This op-ed originally appeared in Townhall.com In her dissent from the ruling outlawing affirmative action in college admissions, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson made a blunder. She parroted a debunked claim that the chance of survival of a high-risk black newborn nearly doubles if under the care of a black physician. I suppose we shouldn’t hold that against her since she gave us fair warning that she’s not a biologist. No, she’s just a simple Supreme Court Justice after all.  Conservative commentators are raking Jackson over the coals for the error. This is understandable when, as lawyer Ted Frank suggests, “[a] …

This article was first published on Law.com Almost immediately, selective colleges around the country responded to the Supreme Court’s  affirmative action ruling with expected disdain. But if they don’t comply, they could be in for a world  of hurt.  The president of Harvard and 17 other senior university officials signed a letter admitting that “for almost a decade, Harvard has vigorously defended an admissions system” that the Supreme Court explained took race into consideration at nearly every stage of the admissions process. Harvard explained it is committed to preserving what it calls its “essential values,” such as racial diversity. In …

Related posts: Devon Westhill discusses Supreme Court cases on Newsmax Sunday Agenda Devon Westhill discusses SCOTUS cases on Fox News Devon Westhill Explains Why Affirmative Action Is BAD For Black People Opening Statement of Devon Westhill House Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties

University’s race discrimination is ‘long-standing,’ and its many victims remain uncompensated This article was published by The Washington Times on July 4, 2023 The race preference regimes at Harvard and the University of North Carolina have received a supreme slap down. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for a 6-2 majority, explained that Harvard’s affirmative action regime had satisfied none of the requirements necessary pursuant to the highest level of judicial scrutiny required when using racial distinctions — what Justice Clarence Thomas calls “genuine strict scrutiny.” So, what to do about all the other schools that have been following the “Harvard …

Related posts: Devon Westhill discusses Affirmative Action decision on Newsmax Wake Up America Weekend Devon Westhill discusses SCOTUS cases on Fox News FILED: Two Briefs in Supreme Court Affirmative Action Cases PRESS RELEASE: Supreme Court Hears Argument in Harvard and UNC Cases

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 …