f**********n
发帖数: 29853 | 1 TheWashington PostPublishes the Worst Analysis Yet of Neil Gorsuch’
s Confirmation Fight
byEdward BlumApril 5, 2017 3:30 PM
The prize for the worst analysis to date about the confirmation of Judge
Neil Gorsuch to the U.S. Supreme Court should be awarded to Professor
Richard Hasen of the University of California–Irvine Law School. Professor
Hasen’s evolution from a serious legal scholar to a partisan mudslinger is
now sadly complete.
That is the only conclusion to be drawn from his April 2Washington Post
editorial, “Neil Gorsuch got where he is because of a form of
affirmative action.” In it, Hasen calls Judge Gorsuch “an affirmative
action baby” who did not “get where he is today solely based on his merits
.” According to Hasen, Judge Gorsuch’s remarkable career is a product of
Justice White’s affinity for law clerks from his home state, Justice
Kennedy’s charity, political connections, and wealthy clients. To call
Hasen’s charges unfounded would be more charitable than his baseless
speculation deserves. But Judge Gorsuch’s sterling achievements and well-
earned success at every stage of his career need no defense from me or any
impartial observer.
What does merit a response is Hasen’s attempt to use his baseless
speculation about Judge Gorsuch as a launching pad for a defense of
affirmative action. Remarkably, Hasen’s convoluted argument makes one of
the best cases against race-based preferences anyone has seen in a very long
time. Hasen’s thesis is that simply by knowing the circumstances of Judge
Gorsuch’s life — being a Coloradan, having a politically active mother,
and representing powerful clients — one can label him an “affirmative
action baby.” But these kinds of assumptions are of course what make racial
preferences so pernicious. In Hasen’s view, for example, every African-
American graduate from an Ivy League school is presumptively an “
affirmative action baby” who did not gain admission on merit. As Hasen says
his eyes, race must have played a role. Quite accidentally, then, Hasen
proves Justice Clarence Thomas’s point: “These programs stamp minorities
with a badge of inferiority,” and in so doing, “undermine the moral basis
of the equal protection principle.”
Furthermore, Hasen’s attempt to defend his position on originalist grounds
is even more nonsensical. Serious jurists and scholars — originalists and
non-originalists alike — have, and are engaged in, a thoughtful debate
about whether, and to what extent, the 14th Amendment, as originally
understood, allows the use of racial preferences in government programs.
Hasen’s breezy assertion that “an honest originalist probably would
conclude that affirmative action is consistent with the original meaning of
the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, as the Congress that passed
the 14th Amendment also passed race-conscious affirmative action legislation
,” only proves that he is neither honest nor an originalist. There is far
more to the issue than that— and Hasen knows it.
–– ADVERTISEMENT ––
Hasen then claims that it is “a deep conservatism” that led Chief Justice
Roberts and Justice Alito “to vote to oppose race-based affirmative action,
even though they are not originalists.” But Hasen appears to have bypassed
a far more obvious reason: respect for judicial precedent. Justice Harlan’
s dissent inPlessyv. Fergusonand the Court’s decision in
Brown vs. Board of Educationhave far more in common with those who
oppose race-based affirmative action than they do with those who subscribe
to the amorphous “diversity” rationale. In fact, Chief Justice Roberts’s
statement that “the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to
stop discriminating on the basis of race,” is reminiscent of what the
plaintiffs told the Supreme Court inBrown: “no State has any authority
under the equal-protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to use race as
a factor in affording educational opportunities among its citizens.” Is
this what Hasen means by “deep conservatism”?
Indeed, it is striking that Professor Hasen doesn’t even try to defend the
diversity rationale — the only rationale the Supreme Court has ever
accepted for using racial preferences in education. Instead, he contends
that race-based preferences should extend to African Americans because many
of their “ancestors were slaves in the United States” and because they “
are still working to overcome more than a century of discrimination once
slavery ended.”
Well, as an initial matter, his candor is welcome and instructive. It is
important that the Supreme Court understand that, deep down, ardent
supporters of affirmative action don’t believe in the diversity rationale
— it merely a means to an end for them. The Court should therefore view
diversity-rationale arguments with deep skepticism.
More fundamentally, do Hasen and other progressives genuinely believe that
slavery is a defense for how affirmative action is used today? Do they care
that Ivy League schools are using it as cover to engage in systematic
discrimination against Asian Americans — as Students for Fair Admissions
has alleged in its ongoing lawsuit against Harvard? After all, Asian
Americans, as Hasen puts it, also “have faced their own struggles, with
many of them or their ancestors fleeing poverty or oppression.” Does it
bother Hasen and the admissions administrators at dozens of elite
universities that colleges are granting racial preferences mostly to
affluent minorities from well-connected families instead of minorities from
challenging social-economic circumstances? These are the applicants who need
the “helping hand” that Hasen claims racial preferences deliver? There
are many other issues that raise additional doubts about whether modern
racial-preferences can withstand scrutiny even for those jurists and
academics who accept them as constitutional under some circumstances. But
why let nuance get in the way of an outburst against an honorable man.
Most disappointing of all, Hasen saves his worst criticism of Judge Gorsuch
for last, claiming that his failure to “meet with three senators who are
all women of color” adds to the “fears” about his approach “on issues of
race.”
So, it has come to this.
No presumption of good faith. No offer of proof for such a serious
accusation — even though they are only three of approximately 20 senators
with whom Judge Gorsuch has not met. For the progressive academic,
correlation is causation, and we are all guilty of racial insensitivity
unless we can prove ourselves innocent.
But is Hasen willing to live by his own test? Who are the senators that
Justices Kagan and Sotomayor failed to meet with? What if they were all
Christian or white? Did they miss any Jewish ones? Should we make the same
disreputable assumptions about them that Hasen is so eager to make about
Judge Gorsuch? Of course not.
In the end, this scurrilous weaponizing of race as a debater’s tool just
proves that the diversity project is a failure. After more than 40 years of
experimentation with racial classifications and preferences as a means to
promote reconciliation, we have less understanding and more division. We
have an increased desire to make everything in life about the few things
that separate us instead of the many that unite us. We’re going backwards.
Someone has a problem with race. But it is not Neil Gorsuch.
— Edward Blum, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, is
the president of Students for Fair Admissions. | t**********r
发帖数: 882 | 2 This is the original post on Washington Post. The columnist did make some
strange arguments.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/04/03/neil-gorsuch-got
-where-he-is-because-of-a-form-of-affirmative-action/?utm_term=.12add2ae254a
#comments
Professor
is
Post
【在 f**********n 的大作中提到】
: TheWashington PostPublishes the Worst Analysis Yet of Neil Gorsuch’
: s Confirmation Fight
: byEdward BlumApril 5, 2017 3:30 PM
: The prize for the worst analysis to date about the confirmation of Judge
: Neil Gorsuch to the U.S. Supreme Court should be awarded to Professor
: Richard Hasen of the University of California–Irvine Law School. Professor
: Hasen’s evolution from a serious legal scholar to a partisan mudslinger is
: now sadly complete.
: That is the only conclusion to be drawn from his April 2Washington Post
: editorial, “Neil Gorsuch got where he is because of a form of
| t*******d
发帖数: 12895 | 3 赞Blum先生，今天也发了信
Hello SFFA Member!
As another school year comes to a close, I wanted to let you know how
Students for Fair Admissions is continuing our fight for equal protection in
the admissions process.
We recently sued the U.S. Department of Education because it failed to
produce documents related to its investigation of Princeton University for
discrimination against Asian Americans. After the agency agreed to give us
these documents, Princeton brought its own lawsuit against DOE in an attempt
to stop the public from seeing its files. As I told CNBC, “The fact that
Princeton has sued suggests that Princeton has something very revealing it
wants to hide about its admissions.” We are encouraged by our progress and
will continue to fight for transparency in the admissions process. Read more
here:
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/24/princeton-is-scrambling-to-block-release-of-admission-records.html
We also launched a new website: UTnotFair.com. The purpose of the website is
to educate the public about the unfair and unconstitutional admissions
policies of the University of Texas at Austin and to encourage students who
were recently rejected by UT-Austin to share their stories with SFFA. As I
told the Austin American-Statesman, “Students for Fair Admissions believes
that [UT-Austin] has not met its constitutional obligations and is
vulnerable to a new legal challenge.” Stay tuned for more updates on this
new battle. Read more here:
http://www.mystatesman.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/affirmative-action-admissions-faces-new-legal-challenge/dXzUDqUuVtaNuHZUe5cCgK/
We are also continuing our fight in our lawsuits against Harvard and the
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. These cases are in the “discovery
” process, which we expect to continue for much of this year. I hope to
bring you more news about these cases soon.
Finally, if you or someone you know has been denied admission to a school
that uses race-based admission, please let us know. We are especially
interested in hearing from students who have been denied admission to
Harvard, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, University of Wisconsin
or the University of Texas. Please visit our website at
https://studentsforfairadmissions.org/
Thanks, as always, for your continued support.
Sincerely,
Edward Blum
President, Students for Fair Admissions | t**********r
发帖数: 882 | 4 赞
in
attempt
【在 t*******d 的大作中提到】
: 赞Blum先生，今天也发了信
: Hello SFFA Member!
: As another school year comes to a close, I wanted to let you know how
: Students for Fair Admissions is continuing our fight for equal protection in
: the admissions process.
: We recently sued the U.S. Department of Education because it failed to
: produce documents related to its investigation of Princeton University for
: discrimination against Asian Americans. After the agency agreed to give us
: these documents, Princeton brought its own lawsuit against DOE in an attempt
: to stop the public from seeing its files. As I told CNBC, “The fact that
| f**********n
发帖数: 29853 | 5 咦？呵呵妹子你不是左派吗？虽然你是最体面，最文雅，左派里面唯一拿得出手的，那
也是左派啊。
为啥要支持我老板Edward Blum？展开说说嘛，求求你了。
【在 t**********r 的大作中提到】
: 赞
:
: in
: attempt
| t**********r
发帖数: 882 | 6 妹子？我这么文雅吗？
我是左派？可能可以算吧。我没有一个坚决的意识形态。我不认为政府一定会mess up
，不认为政府介入经济活动就一定是错误的，我也不认为政府能够解决所有的问题。所
以算是中间偏左吧。social issue我比较左。hot button social issues，我支持ROE
vs Wade，支持同性恋结婚。但是我对强迫宗教人士serve同性恋婚姻有一定的保留。
但是我认为AA不但系统性的引进不公平，而且并没有解决实际问题，所以坚决反对。呵呵
【在 f**********n 的大作中提到】
: 咦？呵呵妹子你不是左派吗？虽然你是最体面，最文雅，左派里面唯一拿得出手的，那
: 也是左派啊。
: 为啥要支持我老板Edward Blum？展开说说嘛，求求你了。
| f**********n
发帖数: 29853 | 7 谢谢呵呵妹子回答。乍一看我还以为是我自己几年前发的帖子。
俺也支持ROE v Wade，因为这个案子判决比较模糊，还是给了地方自治的余地。
俺不反对同性恋结婚，但是俺坚决反对由法院来决定同性恋是否可以结婚。
最后，谢谢支持我老板Edward Blum。如果有下次，我化缘一定找你。
up
ROE
呵呵
【在 t**********r 的大作中提到】
: 妹子？我这么文雅吗？
: 我是左派？可能可以算吧。我没有一个坚决的意识形态。我不认为政府一定会mess up
: ，不认为政府介入经济活动就一定是错误的，我也不认为政府能够解决所有的问题。所
: 以算是中间偏左吧。social issue我比较左。hot button social issues，我支持ROE
: vs Wade，支持同性恋结婚。但是我对强迫宗教人士serve同性恋婚姻有一定的保留。
: 但是我认为AA不但系统性的引进不公平，而且并没有解决实际问题，所以坚决反对。呵呵
| t**********r
发帖数: 882 | 8 一定支持
【在 f**********n 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢呵呵妹子回答。乍一看我还以为是我自己几年前发的帖子。
: 俺也支持ROE v Wade，因为这个案子判决比较模糊，还是给了地方自治的余地。
: 俺不反对同性恋结婚，但是俺坚决反对由法院来决定同性恋是否可以结婚。
: 最后，谢谢支持我老板Edward Blum。如果有下次，我化缘一定找你。
:
: up
: ROE
: 呵呵
| f**********n
发帖数: 29853 | 9 感恩。
社会安全号能不能先给我？
【在 t**********r 的大作中提到】
: 一定支持
| t**********r
发帖数: 882 | 10 给你个信用卡，行不？
【在 f**********n 的大作中提到】
: 感恩。
: 社会安全号能不能先给我？
| f**********n
发帖数: 29853 | 11 发自内心地感谢呵呵兄。
本版，乃至本站，只有你才让左派这个词重新有了正面意义！
【在 t**********r 的大作中提到】
: 给你个信用卡，行不？
| f*****n
发帖数: 12752 | 12 这样不好，这样就没有“既然周围都是敌人就无需瞄准。火力全开，尽情射击吧”的豪
迈了 | f**********n
发帖数: 29853 | 13 也对，恳请呵呵从此退出江湖。
【在 f*****n 的大作中提到】
: 这样不好，这样就没有“既然周围都是敌人就无需瞄准。火力全开，尽情射击吧”的豪
: 迈了
| f*****n
发帖数: 12752 | 14 木秀于林，风必摧之
如果呵呵不是隐藏极深的甜妈beta版的话，一定会被左派打成川粉的
【在 f**********n 的大作中提到】
: 也对，恳请呵呵从此退出江湖。
|
|
