-
“The result of the Court’s decision: a normality of racial inequity. Again.”
— ivonne lucia (@imandue) June 29, 2023
Again. https://t.co/KDTdiTP0ED -
Read this👏🏾 'To frame policies as “race neutral” or “not racist” or “race blind” because they don’t have racial language—or because the policy makers deny a racist intent—is akin to framing Jim Crow’s grandfather clauses and poll taxes and literacy tests as “race neutral”' https://t.co/iaACgx2HST
— shon. (@itsTreShonda) June 29, 2023 -
"Litigants and judges continue to use Asian Americans as political footballs to maintain these racial preferences for white and wealthy students. Particularly in the Harvard case, SFFA’s Edward Blum used Asian plaintiffs to argue that affirmative action harms Asian Americans. https://t.co/hhpu9bqnmO
— Anna Lau (@annaslau) June 29, 2023 -
“Race-neutral” admissions are a fantasy. If they actually existed, they wouldn’t replace affirmative action. Nor would they be the panacea for diversity that the Court’s ruling implies. Worthwhile read from professors Uma Mazyck Jayakumar and @DrIbram. https://t.co/7ctPCK3i5g
— Jamil Smith جميل كريم (@JamilSmith) June 29, 2023 -
“Separate but equal” then. “Race neutral” now. Read my article about the Supreme Court’s decision on #affirmativeaction 👇🏽 https://t.co/awP6UTGVEJ
— Uma Jayakumar (@DrUJayakumar) June 29, 2023
History