Skip to comments.Race OK as factor in enrollment, court says
Posted on 03/17/2009 7:21:24 PM PDT by SmithL
SAN FRANCISCO -- A state appeals court breathed new life Tuesday into campus integration efforts, ruling that Berkeley does not violate California's ban on racial preferences when it considers the makeup of students' neighborhoods in deciding where they will go to school.
Berkeley's policy "does not show partiality, prejudice or preference to any student on the basis of that student's race," said the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco. "All students in a given residential area are treated equally."
The ruling is the first by an appellate court on a school district's voluntary integration plan since California voters passed Proposition 209 in 1996, prohibiting preferences by race or sex in state and local education, employment and contracting.
The case could be heading for the state Supreme Court for a decision on whether Prop. 209 forbids any consideration of race in government programs. The court interpreted the initiative broadly in a 2000 contracting case, its only ruling on Prop. 209, but did not say it whether it prohibited all government programs aimed at promoting racial diversity.
Alan Foutz, a Pacific Legal Foundation attorney representing a nonprofit organization that challenged the Berkeley program, said his client would probably appeal to the state Supreme Court, though no final decision has been made. He said the ruling "undermined (Prop. 209's) mandate for colorblind educational policy by allowing districts to continue using race in (their) student assignment decisions."
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Commie lib ‘RATS love to play around with the race thing. To them, it’s a tool. Sick bass turds.
there are always unintended consequences to this...using geographical quotas is not the same thing as using race. However, other majority and minority groups may see this as an easy ‘in’ to a school. Just move into a low-scoring predominately minority district to gain easy entrance to an otherwise unattainable school.
When you add in illegals aren’t white males now a minority in California? Aren’t they due minority rights under the law?
Yup. Two wrongs make a right.
Racism is apparently permissible according to the court.
Of course not. It isn’t about fairness. Its about getting even.
White males are the doormat of our modern society. It's perfectly ok to make fun of us, discriminate against us, and confiscate our wages.
All the while, we are expected to work hard and produce, because they need us to pay our "fair share"....
"Using neighborhood demographics when assigning students to schools is not discriminatory," Justice Patricia Sepulveda said in the 3-0 ruling. "The challenged policy does not use racial classifications; in fact, it does not consider an individual student's race at all."
The way that they can look you right in the eye and tell you a boldfaced lie is just astonishing. Utterly soulless vermin.
Liberalism is truly a cancer that eats away not only the mind but simultaneously the heart and soul as well.
University of Delaware Diversity Task Force Urges Unlawful Actions
democracy-project.com | March 16, 2009 | Winfield Myers
Posted on 03/16/2009 11:24:34 AM PDT by neverdem
Yeah...probably Democrats who told them to leave the black guys at home......read UNFOUNDED LOYALTY by Wayne Perryman, an African American researcher/writer.
Certainly no Conservatives of the time would say such a thing.
Nope. Whites aren't a race, just white. And if you are a white Christian, they can call you a racist AND bash your religion without repercussions.
Have you read UNFOUNDED LOYALTY.....???
This is reverse redlining.
That is, by California legal rulings and Federal Law, by definition a form of racism according to National Commission on Fair Housing and The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund (LCCREF).
There is a definite avenue of appeal for this case based on extensive case law regarding redlining and CREF lawsuits.
Well, sure. Everybody knows if you grow up in a black neighborhood it’s very difficult to learn. But if all your neighbors are Asian, life is easy for you.
This is no different from the admissions practice of Jim Crow; only the races have been changed to protect the guilty.
Well the answer if for every American to list their race
as “other.” Probably most of us have some other race
as part of our heritage. So....we just claim that
race as our own identity.
At least then if there is a specific race that is supposed
to be the beneficiary of all the goodies, the gov’t will
have to get very specific. Could get interesting.
Whites discarded their racial identity long ago as an olive branch to minorities.
The expectation was that we would all discard our racial identities but the gesture was regarded as an act of the guilty.
Now, every other race wallows in its own racial pride rather than uniting thanks to the Left.
This is "reverse red-lining". No joke. Any honest court would see this.
Good luck finding one.
There may be a much higher demand for slum homes ... buy one just before sending in your child's application to UC Berkeley, get in based on "diversity", and sell it to someone with a kid graduating the next year. It could boost housing values in the worst slums of California, while making the racists in the UC system feel good about themselves. It's still stupid, but at least it's fun stupidity.
These “Judges” are the ultimate COUNTER-intellectuals!