Education

California and Michigan preview the unexpected benefits of doing away with the policy: more students in good state schools, and higher graduation rates. AFTER 45 YEARS OF CONFUSING AND MISGUIDED DECISIONS on affirmative action in higher education, the Supreme Court on Thursday finally made clear that the Constitution forbids universities from giving preferential treatment based on race or ethnicity to some students in the admissions process. At issue were programs at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina that made race a significant “plus factor” for black and Hispanic applicants, to the disadvantage of both Asians and whites. The …

Watch the latest video at <a href=”https://www.foxnews.com”>foxnews.com</a> Related posts: Opening Statement of Devon Westhill House Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties WATCH: Devon Westhill Speaks at Federalist Society Supreme Court Preview Devon Westhill Explains Why Affirmative Action Is BAD For Black People FILED: Two Briefs in Supreme Court Affirmative Action Cases

This column appeared originally at philanthropyroundtable.org Nearly every selective college in the country discriminates on the basis of race in admitting students because the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed it for decades. This month, the Court is expected to revoke that permission slip when it issues opinions in two cases brought by Students for Fair Admissions that challenge affirmative action at Harvard and the University of North Carolina. The good news is there are many other, better ways to support the disadvantaged than using race-based preferences.   If the Court’s decision prohibits race-explicit affirmative action, some expect organizations to evade the …

On Tuesday, March 28, at 2:00 pm ET, CEO President Devon Westhill will take part in the National Association of Scholars webinar “Anti-Asian Discrimination in College Admissions.”  From the NAS press release: “Every ‘plus’ on one student’s college application translates to a ‘minus’ on another student’s application. In the process of boosting the applications of so-called ‘underrepresented minorities,’ admissions offices routinely penalize Asian-American applicants, dismissing their diligence and hard work as a ‘lack of personality.’ How did the widespread discrimination against Asian-American students arise in American higher education? Why has the plight of these minority students been so disregarded by …

On October 31, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College. In perhaps the most anticipated case of this term, the court considers a challenge to the use of racially preferential undergraduate student admissions practices at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. Experts broke down the oral argument on the same day, October 31, 2022. Featuring: Prof. Amanda Shanor, Assistant Professor of Legal Studies & Business Ethics, The Wharton School Devon Westhill, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal Opportunity Moderator: Curt Levey, President, Committee for Justice …

Related posts: Harvard Investigates Harvard Good Briefs in the Harvard Case Investigating Discrimination at Harvard Americans Don’t Like Racial Preferences

Dear friends, I am pleased to report to you that CEO has once again assisted in crafting and joined a Supreme Court amicus brief filed by our friends at the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF). As a former civil rights government official, I also joined a brief filed by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ). The briefs can be viewed by following the links provided in the “Merits-Stage Amicus Briefs” section below. Both briefs support petitioners in the case of Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard/University of North Carolina in their challenge to the schools’ use of racial preferences in …