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.
They already are. Legacy admissions are rightfully being targeted. Honestly they should have done away with those before even starting affirmative action.
Being a legacy admit tells us that you grew up with all kinds of advantage in your favor to get into the school. You were more likely to have connections, know the bueracratic ins-and-outs, know how to cater your application to what the university likes, etc. . Being legacy means your test scores should almost inherently be treated as less impressive than identical scores from a non-legacy because the non-legacy almost certainly showed more grit and effort to get to the same place.
Which is the same exact logic as how being an underrepresented minority student should almost certainly weight your scores more strongly than someone with identical scores from an over represented social group since it almost certainly took more grit and effort to get to those scores for someone starting from that point of disadvantage. On the same logic that someone who grew up dirt poor and self-studied has shown far more grit than the rich kid who had a team of tutors. The former put blood, sweat, and tears into getting that A. The latter is a loser if he DIDN’T get the A.
And this plays out in reality, which is why affirmative action rules have been shown to increase academic performance of schools that have them. They get better students by pursuing those policies.
All that to say, they should’ve gone after legacy admits INSTEAD of affirmative action. But they didn’t because Students for Fair Admissions was not really concerned with helping Asian kids get into elite universities. They were after affirmative action because Edward Blum is a hardline anti-black neoconservative and works to repeal any laws designed to ensure black representation or participation in the American political system. It’s the same people that brought Shelby to the SCOTUS and is still actively trying to strike down the Voting Rights Act.