Call me a pessimist, but I think a Supreme Court that's not going to bat an eye in overturning Roe isn't going to worry about the consequences of ending affirmative action entirely in college admissions.
It'll do nothing to change the composition of who goes to elite institutions, Harvard and Yale will find a way to admit who they wish, but it is a huge encroachment on the rights of academic institutions to operate according to their purported values.
Ending affirmative action will open the door to an endless stream of litigation over every aspect and operation of educational institutions.
Affirmative action now is only allowed under an explicit educational rationale, the benefit of a diverse cohort of students. Ending it suggests that institutions should be open to lawsuits on any aspect of their operations, without the autonomy to make those decisions.
Someone could sue over a requirement to take an African-American studies course because of some bullshit nonsense about coerced thinking, and there's courts in this country (including the SC) that will take that seriously.
The purpose of this litigation is not to make admission to Harvard fairer. It is backlash to whatever progress we've made toward a multi-racial democracy.
I had similar thoughts to @kevincarey1 on enforcement post AA. Are they going to require Harvard to livestream their admission committee discussions?
https://twitter.com/kevincarey1/status/1485633113426436102
But I'll also reiterate that this is much more than about how Harvard chooses students. This is an attempt to establish a rationale that allows this kind of intrusion in many other spaces. It's intimidation.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
