Connect with us

Published

on

The end of affirmative action in university admissions has been prophesied since 2003, when the Supreme Court issued its decision in Grutter v. Bollinger. In the majority opinion, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote that “25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.” That reckoning has now arrived, and five years earlier than predicted: In June, the Supreme Court ruled 63 that public universities must stop favoring certain applicants, and disfavoring others, based on their race or ethnicity.

“Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it,” Chief Justice John Roberts declared, writing for the majority in Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. “In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individualnot on the basis of race.”

For everyone who values fairness, individuality, and nondiscrimination, this decision could not have come soon enough. The perniciousness of the admissions system was on full display, thanks to the details of the case. The plaintiffan advocacy organization that filed suits against Harvard and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC)persuasively demonstrated that race-based admissions schemes systematically disadvantaged Asian-American students. UNC, for instance, admitted more than 80 percent of its black applicants but less than 70 percent of its white and Asian applicants. (Reason Foundation, the nonprofit that publishes this magazine, submitted an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff.)

At Harvard, discriminatory practices were overt and began with recruitment. Admissions officials would send letters of interest to black and Hispanic high schoolers who received a score of 1100 or more on the SAT. Asian Americans were ignored unless they received at least a 1350. During the actual admissions process, students were sorted into “deciles”10 levels of academic performance. Asian Americans in the top decile were less likely to get in than black students in the fourth decile.

The plaintiff also submitted evidence that Harvard admissions officers tended to give Asian Americans negative scores on the personality rating, a wholly subjective criterion. Favoritism also extended to white applicants from what Harvard describes as “sparse country”: rural states with historically low enrollment numbers. The result was that applicants were judged not solely on the merits of their individual achievements but on immutable characteristics like their race and place of origin.

These schemes, according to the Supreme Court, violated federal law and, in UNC’s case, the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. “Many universities have for too long wrongly concluded that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned, but the color of their skin,” wrote Roberts. “This Nation’s constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”

Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits entities that receive federal funding from practicing racial discrimination. But affirmative actiona scheme to benefit racial minorities in hiring, contracting, and school admissionswas viewed as an exception; the idea was to practice discrimination on behalf of historically marginalized groups in order to make amends for past wrongs.

In 2003, a pair of Supreme Court rulings involving the University of MichiganGratz v. Bollinger and the aforementioned Grutterupended that justification. In Gratz, the Court held 63 that Michigan’s undergraduate admissions program went too far in its consideration of race. The university used a point system, with 100 points guaranteeing admission; belonging to an underrepresented minority group was worth 20 points, while a perfect SAT score was worth only 12 points.

In Grutter, however, the Court permitted Michigan’s law school to consider race as one factor among many in admissions decisions, on the grounds that a racially diverse student body was a “compelling interest” of the state. While the decision preserved affirmative action in some formfor perhaps 25 years, per O’Connor’s time limitit forced higher education administrators to change their reasoning: Henceforth, they would have to defend race-based admissions as diversity enhancement programs.

Whether affirmative action actually promotes diversity is up for debate, of course. Schools that engage in racial gerrymandering may succeed in making their campuses more diverse in the most superficial sense without doing anything to improve intellectual, political, socioeconomic, or geographic diversity. No one in a position to defend Harvard’s admissions system ever argued that the school needed more conservative or libertarian representation; in practice, the institution’s position was simply that it needed fewer Asians.

At a time when the Supreme Court is often accused of being out of touch and counter-majoritarian, it’s worth mentioning that Students for Fair Admissions undeniably reflects the will of the people. Race-based admissions systems are opposed by 69 percent of poll respondents, including 58 percent of Democrats, according to The New York Times. Voters in California, a deep-blue state, banned affirmative action twicein 1996 and again, for good measure, in 2020. Faced with this reality, many defenders of affirmative action are trying to change the subject.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (DN.Y.), for instance, complained that the Supreme Court had ignored a more serious example of unfairness in higher education. “If SCOTUS was serious about their ludicrous ‘colorblindness’ claims,” she wrote on Twitter, “they would have abolished legacy admissions, aka affirmative action for the privileged.” Other progressive Democrats, such as Reps. Cori Bush (DMo.) and Jamaal Bowman (DN.Y.), made similar observations.

It should go without saying, but the justices declined to adjudicate legacy admissions because this issue was not before them. That said, legislators do not need to wait for the Court; they can and should abolish the practice within public institutions. The widespread practice of granting preferential treatment to the scions of alumni is unfair and has no place at taxpayer-funded colleges and universities.

The fact that legacy admissions still exist is not a reason to maintain affirmative action; eliminating explicit racial discrimination is a noble goal in and of itself. But to any naysayers who disdain the Supreme Court’s ruling because they think legacy admissions should face the same fate: Your terms are acceptable.

Continue Reading

UK

How Prevent is tackling young extremism 20 years after the 7/7 bombings

Published

on

By

How Prevent is tackling young extremism 20 years after the 7/7 bombings

Radicalised nine-year-olds, teenagers mixing incel culture with extreme right ideologies and a Muslim who idolises Hitler – this is just some of the casework of those tasked with deradicalising young extremists in the UK.

Monday will mark 20 years since the 7/7 attacks on the London transport network when four suicide bombers killed 52 people and injured 770 others.

A year later the government set up its deradicalisation programme Prevent as part of its counter-terrorism strategy.

Sky News has spoken to two leading intervention providers (IPs) at Prevent who both say their work is getting ever more complex and the referrals younger.

The Metropolitan Police’s Prevent co-ordinator, Detective Superintendent Jane Corrigan, has also told Sky News it is “tragic” that when it comes to terrorism, “one in five of all our arrests is a child under 17”.

She believes parents should talk to their children about what they are reading and seeing online.

“Parents instinctively know when something doesn’t feel right when their child is becoming withdrawn or isolated – not wanting to engage,” she says.

More on Prevent

People worried that someone they know has thoughts that could lead to terrorism can refer them to Prevent.

File pic: iStock
Image:
File pic: iStock

‘A pic-n-mix of ideologies’

Home Office figures show 11-year-olds are the largest age group to get referred.

Concerning cases are passed on to IPs such as Nigel Bromage who told Sky News: “Often there will be a pic-n-mix of ideologies.

“From my own examples and experience, we are aware of people looking at the incel culture and mixing that with some far-right elements.”

Jason Farrell with Nigel Bromage
Image:
Sky’s Jason Farrell with intervention provider Nigel Bromage, who was exposed to extremism when he was a child

Incels, meaning “involuntary celibates” are men who have been unable to have a relationship with women despite wanting one and become misogynistic and hateful as a result.

Like many IPs, Mr Bromage from Birmingham comes from an extremist background himself, having once been a regional organiser for the proscribed Neo-Nazi group Combat 18.

For him too, it began as a child.

“It all started with someone giving me a leaflet outside my school gates,” Mr Bromage says.

“It told me a horrific story about a mum getting killed by an IRA bomb explosion – and at the end of the leaflet there was a call to action which said: ‘If you think it’s wrong then do something about it’.”

He developed a hatred for Irish republican terrorism which morphed into general racism and national socialism.

“At the very end I thought I was going to go to prison, or I would end up being hurt or even killed because of my political beliefs,” he says.

Nigel Bromage
Image:
Mr Bromage says his youngest case involved a nine-year-old

Boy, 9, groomed by his brother

Mr Bromage reveals his youngest case was a nine-year-old who had been groomed by his brother.

“He was being shown pro-Nazi video games, and his older brother was saying ‘when I go to prison or I get in trouble – they you’re the next generation – you’re the one who needs to continue the fight’,” he says.

“Really, he had no interest in the racist games – he just wanted to impress his brother and be loved by his brother.”

                  aaaa

Every year, nearly 300 children who are 10 or younger are referred to Prevent.

Home Office figures show that over the last six years 50% of referrals were children under the age of 18.

Eleven-year-olds alone make up a third of total referrals, averaging just over 2,000 a year, with the figure rising even higher in the most recent stats.

Another IP, Abdul Ahad, specialises in Islamic extremism.

He says the catalyst for radicalisation often comes from events aboard.

Ten years ago, it was Syria, more recently Gaza.

“It is often a misplaced desire to do something effective – to matter, to make a difference. It gives them purpose, camaraderie and belonging as well – you feel part of something bigger than you,” he says.

The wreckage of a double-decker bus after the blast at Tavistock Square. Pic: PA
Image:
Fifty-two people were killed on 7 July 2005 when four suicide bombers blew up three London Underground trains and a bus. Pic: PA

Clients want someone to ‘hear them’

Some of his clients “don’t fit into any particular box”.

“I’m working with a guy at the minute, he’s a young Muslim but he idolises Hitler and he’s written a manifesto,” he says.

“When you break it down, some people don’t know where they fit in, but they want to fit in somewhere.”

Mr Ahad says the young individual mostly admires Hitler’s “strength” rather than his ideologies and that he was drawn to darker characters in history.

Often his clients are very isolated and just want someone to “hear them”, he adds.

Read more:
What is Prevent – and why is it controversial?
PM warns of new kind of terror threat

Abdul Ahad
Image:
Intervention provider Abdul Ahad specialises in Islamic extremism

Mr Ahad is also an imam who preaches at the Al-Azar Mosque in South Shields, a well-regarded centre for community cohesion and outreach.

He uses his understanding of the Islamic faith in his Prevent sessions to help guide his referrals away from extreme interpretations of the Koran by offering “understanding and context”.

He says: “We quote the correct religious texts – we explain their responsibility as a Muslim living in the UK and we re-direct their energies into something more constructive.”

Common theme of mental health issues

Mental health problems are a common theme among those referred to Prevent including depression and autism.

A recent inquest into the death of autistic teenager Rhianan Rudd found she took her own life after being radicalised by two white supremacists.

Her mother was critical of Prevent, as well as the police and MI5 after she had referred her daughter to the deradicalisation programme and Rhianan was subsequently charged with terrorism offences.

   aaa

Last month a coroner found some failings in the processes around protecting Rhianan, but none of them attributable to Rhianan taking her own life.

Det Supt Corrigan says a referral doesn’t mean individuals end up being arrested or on an MI5 watchlist.

She says: “You’re not reporting a crime, but you are seeking support. I would say the earlier you can come in and talk to us about the concerns you have the better. Prevent is just that – it is a pre-criminal space.

“It’s tragic when you see the number of young people being arrested for very serious charges. Just look at terrorism – one in five of all our arrests is a child under the age of 17. We need to think about how we respond to that.”

Prevent has been criticised for failures such as when Southport killer Axel Rudakabana failed to be recognised as needing intervention despite three referrals, or when MP David Amiss’ killer Ali Harbi Ali went through the programme and killed anyway.

Axel Rudakubana. Pic: Merseyside police
Image:
Axel Rudakubana failed to be recognised as needing intervention despite three referrals. Pic: Merseyside police

It’s harder to quantify its successes.

Mr Ahad says he understands why the failures hit the headlines, but he believes the programme is saving lives.

He says: “I think the vast majority of people get radicalised online because they are sitting in their room reading all this content without any context or scholarly input. They see one version of events and they get so far down the rabbit hole they can’t pull themselves out.

“I really wish Prevent was around when I was a young, lost 15-year-old because there was nothing around then. It’s about listening to people engaging with them and offering them a way of getting out of that extremism.”

File pic: iStock
Image:
File pic: iStock

‘Radicalisation can happen in days to weeks’

Det Supt Corrigan says: “I’ve sat with parents whose children have gone on to commit the most horrendous crimes and they all spotted something.

“Now, with hindsight, they wished they had done something or acted early. That’s why we created this programme, because radicalisation can happen in days to weeks.”

Twenty years on from 7/7 the shape of the terrorist threat has shifted, the thoughts behind it harder to categorise, but it is no less dangerous.

Continue Reading

Sports

Volpe toss hits Judge as sloppy Yanks fall again

Published

on

By

Volpe toss hits Judge as sloppy Yanks fall again

NEW YORK — A blunder that typifies the current state of the New York Yankees, who find themselves in the midst of their second six-game losing streak in three weeks, happened in front of 41,401 fans at Citi Field on Saturday, and almost nobody noticed.

The Yankees were jogging off the field after securing the third out of the fourth inning of their 12-6 loss to the Mets when shortstop Anthony Volpe, as is standard for teams across baseball at the end of innings, threw the ball to right fielder Aaron Judge as he crossed into the infield from right field.

Only Judge wasn’t looking, and the ball nailed him in the head, knocking his sunglasses off and leaving a small cut near his right eye. The wound required a bandage to stop the bleeding, but Judge stayed in the game.

“Confusion,” Yankees manager Aaron Boone said. “I didn’t know what happened initially. [It just] felt like something happened. Of course I was a little concerned.”

Avoiding an injury to the best player in baseball was on the Yankees’ very short list of positives in another sloppy, draining defeat to their crosstown rivals. With the loss, the Yankees, who held a three-game lead over the Toronto Blue Jays in the American League East standings entering June 30, find themselves tied with the Tampa Bay Rays for second place three games behind the Blue Jays heading into Sunday’s Subway Series finale.

The nosedive has been fueled by messy defense and a depleted pitching staff that has encountered a wall.

“It’s been a terrible week,” said Boone, who before the game announced starter Clarke Schmidt will likely undergo season-ending Tommy John surgery.

For the second straight day, the Mets capitalized on mistakes and cracked timely home runs. After slugging three homers in Friday’s series opener, the Mets hit three more Saturday — a grand slam in the first inning from Brandon Nimmo to take a 4-0 lead and two home runs from Pete Alonso to widen the gap.

Nimmo’s blast — his second grand slam in four days — came after Yankees left fielder Jasson Dominguez misplayed a ball hit by the Mets’ leadoff hitter in the first inning. On Friday, he misread Nimmo’s line drive and watched it sail over his head for a double. On Saturday, he was slow to react to Starling Marte’s flyball in the left-center field gap and braked without catching or stopping it, allowing Marte to advance to second for a double. Yankees starter Carlos Rodon then walked two batters to load the bases for Nimmo, who yanked a mistake, a 1-2 slider over the wall.

“That slider probably needs to be down,” said Rodon, who allowed seven runs (six earned) over five innings. “A lot of misses today and they punished them.”

Jazz Chisholm Jr.’s throwing woes at third base — a position the Yankees have asked him to play to accommodate DJ LeMahieu at second base — continued in the second inning when he fielded Tyrone Taylor’s groundball and sailed a toss over first baseman Cody Bellinger’s head. Taylor was given second base and scored moments later on Marte’s RBI single.

The Yankees were charged with their second error in the Mets’ four-run seventh inning when center fielder Trent Grisham charged Francisco Lindor’s single up the middle and had it bounce off the heel of his glove.

The mistake allowed a run to score from second base without a throw, extending the Mets lead back to three runs after the Yankees had chipped their deficit, and allowed a heads-up Lindor to advance to second base. Lindor later scored on Alonso’s second home run, a three-run blast off left-hander Jayvien Sandridge in the pitcher’s major league debut.

“Just got to play better,” Judge said. “That’s what it comes down to. It’s fundamentals. Making a routine play, routine. It’s just the little things. That’s what it kind of comes down to. But every good team goes through a couple bumps in the road.”

This six-game losing skid has looked very different from the Yankees’ first. That rough patch, consisting of losses to the Boston Red Sox and Los Angeles Angels, was propelled by offensive troubles. The Yankees scored six runs in the six games and gave up just 16. This time, run prevention is the issue; the Yankees have scored 34 runs and surrendered 54 in four games against the Blue Jays in Toronto and two in Queens.

“The offense is starting to swing the bat, put some runs on the board,” Boone said. “The pitching, which has kind of carried us a lot this season, has really, really struggled this week. We haven’t caught the ball as well as I think we should.

“So, look, when you live it and you’re going through it, it sucks, it hurts. But you got to be able to handle it. You got to be able to deal with it. You got to be able to weather it and come out of this and grow.”

Continue Reading

Sports

Former White Sox pitcher, world champ Jenks dies

Published

on

By

Former White Sox pitcher, world champ Jenks dies

Bobby Jenks, a two-time All-Star pitcher for the Chicago White Sox who was on the roster when the franchise won the 2005 World Series, died Friday in Sintra, Portugal, the team announced.

Jenks, 44, who had been diagnosed with adenocarcinoma, a form of stomach cancer, this year, spent six seasons with the White Sox from 2005 to 2010 and also played for the Boston Red Sox in 2011. The reliever finished his major league career with a 16-20 record, 3.53 ERA and 173 saves.

“We have lost an iconic member of the White Sox family today,” White Sox chairman Jerry Reinsdorf said in a statement. “None of us will ever forget that ninth inning of Game 4 in Houston, all that Bobby did for the 2005 World Series champions and for the entire Sox organization during his time in Chicago. He and his family knew cancer would be his toughest battle, and he will be missed as a husband, father, friend and teammate. He will forever hold a special place in all our hearts.”

After Jenks moved to Portugal last year, he was diagnosed with a deep vein thrombosis in his right calf. That eventually spread into blood clots in his lungs, prompting further testing. He was later diagnosed with adenocarcinoma and began undergoing radiation.

In February, as Jenks was being treated for the illness, the White Sox posted “We stand with you, Bobby” on Instagram, adding in the post that the club was “thinking of Bobby as he is being treated.”

In 2005, as the White Sox ended an 88-year drought en route to the World Series title, Jenks appeared in six postseason games. Chicago went 11-1 in the playoffs, and he earned saves in series-clinching wins in Game 3 of the ALDS at Boston, and Game 4 of the World Series against the Houston Astros.

In 2006, Jenks saved 41 games, and the following year, he posted 40 saves. He also retired 41 consecutive batters in 2007, matching a record for a reliever.

“You play for the love of the game, the joy of it,” Jenks said in his last interview with SoxTV last year. “It’s what I love to do. I [was] playing to be a world champion, and that’s what I wanted to do from the time I picked up a baseball.”

A native of Mission Hills, California, Jenks appeared in 19 games for the Red Sox and was originally drafted by the then-Anaheim Angels in the fifth round of the 2000 draft.

Jenks is survived by his wife, Eleni Tzitzivacos, their two children, Zeno and Kate, and his four children from a prior marriage, Cuma, Nolan, Rylan and Jackson.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Trending