LyrArc Article Gist
The Opinion given by the US Supreme Court shows the thinking behind its decision to call Affirmative Action or race based admissions by colleges unconstitutional, as violating the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause. Because the respondents (Harvard College) use of race involves stereotyping and negative criteria the Court declared it invalidated. "It unduly harms non-minority interests," not permissible when all citizens are equal regardless of race or color. Proposed by Congress and ratified by the States the Fourteenth Amendment provides that no State shall "deny to any person.... the equal protection of the laws." Proponents of that law describing as the "foundational principle" as "not permitting any distinctions of law based on race or color." As WSJ shows today there are three times as many White as Black or Hispanic families in California making below $50,000 a year.  "That the law shall be the same for the black as well as the white, that all persons shall stand equal before the laws of the States." It was a blot on the face of America that this allowed racially segregated schools till this was changed, says the Supreme Court. It calls the Bakke decision to allow race based admissions as a deeply splintered decision and Judge Powell writing for himself allowed it only to allow the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body. The decisions in Grutter stated that in 25 years this race based admissions should end and in no way can it be used for stereotyping or as a negative- to discriminate against those racial groups that were not the beneficiaries of the preference. A university's use of race could not be used to "unduly harm non-minority interests." It also means engaging in stereotyping- "a demeaning assumption that students of a particular race think alike."  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The progress of efforts to be inclusive as seen in the UC University of California system of colleges over 25 years has increased the representation of Hispanics to 36%, blacks marginally to 2.5%, and reduced the presence of white Americans to about 18%, while allowing Asians to increase representation to above 40%. As white communities declined with the outshoring of manufacturing the loss of income opportunities was accompanied with less access to education. In this sense it has created problems of negatively impacting non-minority access as it worked to solve a problem of minority representation. The other problem the Supreme Court noted in its decision to stop race based admission or affirmative action was its stereotyping students into groups not treating them with respect for individual character. The bigger problem that has emerged that now overshadows others in its effect on America is the poor access to college for white people particularly white men, over three decades in which manufacturing shipped overseas has destroyed the middle class incomes in manufacturing with whole manufacturing  based communities erased off the map of America. Restoring college opportunity for all Americans, including black people, and including the sons and daughters of generations of white Americans and settlers who built America is the task of this generation, so badly has it been eroded. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Much of this report concentrates on big name schools ignoring the facts about student debt and value delivered, and the shifts in perceptions in companies that see big name schools as not necessarily an asset as inthe past. In this new situation looking objectively at value delivered the US state university system is its strongest asset and the state universities offer higher value for local students without the unneeded debt loads of big ticket institutions with a lot of debt overhang, and little additional value. In the end education is about persistence, hard work, grit and determination. A  Kamala Harris at Hastings in San Francisco can do as well or better than someone from the big name schools. After the Supreme Court decision opposing quotas for affirmative action the first results of enrollment by ethnic group and race are mixed and sometimes confusing. Some colleges and universities are seeing the same enrollment and some are moving in opposite directions for ethnic groups and race. This NYT report says if universities can get to a fair enrollment for different groups without racial quotas then these quotas may not be essential to achieve their purpose. Schools are looking at students from rural areas in ways they did not in the past, and trying innovative approaches to building a better America after the pandemic because they think it is the right way. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In extensive ranging comments Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg describes her positions on Supreme Court cases to Adam Liptak of the NYT. She hopes the next president after this one will be a fine one and is not perturbed by liberals who would like to see her leave so that another liberal could be appointed in her place. Ginsberg is 80 years, but says she works with her trainer twice a week, and works just as hard as in previous terms. She loves her work and will go on as long as she is able to do it. Her work leading the liberal opinion of Justices on the bench shows a senior justice in command of the issues. She has a framed copy of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 on a wall and sees it as a response by Congress to her dissent in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire Rubber Company. That 2007 ruling said Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 imposes strict limits for workplace discrimination suits. She sees the present Congress as too timid to take up more issues related to affirmative action and the Voting Rights Act. On the court's decision for the Voting Rights Act Ginsberg said in her dissent "It is like throwing away your umbrella after a rainstorm because you don't need it." Her views on Roe vs. Wade are that the law was too sweeping in making abortion rights constitutional and could have taken a different approach of striking down the law in Texas....

LyrArc Article Gist
Diversity support is dropping among CEO's with the new DJT administration taking office in 2025. Diversity is also losing support nationally. PEW Research shows nationally 52% support it in 2024 compared to 56% in early 2023. Among Republicans the shift is pronounced disapproval of Diversity up to 42% from 20% in the same period. Dhillon's law firm represented a social media activist Starbucks who launched campaigns against corporate Diversity policies during his campaign for Congress from Tennessee. DJT says Dhillon has a history of “suing corporations who use woke policies to discriminate against their workers."

CEO's appear to be saying they were not enthusiastic about such policies in the first place. The shift in sentiment nationally and the US Supreme Court decision against affirmative action in colleges has led to this shift in business CEO thinking.