Seems like a fair and reasonable approach. |
| It's an extremely thin document that delegates extremely broad powers. |
Yeah that’s why Katie Britt is freaking out that Univ of Alabama just lost funding. Red state Medical schools are going away woo hoo |
+1 And before the usual hysterics start up, this was a footnote: "This memorandum is intended to encompass programs, initiatives, or policies that discriminate, exclude, or divide individuals based on race or sex. It does not prohibit educational, cultural, or historical observances-such as Black History Month, International Holocaust Remembrance Day, or similar events-that celebrate diversity, recognize historical contributions, and promote awareness without engaging in exclusion or discrimination." |
That was a major in 1990. What decade do they want to take us back to? |
With a caveat not to play stupid games. "But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissenting opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name.” Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277, 325 (1867). A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrimination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage and determination. Or a benefit to a student whose heritage or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student’s unique ability to contribute to the university. In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual—not on the basis of race." IOW if you are using these essays as a subterfuge to continue to discriminate based on race, you are violating the 14th amendment. |
The current state of DEI is the result of a supply side push of [insert oppressed group here] studies. These people needed jobs and they created a demand for them. |
| I don't think DOJ should be in the business of telling universities what is and is not worthy of studying. |
If it implies racial or gender discrimination, they have every right to stop it, which is exactly the reason of the memo. |
How does diversity, equity, and inclusion imply racial or gender discrimination? |
Because they provide opportunities only to certain groups of people that are not based on merit. Why are they entitled to such privileges? |
Privleges? You need to really look at the truth about DEI. Not the Fox News version. |
Regarding majors and concentrations. Should Jewish studies be removed too? Because I am Jewish and I want to know. Or are Jewish studies okay but “ethnic” studies are not? What about Russian Studies? Islamic Studies? If someone discusses their background, is it okay to do so if you’re white, but not okay if you’re hispanic? Some students are proud of their Irish or Italian roots and discuss what their culture means to their identity. Should that be illegal? You maga have gone too far, and you’re going to lose the support of your country. |
Can’t you be a white male and study “ethnic studies”? Or “race, ethnicity and migration”? These kids of majors don’t seem exclusionary? |
Because they have/had disadvantages and/or are discriminated against due to their race, gender, or disabilities. This is really elementary level logic. Are you just trying rationalize discrimination or do you not understand this? |