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.
.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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?