musk has told the European Commission that Twitter will abide by the more stringent European rules governing illegal online content. I wonder if that was before or after he tweeted disinformation about the attack on Paul Pelosi to upwards of 100 million followers? Musk deleted the tweet hours later, but amplifying a “publication” that exists only to spread right-wing lies and conspiracy theories is not a great harbinger of what’s to come.
|
|
|
Twenty years after he first won the Brazilian presidency, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has defeated far-right incumbent Jair Bolsonaro in the tightest election result in the country’s recent history. Before the vote, Bolsonaro’s campaign made repeated, completely fabricated, Trump-like allegations of fraud, raising fears that he would not accept defeat and would challenge the results if he lost. Sound familiar? Da Silva’s inauguration is scheduled to take place on January 1, but there has been no word from Bolsonaro since the results were announced. Nevertheless, congratulations poured in around the world, including from President Biden, who congratulated Lula on his victory in the country’s “free, fair, and credible elections.” Even Bolsonaro’s allies in his own party are publicly acknowledging that their guy lost. Lula’s victory extended a wave of recent leftist victories in South American countries like Argentina, Chile, and Colombia. Da Silva has pledged to boost spending on the poor, reestablish relationships with foreign governments that soured under Bolsonaro, and take bold climate action to eliminate illegal clear-cutting in the Amazon rainforest.
|
|
|
Trees are pretty great, aren’t they? They provide shade, make oxygen, prevent erosion, suck up all that carbon, provide homes for animals - is there anything they can’t do?
To turn something as awesome as a tree, and more accurately, a forest of trees, into toilet paper just feels wrong. These trees spent decades growing only to get cut down and flushed down the toilet.
At Reel Paper, we feel the same way. Reel makes a sustainable toilet paper that uses 100% bamboo. Bamboo is a fast-growing grass, and some can grow up to three feet per day! And like grass on a lawn, you can harvest the same stalk over and over without disrupting the plant or soil.
Even better? Reel Paper ships FREE in plastic-free and compostable packaging.
For a limited time, head on over to REELPAPER.com/WORLD to sign up for a subscription and get 30% off your first order.
Let's stop flushing our forests. Reel is tree-free paper for the planet.
|
|
|
A growing number of cities across the United States are adopting salary-transparency laws in an effort to address pay disparities for women and people of color.
A federal judge has blocked Penguin Random House’s bid to buy one of its main rivals, Simon & Schuster, in a significant victory for the Biden administration, which aims to revive antitrust enforcement.
Arizona’s Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich went on 60 Minutes with a change of heart and ripped into election deniers like gubernatorial nominee Kari Lake and called the Big Lie “horseshit.” We couldn't have said it better.
It's Halloween! Have fun out there!
|
|
|
|
|
