As Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority decision, “the Court has permitted race-based college admissions only within the confines of narrow restrictions: such admissions programs must comply with strict scrutiny, may never use race as a stereotype or negative, and must – at some point – end.” In reaching that decision, the majority sought to compel universities to find other means to work toward a more just and equal society. Rather, the court has determined that doing so on the basis of any form of racial discrimination, regardless of the desired social effect, violates the constitutional guarantee of “equal protection under the law” in the 14th Amendment. It does not dispute as “commendable goals” the desire by Harvard University and the University of North Carolina – the two institutions at the center of the case – to cultivate, through diversity, a higher class of “engaged and productive citizens and leaders.” It also acknowledged the importance of “appreciation, respect, and empathy, cross-racial understanding, and breaking down stereotypes.” Yet it would be helpful to start that search by considering what the court ruling does not do. Supreme Court’s decision today to end race as a factor in college admissions will now launch a vigorous and perhaps difficult search in higher education for legal and creative ways to deservedly educate more students from underrepresented racial groups. Xu: “Even the staunchest conservatives are like, yeah, get those off the books.”
When the Senate reconvenes in January, it may consider the bill.Says Mr. Xu's bill is now dead, the Democrat has supported a similar Republican bill that cleared the House.
Homeowners are often shocked to discover these clauses in paperwork attached to their homes. Xu – the only Asian American currently elected to the Kansas state Legislature – to introduce a bill last year to redact racial covenants. This May, a Washington state law established down-payment assistance for homebuyers whose families were disadvantaged by racial covenants. In Kansas, constituents urged Mr. A steady trickle of states has since passed laws that more easily allow residents to remove a racial covenant from documents that are notoriously difficult to change. But the language still exists in deeds – and the effects linger. Researchers at the University of Minnesota began mapping racial covenants in 2016. Racial covenants became unenforceable by a 1948 Supreme Court ruling and then illegal by the federal Fair Housing Act of 1968. Real estate developers nationwide spread the use of racial clauses, and later the federal government joined in with redlining. Segregation was thought necessary for social order. That developer also pioneered the use of homes associations and restrictive racial covenants – racist restrictions written into housing deeds to keep neighborhoods white, forever. A century ago, thousands of acres of suburbs here were planned by a visionary who prioritized green spaces, curving roads, and beautiful design. Rui Xu’s district looks nothing like the Kansas of wheat fields and grain silos.
0 kommentar(er)
