Dilan Esper Profile picture
Jul 4 10 tweets 2 min read Read on X
I will say one other thing on my mind about this Mamdani stuff, which is despite the Left's pose of being very class conscious, they really do not understand (or maybe do not care) about the connection between gaming affirmative action and similar systems, and class privilege.
I have said this before, that I knew some people who gamed affirmative action back in the day. People who had always called themselves white but had distant relatives who were HIspanic or Black and when college or job applications came around discovered the One Drop Rule.
The thing is, the people who did this all grew up rich and white in Burbank.

And this is not an accident. Pre-Trump, when vaccine skeptics were mostly on the Left? The zip codes with the highest vaccine skepticism were in West Los Angeles. Parents figured they could free ride.
Or how about "learning disabilities" that give you extra time to take tests? Those should either be spread out evenly throughout the population or maybe even corollate some with poverty due to the lack of educational opportunities.
And yet, when stats were kept in the early 2000's, it was almost all wealthy kids with the doctor's diagnoses and getting the extra time on tests. Again, they tracked it by zip codes and the "extra time" on the SAT was concentrated in wealthy zip codes in West LA and Connecticut.
Mamdani, of course, was a rich kid, the son of a famous film director. Elizabeth Warren had her own kind of privilege as a successful college professor. These are the types of people who check the boxes.
Your average working class kid doesn't know the game and just checks their actual identified race. Just as they don't know to ask for extra time because they don't hang out with the other rich kids who do it or have the fee for service doctors who will fake the diagnosis.
If you actually care about social mobility in America, rather than just letting wealthy people who faced little actual disadvantage but have trendy left-leaning politics, get ahead, you should be appalled by all this stuff.
The best way to disadvantage rich people is to be strict meritocrats. Don't give them anything they can cheat or game the system with. Make them go in there and actually get ahead on smarts, and make their money and connections and "insider knowledge" as useless as possible.
If you do that, a lot of rich people won't get into the sorts of institutions and elite pathways they want to. Which is why their class has been so skilled at creating all these mechanisms by which they can cheat and get ahead of the lower and middle classes.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dilan Esper

Dilan Esper Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @dilanesper

Jul 5
The real, nonpartisan lesson of Trump v. DVD, the South Sudan deportation case, is that the Convention Against Torture system is really based on the assumption that people are going to be deported back to their homes. And it doesn't work well on third country deportations.
With respect to being deported back to your home, the system works well. You get a notice of deportation because you are illegally here, and you bring in witnesses and testimony and documents and show that you will be targeted for official torture if you are sent back home.
So, for instance, the paradigm type of CAT claim is let's say you have an undocumented migrant from China, and he shows that he left China because he was a political dissident and that if he is sent back to his home, he is likely to be arrested and tortured by the authorities.
Read 19 tweets
Jun 30
Remember this? Justice Thomas getting mad at the rest of the Court for applying rules that he, in complete vanity opinions, performatively states he is too pure to believe in?

He just did it again this morning.
In MacRae v. Mattos, he is outraged about what he contends are massive, ongoing violations of free speech of public employees going on. They are losing their jobs because they speak on controversial topics. Sounds bad.

His opinion starts at page 15 here.

supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
But now go to footnote 2. It turns out that in one of his onanistic dissents that he writes for no legitimate reason and which will never become law, he took the position that-- public employees have no First Amendment rights at all!
Read 11 tweets
Jun 29
OK, here's my comprehensive Mahmoud thread. It's a terrible decision.

First, it creates massive privileges for religious objectors to sexual content, while leaving secular parents with the same objections out in the cold.

It flouts the rules of evidence and treats completely hypothetical classroom discussions as sufficient to trigger a free exercise violation and a court injunction.

It extends far beyond sex and gender and creates a constitutional right to object to any classroom instruction on conceivably any subject, and interferes with schools' ability to educate on important subject matters.

Read 13 tweets
Jun 29
One broader-than-Mahomoud take (and one that sounds a bit like Justice Thomas, if he were a Lefty instead of a Rightie)-- none of the Court's recent "free exercise" jurisprudence is textual. None of it is about the actual EXERCISE of religion.
To be clear, and I will concede, this is a bit of an overstatement. For instance, the expansion of the "ministerial exemption" is at least in some sense textually justifiable. After all, ministering is part of practicing a faith. (I'd still argue they take it too far, though.)
But when you think of things like 303 Creative and Mahmoud and Fulton, none of these involve believers who are being interfered with in their exercise of religion. Let's take Mahmoud first because it's the easiest.
Read 22 tweets
Jun 29
A quick thread on some democratic theory, to address some comments I got from both the far left and far right on my Supreme Court threads.

A lot of people have very inflated views of how much power judges have.
Before you talk about anything the Constitution requires, your first principle has to be "judges are unelected, politicians are elected". Seriously, learn that mantra. Live it. Eat it up.

It means that politicians have far more latitude than judges do.
A simple example from 2021 and 2024-- the Senate had a LOT of power had the votes been there to keep Donald Trump off the ballot in 2024. They could have voted to convict him and made disqualification from future office part of the conviction.
Read 18 tweets
Jun 27
I'm seeing the usual "SCOTUS will reverse itself on universal injunctions when the Democrats win the presidency", and no, I don't think they will. Indeed, while his name isn't in Barrett's opinion, you cannot possibly understand how we got to Trump v. CASA without Matt Kacsmaryk.
You might ask, "why would a conservative court be mad about Matt Kacsmaryk?".

Well, think about it for a second. Imagine you are a mainstream conservative Justice. You want to move the law to the right. You also have some principles. And you don't want to be seen as a hack.
And then you have this judge who is in a single judge district, and the entire right wing legal movement starts bringing their cases there so that they can get him. And he starts making all these rulings taking the most extreme positions, going far beyond anything SCOTUS said.
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(