A new lawsuit against Texas A&M challenges racial preferences in academic hiring
[link removed]
CounterCurrent:
Equal Protection for Me But Not for Thee
A new lawsuit against the Texas A&M University System challenges racial preferences in academic hiring
CounterCurrent is the National Association of Scholars’ weekly newsletter, bringing you the biggest issues in academia and our responses to them.
[link removed]
Category: Racial Preferences; Reading Time: ~2 minutes
------------------------------------------------------------
** Featured Article - "Lowery v. Texas A&M University System: The Beginning of the End of DEI Discrimination?" by Louis K. Bonham ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------
"White and Asian men need not apply."
If you’ve spent any time on the academic job market lately, you know that this statement might as well have been plastered at the top of most faculty job postings for the last decade. Inspired by the Supreme Court’s limited authorization ([link removed]) of racial preferences in college admissions, colleges and universities across the country have long prioritized the applications of minority applicants in a not-so-subtle attempt to achieve racial balance in their student bodies, faculty, and staff.
Over the past two years, some university administrators have begun to say the quiet part out loud ([link removed]) , swapping their quiet emphasis on "diversity skills ([link removed]) " for blatant declarations that particular positions are reserved for applicants from "underrepresented groups"—in other words, non-white, non-Asian applicants.
There's only one problem: discrimination on the basis of race or sex in hiring decisions is flat-out illegal. Title VI ([link removed]) of the Civil Rights Act and Title IX ([link removed]) of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibit all forms of race and sex discrimination, respectively, at federally-funded universities. Contrary to popular belief, these laws don't just protect underrepresented minorities—they protect all Americans, regardless of their race, sex, or membership in a "preferred" identity group.
Why, then, do universities continue to engage in such blatant malfeasance? Because they assume that no one will take on the burden of challenging them in court for fear of facing the campus cancel culture mobs ([link removed]) . Even if one of the victims of an administrator’s overt discrimination were to accept both the social and the financial risk of fighting back, the universities assume (usually rightly) that no authority will actually intervene to enforce the law.
As attorney Louis K. Bonham explains in an article for Minding the Campus ([link removed]) ,
With universities perceiving no real risk of being sued, and with the Biden administration having about the same interest in neutrally enforcing federal discrimination law as it does in securing the southern border, university administrators know there is no serious risk to giving in to the demands of "antiracist" activists for official, overt discrimination against white and Asian men. That many state officials (including some red-state officials such as Texas Governor Greg Abbott) are too cowardly to do anything to resist the campus wokesters further compounds the problem. Like the days of Mob-controlled garbage collection in New York City, university administrators can say, "Yeah, what we’re doing is illegal. Whaddya gonna do about it?"
But the tide may be changing. The Supreme Court stands poised ([link removed]) to overturn the use of racial preferences in college admissions—and now, thanks to the bold actions of National Association of Scholars affiliate head and University of Texas finance professor Richard Lowery, the system of hiring discrimination that undergirds American higher education may collapse as well.
On September 10, Lowery filed a lawsuit ([link removed]) against the Texas A&M University System for its blatant disregard of Title VI and Title IX. The lawsuit references a program initiated in July 2022 by Texas A&M's "Office for Diversity" that offers bonuses for faculty hires from "underrepresented minority groups," which it defined as "African Americans, Hispanic/Latino Americans, Native Americans, Alaskan Natives, and Native Hawaiians." The initiative also reserves certain faculty positions for these non-white, non-Asian applicants—including one in the Department of Finance, which Professor Lowery would be eligible to apply for if not for his skin color.
Lowery's lawsuit will serve as a test case. Will U.S. courts enforce existing anti-discrimination law—or will they eschew equality under the law in favor of a Kendian anti-racism agenda? Bonham spoke to several legal experts who agree that Lowery's case is strong. If he wins in court, it will likely be the first in a flood of lawsuits challenging universities' illegal use of racial preferences.
Whatever the outcome, the case will be one to watch.
Until next week.
Marina Ziemnick
Communications Associate
National Association of Scholars
Read More ([link removed])
For more on racial preferences in American higher education:
[link removed]
May 03, 2022
** The Proof Is in the Data ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------
Marina Ziemnick
Administrators at elite universities rarely talk about their discrimination against Asian Americans. Instead, the proof of discrimination appears in the data.
[link removed]
January 25, 2022
** We’ll See You in Court, After All ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------
Marina Ziemnick
The Supreme Court has propped up racial discrimination in this country for over four decades. It’s time for a new ruling to turn the tide.
[link removed]
January 24, 2022
** Anti-Asian Discrimination at the Heart of the Progressive Education Agenda ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------
Wenyuan Wu
A glaring skeleton in the closet of American education is its long-established discrimination against Asian Americans.
[link removed]
November 17, 2020
** Surprise! Americans Oppose Discrimination ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------
John Rosenberg
When you spell out what "affirmative action" actually entails, Americans of every stripe vote against it. Race and sex preferences only pass when lawmakers obfuscate their true meaning.
** About the NAS
------------------------------------------------------------
The National Association of Scholars, founded in 1987, emboldens reasoned scholarship and propels civil debate. We’re the leading organization of scholars and citizens committed to higher education as the catalyst of American freedom.
============================================================
Follow NAS on social media.
** Facebook ([link removed])
** Twitter ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
** Website ([link removed])
** Donate ([link removed])
| ** Join ([link removed])
| ** Renew ([link removed])
| ** Bookstore ([link removed])
Copyright © 2022 National Association of Scholars, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website, membership or donation forms, contact forms at events, or by signing open letters.
Our mailing address is:
National Association of Scholars
420 Madison Avenue
7th Floor
New York, NY 10017-2418
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.
