Harvard's easy affirmative action solution...

[Anonymous]

Harvard should have the absolute right to determine the students whom they admit. On the other hand, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides explicitly to the contrary: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Why doesn't Harvard, with its huge endowment bigger than Hillsdale College, simply follow Hillsdale's footsteps by refusing all federal aid and grants?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harvard should have the absolute right to determine the students whom they admit. On the other hand, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides explicitly to the contrary: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Why doesn't Harvard, with its huge endowment bigger than Hillsdale College, simply follow Hillsdale's footsteps by refusing all federal aid and grants?

^ define "discrimination." Good luck.

[Anonymous]

Why don't we wait to see how this current lawsuit comes out? I predict their holistic admissions process will survive and thus they may not have to change anything at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard should have the absolute right to determine the students whom they admit. On the other hand, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides explicitly to the contrary: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Why doesn't Harvard, with its huge endowment bigger than Hillsdale College, simply follow Hillsdale's footsteps by refusing all federal aid and grants?

^ define "discrimination." Good luck.

Harvard has already stipulated it is using race as one of the factors from participation in, or be denied the benefits of... Moot issue...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard should have the absolute right to determine the students whom they admit. On the other hand, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides explicitly to the contrary: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Why doesn't Harvard, with its huge endowment bigger than Hillsdale College, simply follow Hillsdale's footsteps by refusing all federal aid and grants?

^ define "discrimination." Good luck.

Harvard has already stipulated it is using race as one of the factors from participation in, or be denied the benefits of... Moot issue...

? Hardly moot. The question is whether it is illegal. You appear to have made up your mind but the court's haven't.

[Anonymous]

A huge percent of the budget of any research institution is federal grant money. Even with their endowment, it would be hard to eschew federal grant money, at least over any significant term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard should have the absolute right to determine the students whom they admit. On the other hand, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides explicitly to the contrary: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Why doesn't Harvard, with its huge endowment bigger than Hillsdale College, simply follow Hillsdale's footsteps by refusing all federal aid and grants?

^ define "discrimination." Good luck.

Harvard has already stipulated it is using race as one of the factors from participation in, or be denied the benefits of... Moot issue...

? Hardly moot. The question is whether it is illegal. You appear to have made up your mind but the court's haven't.

Prior SCOTUS decisions have said race as one of many factors is legal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard should have the absolute right to determine the students whom they admit. On the other hand, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides explicitly to the contrary: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Why doesn't Harvard, with its huge endowment bigger than Hillsdale College, simply follow Hillsdale's footsteps by refusing all federal aid and grants?

^ define "discrimination." Good luck.

Harvard has already stipulated it is using race as one of the factors from participation in, or be denied the benefits of... Moot issue...

? Hardly moot. The question is whether it is illegal. You appear to have made up your mind but the court's haven't.

Prior SCOTUS decisions have said race as one of many factors is legal.

Correct. The only thing moot is the OP's proposal once Harvard wins the lawsuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard should have the absolute right to determine the students whom they admit. On the other hand, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides explicitly to the contrary: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Why doesn't Harvard, with its huge endowment bigger than Hillsdale College, simply follow Hillsdale's footsteps by refusing all federal aid and grants?

^ define "discrimination." Good luck.

Harvard has already stipulated it is using race as one of the factors from participation in, or be denied the benefits of... Moot issue...

? Hardly moot. The question is whether it is illegal. You appear to have made up your mind but the court's haven't.

Prior SCOTUS decisions have said race as one of many factors is legal.

Correct. The only thing moot is the OP's proposal once Harvard wins the lawsuit.

With the new Court, good luck with that. If it were that easy, Hillsdale wouldn't be refusing all that free money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard should have the absolute right to determine the students whom they admit. On the other hand, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides explicitly to the contrary: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Why doesn't Harvard, with its huge endowment bigger than Hillsdale College, simply follow Hillsdale's footsteps by refusing all federal aid and grants?

^ define "discrimination." Good luck.

Harvard has already stipulated it is using race as one of the factors from participation in, or be denied the benefits of... Moot issue...

? Hardly moot. The question is whether it is illegal. You appear to have made up your mind but the court's haven't.

Prior SCOTUS decisions have said race as one of many factors is legal.

Correct. The only thing moot is the OP's proposal once Harvard wins the lawsuit.

With the new Court, good luck with that. If it were that easy, Hillsdale wouldn't be refusing all that free money.

It's pretty easy, since what Harvard is doing (holistic admissions) is perfectly legal. What happens with the "new court" is anyone's guess, but that is still a long way off.

[Anonymous]

Why do people care. Funny how everyone who is complaining about policies, are dying to go. “Harvard, you are bad and racist. Let me in”. SMH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard should have the absolute right to determine the students whom they admit. On the other hand, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides explicitly to the contrary: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Why doesn't Harvard, with its huge endowment bigger than Hillsdale College, simply follow Hillsdale's footsteps by refusing all federal aid and grants?

^ define "discrimination." Good luck.

Harvard has already stipulated it is using race as one of the factors from participation in, or be denied the benefits of... Moot issue...

? Hardly moot. The question is whether it is illegal. You appear to have made up your mind but the court's haven't.

Prior SCOTUS decisions have said race as one of many factors is legal.

Correct. The only thing moot is the OP's proposal once Harvard wins the lawsuit.

With the new Court, good luck with that. If it were that easy, Hillsdale wouldn't be refusing all that free money.

It's pretty easy, since what Harvard is doing (holistic admissions) is perfectly legal. What happens with the "new court" is anyone's guess, but that is still a long way off.

If what H is doing is "perfectly legal," I am pretty sure it would have won its case already at the summary stage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard should have the absolute right to determine the students whom they admit. On the other hand, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides explicitly to the contrary: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Why doesn't Harvard, with its huge endowment bigger than Hillsdale College, simply follow Hillsdale's footsteps by refusing all federal aid and grants?

^ define "discrimination." Good luck.

Harvard has already stipulated it is using race as one of the factors from participation in, or be denied the benefits of... Moot issue...

? Hardly moot. The question is whether it is illegal. You appear to have made up your mind but the court's haven't.

Prior SCOTUS decisions have said race as one of many factors is legal.

Correct. The only thing moot is the OP's proposal once Harvard wins the lawsuit.

With the new Court, good luck with that. If it were that easy, Hillsdale wouldn't be refusing all that free money.

It's pretty easy, since what Harvard is doing (holistic admissions) is perfectly legal. What happens with the "new court" is anyone's guess, but that is still a long way off.

If what H is doing is "perfectly legal," I am pretty sure it would have won its case already at the summary stage.

Has the court ruled on the motions for summary judgement? I haven't followed it that closely, but I thought the matter is still being decided. If Harvard lost it would have been in all the papers. .

P.S: this is just a re-hash of the points you made on that very long thread on this same subject. Why not give it a rest until the case is decided?