Connect with us

Education

Supreme Court to Hear Arguments on the Fate of Affirmative Action

Published

on

Supreme Court to Hear Arguments on the Fate of Affirmative Action

WASHINGTON — The way forward for affirmative motion in increased training will likely be on the road in a pair of instances to be argued on the Supreme Courtroom on Monday difficult race-conscious admissions applications at Harvard and the College of North Carolina.

The courtroom has repeatedly upheld comparable applications, most just lately in 2016, saying that academic variety is a compelling curiosity that justifies taking account of race as one issue amongst many in admissions choices. However the courtroom is now dominated by a six-member conservative supermajority, one which may be very more likely to view the challenged applications with skepticism, imperiling greater than 40 years of precedents.

If there had been any doubt concerning the courtroom’s willingness to overrule outstanding precedents, it was demolished in June when the justices overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 choice that had established a constitutional proper to abortion.

When the courtroom agreed in January to listen to the 2 affirmative motion instances, it consolidated them and mentioned it might hear a single hour of arguments to think about them. The courtroom decoupled the instances after the arrival in June of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who recused herself from the Harvard case in mild of her service on one of many college’s governing our bodies.

The 2 instances are usually not equivalent. As a public college, U.N.C. is certain by each the Structure’s equal safety clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars race discrimination by establishments that obtain federal cash. Harvard, a personal establishment, is topic solely to the statute.

Advertisement

Within the North Carolina case, the plaintiffs mentioned that the college discriminated in opposition to white and Asian candidates by giving choice to Black, Hispanic and Native American ones. The college responded that its admissions insurance policies fostered academic variety and had been lawful beneath longstanding Supreme Courtroom precedents.

The case in opposition to Harvard has a further ingredient, accusing the college of discriminating in opposition to Asian American college students through the use of a subjective customary to gauge traits like likability, braveness and kindness, and by successfully making a ceiling for them in admissions.

Harvard denied that it discriminated in opposition to Asian American candidates. Extra typically, it mentioned race-conscious admissions insurance policies are lawful.

A ruling limiting or prohibiting using race as a consideration in admissions would essentially reshape increased training. It will cut back the variety of Black and Latino college students at many selective faculty and graduate colleges, with extra Asian American and white college students gaining admission as an alternative.

Each instances had been introduced by College students for Honest Admissions, a gaggle based by Edward Blum, a authorized activist who has organized many lawsuits difficult race-conscious admissions insurance policies and voting rights legal guidelines, a number of of which have reached the Supreme Courtroom.

In 2016, the Supreme Courtroom upheld an admissions program on the College of Texas at Austin, holding that officers there might proceed to think about race as a consider making certain a various pupil physique. The vote was 4 to three. (Justice Antonin Scalia had died a couple of months earlier than, and Justice Elena Kagan was recused.)

Advertisement

Writing for almost all, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy mentioned that courts should give universities substantial however not whole leeway in devising their admissions applications.

He was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. In an interview not lengthy after the Texas case was determined, Justice Ginsburg mentioned it might endure.

“I don’t anticipate that we’re going to see one other affirmative motion case,” Justice Ginsburg mentioned, “at the least in training.”

Six years later, just one member of the bulk within the Texas case, Justice Sotomayor, stays on the courtroom. Justice Kennedy retired in 2018 and was changed by Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh; Justice Ginsburg died in 2020 and was changed by Justice Amy Coney Barrett; and Justice Breyer retired this yr and was changed by Justice Jackson.

The Texas choice primarily reaffirmed Grutter v. Bollinger, a 2003 choice during which the Supreme Courtroom endorsed holistic admissions applications, saying it was permissible to think about race as one issue amongst many to attain academic variety. Writing for almost all in that case, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor mentioned she anticipated that “25 years from now, using racial preferences will now not be needed.”

Advertisement

The courtroom’s choice within the two new instances — College students for Honest Admissions v. Harvard, No. 20-1199, and College students for Honest Admissions v. College of North Carolina, No. 21-707 — will in all probability land in June, properly earlier than Justice O’Connor’s deadline.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Education

Video: Protesters Scuffle With Police During Pomona College Commencement

Published

on

Video: Protesters Scuffle With Police During Pomona College Commencement

new video loaded: Protesters Scuffle With Police During Pomona College Commencement

transcript

transcript

Protesters Scuffle With Police During Pomona College Commencement

Pro-Palestinian demonstrators tried to block access to Pomona College’s graduation ceremony on Sunday.

[chanting in call and response] Not another nickel, not another dime. No more money for Israel’s crime. Resistance is justified when people are occupied.

Advertisement

Recent episodes in U.S.

Continue Reading

Education

Video: Police Use Pepper Spray on Protesters on G.W.U.’s Campus

Published

on

Video: Police Use Pepper Spray on Protesters on G.W.U.’s Campus

new video loaded: Police Use Pepper Spray on Protesters on G.W.U.’s Campus

transcript

transcript

Police Use Pepper Spray on Protesters on G.W.U.’s Campus

Police officers arrested 33 pro-Palestinian protesters and cleared a tent encampment on the campus of George Washingon University.

“The Metropolitan Police Department. If you are currently on George Washington University property, you are in violation of D.C. Code 22-3302, unlawful entry on property.” “Back up, dude, back up. You’re going to get locked up tonight — back up.” “Free, free Palestine.” “What the [expletive] are you doing?” [expletives] “I can’t stop — [expletives].”

Advertisement

Recent episodes in Israel-Hamas War

Continue Reading

Education

How Counterprotesters at U.C.L.A. Provoked Violence, Unchecked for Hours

Published

on

How Counterprotesters at U.C.L.A. Provoked Violence, Unchecked for Hours

A satellite image of the UCLA campus.

On Tuesday night, violence erupted at an encampment that pro-Palestinian protesters had set up on April 25.

The image is annotated to show the extent of the pro-Palestinian encampment, which takes up the width of the plaza between Powell Library and Royce Hall.

Advertisement

The clashes began after counterprotesters tried to dismantle the encampment’s barricade. Pro-Palestinian protesters rushed to rebuild it, and violence ensued.

Arrows denote pro-Israeli counterprotesters moving towards the barricade at the edge of the encampment. Arrows show pro-Palestinian counterprotesters moving up against the same barricade.

Police arrived hours later, but they did not intervene immediately.

Advertisement

An arrow denotes police arriving from the same direction as the counterprotesters and moving towards the barricade.

A New York Times examination of more than 100 videos from clashes at the University of California, Los Angeles, found that violence ebbed and flowed for nearly five hours, mostly with little or no police intervention. The violence had been instigated by dozens of people who are seen in videos counterprotesting the encampment.

Advertisement

The videos showed counterprotesters attacking students in the pro-Palestinian encampment for several hours, including beating them with sticks, using chemical sprays and launching fireworks as weapons. As of Friday, no arrests had been made in connection with the attack.

To build a timeline of the events that night, The Times analyzed two livestreams, along with social media videos captured by journalists and witnesses.

The melee began when a group of counterprotesters started tearing away metal barriers that had been in place to cordon off pro-Palestinian protesters. Hours earlier, U.C.L.A. officials had declared the encampment illegal.

Security personnel hired by the university are seen in yellow vests standing to the side throughout the incident. A university spokesperson declined to comment on the security staff’s response.

Mel Buer/The Real News Network

Advertisement

It is not clear how the counterprotest was organized or what allegiances people committing the violence had. The videos show many of the counterprotesters were wearing pro-Israel slogans on their clothing. Some counterprotesters blared music, including Israel’s national anthem, a Hebrew children’s song and “Harbu Darbu,” an Israeli song about the Israel Defense Forces’ campaign in Gaza.

As counterprotesters tossed away metal barricades, one of them was seen trying to strike a person near the encampment, and another threw a piece of wood into it — some of the first signs of violence.

Attacks on the encampment continued for nearly three hours before police arrived.

Counterprotesters shot fireworks toward the encampment at least six times, according to videos analyzed by The Times. One of them went off inside, causing protesters to scream. Another exploded at the edge of the encampment. One was thrown in the direction of a group of protesters who were carrying an injured person out of the encampment.

Advertisement

Mel Buer/The Real News Network

Some counterprotesters sprayed chemicals both into the encampment and directly at people’s faces.

Sean Beckner-Carmitchel via Reuters

Advertisement

At times, counterprotesters swarmed individuals — sometimes a group descended on a single person. They could be seen punching, kicking and attacking people with makeshift weapons, including sticks, traffic cones and wooden boards.

StringersHub via Associated Press, Sergio Olmos/Calmatters

In one video, protesters sheltering inside the encampment can be heard yelling, “Do not engage! Hold the line!”

In some instances, protesters in the encampment are seen fighting back, using chemical spray on counterprotesters trying to tear down barricades or swiping at them with sticks.

Advertisement

Except for a brief attempt to capture a loudspeaker used by counterprotesters, and water bottles being tossed out of the encampment, none of the videos analyzed by The Times show any clear instance of encampment protesters initiating confrontations with counterprotesters beyond defending the barricades.

Shortly before 1 a.m. — more than two hours after the violence erupted — a spokesperson with the mayor’s office posted a statement that said U.C.L.A officials had called the Los Angeles Police Department for help and they were responding “immediately.”

Officers from a separate law enforcement agency — the California Highway Patrol — began assembling nearby, at about 1:45 a.m. Riot police with the L.A.P.D. joined them a few minutes later. Counterprotesters applauded their arrival, chanting “U.S.A., U.S.A., U.S.A.!”

Just four minutes after the officers arrived, counterprotesters attacked a man standing dozens of feet from the officers.

Twenty minutes after police arrive, a video shows a counterprotester spraying a chemical toward the encampment during a scuffle over a metal barricade. Another counterprotester can be seen punching someone in the head near the encampment after swinging a plank at barricades.

Advertisement

Fifteen minutes later, while those in the encampment chanted “Free, free Palestine,” counterprotesters organized a rush toward the barricades. During the rush, a counterprotester pulls away a metal barricade from a woman, yelling “You stand no chance, old lady.”

Throughout the intermittent violence, officers were captured on video standing about 300 feet away from the area for roughly an hour, without stepping in.

It was not until 2:42 a.m. that officers began to move toward the encampment, after which counterprotesters dispersed and the night’s violence between the two camps mostly subsided.

The L.A.P.D. and the California Highway Patrol did not answer questions from The Times about their responses on Tuesday night, deferring to U.C.L.A.

While declining to answer specific questions, a university spokesperson provided a statement to The Times from Mary Osako, U.C.L.A.’s vice chancellor of strategic communications: “We are carefully examining our security processes from that night and are grateful to U.C. President Michael Drake for also calling for an investigation. We are grateful that the fire department and medical personnel were on the scene that night.”

Advertisement

L.A.P.D. officers were seen putting on protective gear and walking toward the barricade around 2:50 a.m. They stood in between the encampment and the counterprotest group, and the counterprotesters began dispersing.

While police continued to stand outside the encampment, a video filmed at 3:32 a.m. shows a man who was walking away from the scene being attacked by a counterprotester, then dragged and pummeled by others. An editor at the U.C.L.A. student newspaper, the Daily Bruin, told The Times the man was a journalist at the paper, and that they were walking with other student journalists who had been covering the violence. The editor said she had also been punched and sprayed in the eyes with a chemical.

On Wednesday, U.C.L.A.’s chancellor, Gene Block, issued a statement calling the actions by “instigators” who attacked the encampment unacceptable. A spokesperson for California Gov. Gavin Newsom criticized campus law enforcement’s delayed response and said it demands answers.

Los Angeles Jewish and Muslim organizations also condemned the attacks. Hussam Ayloush, the director of the Greater Los Angeles Area office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, called on the California attorney general to investigate the lack of police response. The Jewish Federation Los Angeles blamed U.C.L.A. officials for creating an unsafe environment over months and said the officials had “been systemically slow to respond when law enforcement is desperately needed.”

Fifteen people were reportedly injured in the attack, according to a letter sent by the president of the University of California system to the board of regents.

Advertisement

The night after the attack began, law enforcement warned pro-Palestinian demonstrators to leave the encampment or be arrested. By early Thursday morning, police had dismantled the encampment and arrested more than 200 people from the encampment.

Continue Reading

Trending