The Ben Shapiro Show - Affirmative Action Is DEAD

00:00:00.000 So it's a historic decision from the United States Supreme Court.

00:00:02.000 They've now struck down affirmative action in college admissions.

00:00:06.000 It was a violation of the 14th Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause, which suggests that all human beings, regardless of their race, have to be treated equally under the law.

00:00:14.000 And there are a bunch of reasons why they struck it down.

00:00:16.000 We're going to go through the opinion in full detail.

00:00:18.000 Let's start with this.

00:00:18.000 Affirmative action is deeply unfair on every level.

00:00:21.000 Doesn't matter what race you are talking about. 0.57

00:00:24.000 If one race is able to get into college with scores that are 200 points below another race, that is obviously racist and it's obviously discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause.

00:00:32.000 That's exactly what was happening when it came to Harvard University as well as the University of North Carolina.

00:00:37.000 Both of those particular colleges were the ones who were named in this lawsuit.

00:00:42.000 The statistics that are cited in the in the actual Supreme Court opinion showing Harvard's attempts to boost minority enrollment demonstrate the disparity between performances for the groups that got in and the groups that did not get in.

00:00:55.000 According to the Supreme Court, Here were the top academic decal chances of getting into college.

00:01:01.000 So you're the top performing people in your particular group, top 10%.

00:01:06.000 So if you are a top 10% performing Asian, you had a 12.7% chance in terms of getting into Harvard.

00:01:13.000 If you are a top performing white student, top tactile, right, meaning the top 10%, this means you had a 15.3% chance of being admitted to Harvard.

00:01:21.000 If you were Hispanic, you had a 31.3% chance of being admitted to Harvard.

00:01:25.000 And if you were black, you had a 56% chance of being admitted to Harvard.

00:01:29.000 These are people with the same scores.

00:01:32.000 What's even more astonishing is that when you actually look at this chart, you will find that if you are in the fourth academic tactile, meaning that you perform better than 40% of people, You perform better than 40% of other students when it comes to test scores and GPA.

00:01:49.000 If you are white, you have less than a 2% chance of getting in.

00:01:51.000 If you're Asian, you have less than 1% chance of getting in.

00:01:53.000 If you're Hispanic, you have a 5% chance of getting in.

00:01:55.000 If you are black, you have a 12.8% chance of getting in.

00:01:58.000 This means you have a better shot of getting into Harvard if you're a black student who performed better than 40% of the population than if you're an Asian student who performed better than 90% of the population. 0.97

00:02:10.000 Hey, that's insane. 0.92

00:02:11.000 And that disparity is obviously racist.

00:02:14.000 This means a discrepancy in scores of 200 up to 300 points between Black students who are getting into Harvard and Asian students who are getting into Harvard.

00:02:21.000 And it's Asians who are suffering the most under this regime because obviously the discrimination has to come at somebody's cost.

00:02:28.000 There's only one slot.

00:02:28.000 That slot goes to somebody.

00:02:29.000 If it goes to a Black underperforming student, it does not go to an Asian overperforming student. 0.92

00:02:36.000 Asians are overrepresented relative to their share of the population because Asians overperform when it comes to things like the math SAT. 0.81

00:02:42.000 As Wesley Yang points out, in 2016, there were 48,000 whites, 52,800 Asians, 4,800 Hispanics,

00:02:49.000 and just 2,200 blacks who scored above 700 on the math SAT.

00:02:53.000 Asians represent 6% of the overall population.

00:02:57.000 They represent almost half of the people who on the SAT get over a 700.

00:03:01.000 And those are the people who are being hurt when somebody else's slot, when their slot goes to somebody else.

00:03:09.000 It's a massive failure.

00:03:10.000 It's not just that.

00:03:11.000 Affirmative action on its own terms fails.

00:03:14.000 This idea that affirmative action is the rung up, it is the pathway to success for black students in America, it's just not true.

00:03:21.000 Steven and Abigail Thornstrom wrote years and years ago for The Atlantic and for the Brookings Institute.

00:03:26.000 They concluded, quote, not only did significant advances in black income increases predate the affirmative action era, the benefits of race conscious policies are not clear.

00:03:36.000 In the decades since affirmative action policies were first instituted, the poverty rate has remained basically unchanged.

00:03:40.000 Despite black gains by numerous other measures, close to 30% of black families still live below the poverty line.

00:03:45.000 And then there's a bigger problem, which is that even the students who get into places like Harvard or Yale for affirmative action, because they were the top performing black students, but because they're performing maybe in middle of the pack in terms of overall student body, they're also more likely to drop out by leaps and bounds.

00:04:02.000 In fact, according to Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor in The Atlantic in 2012, mismatched black students, meaning students who got in through significant affirmative action, are twice as likely to be derailed from pursuing a doctorate and an academic career because if you succeed at Northwestern because you're a really, really good black student and then you go on to get your MD, that is a better career path than getting into Yale and then flunking out.

00:04:22.000 Black law school grads are currently four times as likely to fail the bar as their white counterparts.

00:04:25.000 Black college freshmen want to go into science or engineering more than white students but are twice as likely to drop out as of 2012.

00:04:30.000 And about half of black college students ranked in the bottom 20% of their classes and the bottom 10% in law schools.

00:04:36.000 They were overrepresented in terms of the underperforming students in the schools they actually got into, which makes a lot of sense.

00:04:42.000 Again, if you compare them in terms of test scores, black students who got into Affirmative Action to other students, of course they're underperforming. 0.99

00:04:48.000 That's why they required the Affirmative Action. 0.98

00:04:52.000 Now there is this idea that the best way to remedy historic injustices is to treat people as groups and then give them a quote-unquote leg up.

00:04:58.000 But there's no other context in which we would consider this good policy.

00:05:02.000 Take for example, Major League Baseball, just as an example.

00:05:05.000 So Major League Baseball had a color line for the first half century of its existence.

00:05:10.000 It was an evil. 0.74

00:05:11.000 Black players were not allowed to play.

00:05:13.000 This is why the Negro Leagues got started starting in like the 1920s.

00:05:15.000 And there are amazing black players in the Negro Leagues.

00:05:19.000 In 1945, Jackie Robinson is signed by the Brooklyn Dodgers.

00:05:22.000 He makes his first appearance in the Major Leagues by 1947.

00:05:25.000 By 1948, the Negro Leagues are out of existence.

00:05:26.000 Imagine for a second that Major League Baseball had said, we need a quota of black players.

00:05:31.000 We're not just going to take the best black players and then they're going to now play in the Major Leagues because we use the same standards.

00:05:35.000 Either you can hit, you can field, and you can run, or you can't.

00:05:37.000 Imagine if what they had said was, we need, in order to rectify past imbalances, we need to make sure that a certain percentage of Major League Baseball players are black.

00:05:45.000 Because after all, you can't hold people back from the starting line and then fire the gun, as the metaphor goes, and then expect that everybody is going to run equally or evenly.

00:05:54.000 So, what Major League Baseball would do, let's say, as an affirmative action program, is they would now insist that black pitchers would only need to throw two strikes to strike somebody out, and black hitters would get four strikes before they struck out.

00:06:07.000 Would that make black performance overall better?

00:06:08.000 Would that improve black performance?

00:06:10.000 Or would it be lowering the standard, meaning that you don't have to perform as well as a black baseball player in order to succeed in Major League Baseball if the rules were changed just for black players in 1948 in Major League Baseball?

00:06:22.000 Also, would that heighten or would it lower ethnic tensions in Major League Baseball if black players only had to throw two strikes and got four strikes at the plate?

00:06:30.000 That's effectively what we are doing with affirmative action programs. 0.70

00:06:32.000 They are racist. 0.79

00:06:33.000 They also happen to be racist against blacks, not just against Asians. 1.00

00:06:36.000 They're racist against blacks because the assumption is That in America today, blacks, it is impossible for them to succeed. 0.99

00:06:41.000 This can only be the evidence of two things, right? 0.99

00:06:43.000 There are only two possible arguments that blacks are unable to succeed.

00:06:46.000 One was presented by Ketanji Brown-Jackson, who ironically was selected to the Supreme Court specifically because of her race. 0.99

00:06:52.000 And her opinion is a very good example of why we should not do that, because it is a horribly written opinion that is filled with garbage. 0.97

00:06:57.000 We'll get to that in a moment. 0.73

00:06:58.000 But there are only two possible arguments here.

00:07:02.000 One is that black Americans are somehow lesser or inferior, which is just pure racism, and it's not true. 0.97

00:07:08.000 The other is that America is so inherently racist that black Americans will never be able to get ahead. 0.97

00:07:13.000 They will be inherently victimized just because of the color of their skin.

00:07:16.000 That's not true either, but that is the left-wing ideology that supports affirmative action.

00:07:20.000 The problem is there's no endpoint there, and there is no way to cure it, and there's no point at which you say, okay, everybody is now good.

00:07:25.000 Okay, so in a second we're going to get into the actual opinion because it is quite fascinating.

00:07:29.000 We're going to go through the Chief Justice Roberts' opinion.

00:07:32.000 This is a 6-3 decision.

00:07:33.000 He was joined by Thomas Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, so the conservatives on the court, the Republican nominees on the court.

00:07:38.000 We're going to go through his opinion, then we're going to go through Clarence Thomas' concurrence, which is one of the great pieces of legal writing I've ever seen.

00:07:43.000 It really is a tremendous piece of legal writing.

00:07:45.000 And then we're going to get to the Sotomayor dissent. 0.99

00:07:49.000 And then we're gonna get to the Brown-Jackson descent, which is just a horrendous piece of garbage. 1.00

00:07:54.000 We'll go through all of that momentarily. 0.96

00:07:57.000 First, let's talk about sleep quality.

00:07:59.000 So, as you know, my sleep has been rather disturbed for the past couple of months.

00:08:02.000 Not only do we have a baby, we also have a dog, we have a lot going on in the house.

00:08:06.000 Well, poor sleep can cause weight gain, mood issues, poor mental health, and lower productivity.

00:08:09.000 Sleep is, in fact, the foundation of mental and physical health.

00:08:13.000 Having a consistent nighttime routine is imperative.

00:08:15.000 So if you're struggling with sleep, you need to check out Beam Organics.

00:08:18.000 Beam Organics, they have a top selling Beam Dream formula.

00:08:22.000 Dream is formulated to help ease your body into rest and support all four stages of the sleep cycle with no next day grogginess.

00:08:27.000 Dream contains a powerful blend of all natural premium sleep promoted ingredients and is tested for high quality efficacy to help you wake up refreshed.

00:08:35.000 Just mix Beam Dream into hot water or milk, stir or froth, and enjoy before bedtime.

00:08:38.000 Today, my listeners get a special discount on Beam's new formula of Dream Powder and their best-selling healthy hot cocoa for sleep.

00:08:44.000 With only 15 calories, no added sugar, great way to drift off to dreamland.

00:08:48.000 Better sleep has never tasted better.

00:08:50.000 If you want to try Beam's best-selling Dream Powder, get up to 40% off for a limited time when you go to shopbeam.com slash Ben.

00:08:55.000 Use code Ben at checkout.

00:08:56.000 That's shopbeam.com slash Ben.

00:08:59.000 Use code Ben for up to 40% off.

00:09:01.000 Okay, so let's go through some of this opinion.

00:09:04.000 So the opinion is written by Chief Justice Roberts.

00:09:08.000 I assume because it's a broad majority and also because he, I think, wants to moderate a couple of aspects of the Thomas opinion.

00:09:16.000 He wants to leave a loophole, as we'll get to in a second.

00:09:18.000 This is very typical for Justice Roberts, but it is a very well-written opinion.

00:09:22.000 So here's some of what Justice Roberts writes.

00:09:24.000 And by the way, the entire compendium of this case is about 240 pages.

00:09:27.000 So, Justice Roberts says, despite our early recognition of the broad sweep of the Equal Protection Clause, this court, alongside the country, quickly failed to live up to the clause's core commitments.

00:09:36.000 For almost a century after the Civil War, state-mandated segregation was in many parts of the nation a regrettable norm.

00:09:41.000 By 1950, the inevitable truth of the 14th Amendment had begun to reemerge.

00:09:45.000 Separate cannot be equal. 1.00

00:09:47.000 These decisions reflect the core purpose of the Equal Protection Clause, doing away with all governmentally imposed discrimination based on race.

00:09:52.000 So one thing that the Roberts opinion, the Thomas concurrence, and the dissents have in common is they try to go through America's racial history in sort of one document.

00:10:02.000 And what Roberts is pointing out here is that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment mandates it was passed on the senate 1866 ratified by 1868 and it mandates that every person born or naturalized in the united states including people who are formerly enslaved must be must be given equal protection under the laws and what that was meant to do as justice thomas goes into detail about was ensure that black people were not different were not differently treated by the law than white people and asian people were not differently treated by the law than black people and everybody was treated the same based on race

00:10:35.000 Robert says, eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.

00:10:39.000 And the Equal Protection Clause, we have accordingly held applies without regard to

00:10:42.000 any differences of race, of color, or of nationality. It is universal in its application.

00:10:46.000 For the guarantee of equal protection cannot mean one thing when applied to one individual

00:10:50.000 and something else when applied to a person of another color. And those are citations to

00:10:54.000 prior cases. So the list of affirmative action decisions, the big decision that everybody is

00:11:01.000 is worried about is a case called Grutter v. Volinger.

00:11:04.000 Grutter v. Bollinger followed on the heels of another case called Bakke.

00:11:08.000 So Bakke basically said affirmative action regimes are, we think, kind of okay, but it was kind of unclear.

00:11:14.000 Grutter v. Bollinger was designed to essentially soften that and make way for the possibility of getting rid of affirmative action at some point in the future.

00:11:23.000 It was a five-floor split opinion, was Grutter v. Bollinger.

00:11:27.000 The majority opinion was by Sandra Day O'Connor.

00:11:30.000 And the court held that the Equal Protection Clause did not prohibit Michigan Law School using, in narrowly tailored ways, race and admissions to further a compelling interest.

00:11:40.000 Now, the problem is they never really defined a compelling interest.

00:11:41.000 Gertrude W. Bollinger's very, very badly decided decision.

00:11:45.000 And the decision also suggests that sometime in the future, I mean, they openly state in this decision that sometime in the future, 25 years from now, perhaps, we will change our minds about this.

00:11:54.000 Well, it's been 20 years since Gertrude W. Bollinger, and now was apparently the time This is what the court points out.

00:12:01.000 Gruner concluded with the following caution, quote, it has been 25 years since Justice Powell first approved

00:12:06.000 the use of race to further an interest in student body diversity

00:12:08.000 in the context of public higher education.

00:12:11.000 We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary

00:12:14.000 to further the interest approved today.

00:12:16.000 20 years later, says the court, no end is in sight.

00:12:20.000 Yet both of these colleges insist the use of race in their admissions programs must continue.

00:12:24.000 In other words, there is no actual defining feature to the timeline that was set out by the court.

00:12:29.000 and colleges are taking advantage of that.

00:12:32.000 They have no end goal, in other words.

00:12:35.000 The court says the question whether a particular mix of minority students produces, quote, engaged and productive citizens, sufficiently enhanced appreciation, respect, and empathy, or effectively trains future leaders is standardless.

00:12:45.000 The interests respondents seek, though plainly worthy, are inescapably imponderable.

00:12:49.000 In other words, there's a constitutional standard when you examine a law that appears to violate the Equal Protection Clause.

00:12:56.000 It's called strict scrutiny.

00:12:57.000 Basically, strict scrutiny says you have to have a really, really, really, really, really super good reason for violating the Equal Protection Clause.

00:13:04.000 And that super really really really good reason has to be something like you're trying to avoid a race riot at a prison.

00:13:09.000 So you separate the blacks and the whites at a prison because you're afraid that the Nazi gang is going to fight the black gang or something.

00:13:15.000 That's literally the case that they cite in this case.

00:13:17.000 Other than that, what compelling interest is there in treating people of different races differently under the law?

00:13:24.000 And the answer is none.

00:13:25.000 You can't say things like, we need quote-unquote diversity.

00:13:28.000 Nobody knows what that means.

00:13:31.000 For example, when is a standard of diversity actually reached?

00:13:33.000 Does it have to be representative of the general population?

00:13:37.000 And also, what are the gains of diversity?

00:13:39.000 Just because you have now represented the general population, how is that better?

00:13:43.000 Explain how that makes things better.

00:13:44.000 This is what the court is pointing out.

00:13:47.000 Universities may define their missions as they see fit, says Roberts.

00:13:49.000 The Constitution defines ours.

00:13:52.000 Courts may not license separating students on the basis of race without an exceedingly persuasive justification that is measurable and concrete enough to permit judicial review.

00:14:00.000 This is what we were talking about.

00:14:01.000 Black students are getting in. 0.99

00:14:02.000 Asians are getting booted. 1.00

00:14:03.000 to some applicants but not to others necessarily advantages of the former group at the expense of

00:14:07.000 the latter. This is what we were talking about. Black students are getting in, Asians are getting

00:14:11.000 booted. So by the way are Jewish students. According to the court, we have time and again 0.97

00:14:15.000 forcefully rejected the notion that government actors may intentionally allocate preference to

00:14:19.000 those who have little in common with one another but the color of their skin.

00:14:22.000 The entire point of the Equal Protection Clause is that treating someone differently because of their skin color is not like treating them differently because they are from a city or from a suburb or because they play the violin poorly or well.

00:14:31.000 In other words, in the dissents, there's a lot of talk about, well, a seventh generation legacy white student who has the following characteristics versus a poor black student.

00:14:39.000 But the point the court is making is you can say poor without saying black.

00:14:44.000 Because it turns out there are lots of rich black people in this country too.

00:14:47.000 Like Bronnie James is doing just fine.

00:14:50.000 This belief that just because you are a member of a particular race you are therefore disadvantaged in some unspecified way compared to a white person from Appalachia or an Asian student who's studying in the closet because mommy can't afford the electricity to be available in another room in the apartment.

00:15:05.000 They don't have an extra room in the apartment.

00:15:08.000 People come in varieties of life experiences of various different races, says the court.

00:15:14.000 In the years after Bakke, the court repeatedly held that ameliorating societal discrimination does not constitute a compelling interest that justifies race-based state action.

00:15:21.000 We reached the same conclusion in Croson, a case that concerned a preferential government contracting program, permitting past societal discrimination to serve as the basis for rigid racial preferences would be to open the door to competing claims for remedial relief for every disadvantaged group.

00:15:33.000 And this is forcefully rejecting the idea that affirmative action is designed in order to remediate past discrimination because, again, that looks a lot more like the Major League Baseball example we're talking about.

00:15:41.000 And also, at what point do you decide which groups have had enough relief and which groups now deserve more relief?

00:15:46.000 The opinion concludes, while the dissent would certainly not permit university programs that discriminated against Black and Latino applicants, it is perfectly willing to let the programs here continue.

00:15:56.000 In its view, this court is supposed to tell state actors when they have picked the right races to benefit.

00:16:00.000 Separate but equal is inherently unequal, said Brown vs. Board.

00:16:03.000 It depends, says the dissent.

00:16:05.000 That is a remarkable view of the judicial role.

00:16:07.000 Remarkably wrong.

00:16:08.000 Lost in the false pretense of judicial humility that the dissent espouses is a claim to power so radical, so destructive, it required a second founding to undo.

00:16:15.000 So the claim here is...

00:16:16.000 You say that you are in favor of affirmative action to quote-unquote end discrimination and yet you are promulgating discrimination.

00:16:21.000 You're basically on the side of people who are using the law in order to discriminate.

00:16:25.000 You're just doing it for a different race and that is unacceptable under the law. 1.00

00:16:28.000 We'll get to the loophole in the Roberts opinion in just one second because it's a dangerous loophole.

00:16:31.000 First, Let's talk about something amazing that you can do for your parents.

00:16:37.000 You know, you can do it for yourself.

00:16:39.000 Out in your garage right now, you got a bunch of boxes of old film reels, old VHS tapes, old pictures.

00:16:45.000 And all that stuff is just falling apart.

00:16:46.000 You don't have a VHS player anymore.

00:16:48.000 You don't have a VCR.

00:16:48.000 So what are you going to do with it?

00:16:49.000 You're going to send it over to Legacy Box and you're going to preserve it forever.

00:16:52.000 Do you know where that box of old home movies is?

00:16:54.000 Well, it's moldering out in the garage.

00:16:55.000 Stop that.

00:16:56.000 Instead, send it to Legacy Box.

00:16:57.000 They've helped my dad preserve and relive some of his most treasured memories.

00:17:00.000 Using their all-in-one kit, he sends in old tapes and film, their team of experts digitize them by hand with the utmost care and attention.

00:17:06.000 In just a few short weeks, he received his originals back along with beautifully crafted digital copies he can easily share with our family and friends.

00:17:12.000 It's incredible to be able to access some of these old home videos because you can see memories that have been basically buried for decades on end.

00:17:18.000 The best part, with LegacyBox's exclusive tracking system, you'll know exactly where your order is every step of the way.

00:17:22.000 It's a fantastic service.

00:17:23.000 I've used it for my parents.

00:17:24.000 I've used it for my wife's parents.

00:17:25.000 We've used it ourselves.

00:17:26.000 Don't let the summers heat age.

00:17:27.000 Your videotapes, film reels, and fader photos.

00:17:29.000 LegacyBox is right now offering my listeners an incredible $9 tape offer that's over 60% off.

00:17:34.000 It's an exclusive offer for my listeners.

00:17:35.000 Visit Legacybox.com slash Shapiro.

00:17:37.000 Shop $9 tape and film transfers.

00:17:38.000 There's a limited quantity available.

00:17:40.000 They are selling fast.

00:17:40.000 That's Legacybox.com slash Shapiro.

00:17:43.000 Okay, so the loophole in the Roberts opinion is the one that the left is looking to exploit.

00:17:49.000 So the opinion says, quote, at the same time, as all parties agree, nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant's discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.

00:18:01.000 But despite the dissent's assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today.

00:18:08.000 A dissenting opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.

00:18:13.000 They literally put that in parentheses, which is basically saying, don't listen to Ketanji Brown-Jackson. 0.90

00:18:16.000 You can't write an essay about how being black in America just means that you have it worse off because you're black.

00:18:21.000 We don't believe that and we are not going to allow any university to establish that as the standard. 0.97

00:18:25.000 That instead of you essentially writing, checking a box on your form that says black, instead you just write in your essay, I am black, like a hundred times.

00:18:34.000 And then the college admits you.

00:18:35.000 And don't look to Ketanji Brown Jackson's standard for what now counts as admissible criteria.

00:18:41.000 Now, this does leave the door open to future problems, right?

00:18:44.000 You can see colleges attempting to end around this.

00:18:46.000 In fact, University of California has been doing this for years.

00:18:49.000 California actually banned affirmative action in 1996 and then re-upped that in 2020, as you'll recall.

00:18:56.000 And if you look at the admitted students at UCLA by race and ethnicity, one of the things that you'll notice is that as of 2021, They were back to levels of black tenants at the UCs that they haven't seen since 1995.

00:19:07.000 One of the ways that they've been doing that is by banning tests.

00:19:10.000 And they'll say, we don't take SAT.

00:19:12.000 We don't take GPA.

00:19:13.000 We'll create all sorts of weird new standards in order to effectively avoid the ban on affirmative action.

00:19:21.000 So could that happen?

00:19:22.000 Sure.

00:19:22.000 But is the court going to put a pretty skeptical eye on that?

00:19:24.000 You would imagine the answer there is yes.

00:19:27.000 Now, all of this leads up to one of the best concurrences ever written.

00:19:32.000 Honestly, Roberts should have just let Thomas write the opinion.

00:19:34.000 But the problem is that Roberts always wants to buy it back a little bit.

00:19:37.000 And that's why he added that loophole.

00:19:39.000 Thomas certainly would not have.

00:19:40.000 Thomas would have just said, listen, you try to claim that race is the establishing factor for you in why you should get into a college?

00:19:47.000 The answer is no.

00:19:48.000 So Thomas's opinion is fantastic.

00:19:51.000 And of course, Clarence Thomas can speak to this, growing up the grandson of sharecroppers.

00:19:55.000 Who is now on the Supreme Court of the United States.

00:19:57.000 I know that we're all supposed to pretend that Ketanji Brown-Jackson is somehow emblematic of the black racial experience in America.

00:20:03.000 Actually, Clarence Thomas is much more emblematic of the black racial experience in America, considering that he's much older and actively grew up in a time before the civil rights movement had had full effect.

00:20:13.000 As opposed to, say, Ketanji Brown-Jackson.

00:20:17.000 Brown-Jackson is, uh, how old is she?

00:20:19.000 She is currently 52 years of age.

00:20:23.000 Which means that she was born in like the early 70s.

00:20:26.000 Okay, Clarence Thomas was born In 1948.

00:20:32.000 So he had a lot more experience with discrimination than Katonji Brown Jackson.

00:20:37.000 So Thomas writes, quote, In the wake of the Civil War, the country focused its attention on restoring the Union and establishing the legal status of newly freed slaves.

00:20:44.000 The Constitution was amended to abolish slavery and proclaim that all persons born in the United States are citizens entitled to the privileges or immunities of citizenship and the equal protection of the laws.

00:20:52.000 Because of that second founding, our Constitution is colorblind and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.

00:20:59.000 Again, I've said for literally my entire legal career, Thomas is the best justice on the court.

00:21:11.000 He has always been, in my view, the best justice on the court.

00:21:14.000 I love Justice Scalia.

00:21:15.000 He was great.

00:21:16.000 He's a terrific writer.

00:21:17.000 Clarence Thomas is clear, he's concise, and he makes his case very persuasively.

00:21:22.000 In the 1860s, says Thomas, Congress proposed and the states ratified the 13th and 14th Amendments.

00:21:27.000 And with the authority conferred by these amendments, Congress passed two landmark Civil Rights Acts.

00:21:31.000 Throughout the debates on each of these measures, their proponents repeatedly affirmed their view of equal citizenship and the racial equality that flows from it.

00:21:38.000 In fact, they held this principle so deeply that their crowning accomplishment, the 14th Amendment, ensures racial equality with no textual reference to race whatsoever.

00:21:45.000 The history of these measures enactment renders their motivating principle as clear as their text.

00:21:49.000 All citizens of the United States, regardless of skin color, are equal before the law.

00:21:54.000 However, says Thomas, despite the extensive evidence favoring the colorblind view as detailed above, it appears increasingly in vogue to embrace an anti-subordination view of the 14th Amendment, that the amendment forbids only laws that hurt but not help blacks.

00:22:06.000 Such a theory lacks any basis in the original meaning of the 14th Amendment.

00:22:11.000 He says three aspects of today's decision weren't common.

00:22:13.000 First, to satisfy strict scrutiny, universities must be able to establish an actual link between racial discrimination and educational benefits.

00:22:20.000 Second, those engaged in racial discrimination do not deserve deference with respect to their reasons for discriminating.

00:22:26.000 And third, attempts to remedy past governmental discrimination must be closely tailored to address that particular past governmental discrimination.

00:22:34.000 The court, he says, makes clear that in the future, universities wishing to discriminate based on race and admissions must articulate and justify a compelling and measurable state interest based on concrete evidence.

00:22:43.000 Given the strictures set out by this court, I highly doubt any will be able to do so.

00:22:48.000 And then he points out that without guardrails suggesting colorblindness, the 14th Amendment would, quote, become self-defeating, promising a nation based on equality, but yielding a quota and case-ridden society steeped in race-based discrimination.

00:23:03.000 Now the best part of Thomas' opinion is where he just destroys Jackson's dissent.

00:23:08.000 So Jackson's dissent, which we'll get to momentarily, is truly an awful piece of writing.

00:23:12.000 It is evidence, in and of itself, that affirmative action picks are not good.

00:23:15.000 She was literally picked because Joe Biden said he wanted a black woman.

00:23:18.000 His words, not mine.

00:23:21.000 But it is amazing how Thomas just stomps the dissent in this particular concurrence.

00:23:29.000 He says, Justice Jackson has a different view.

00:23:32.000 Rather than focusing on individuals as individuals, her dissent focuses on the historical subjugation of Black Americans, invoking statistical racial gaps to argue in favor of defining and categorizing individuals by their race.

00:23:44.000 As she sees things, we are all inexorably trapped in a fundamentally racist society, with the original sin of slavery and the historical subjugation of Black Americans still determining our lives today.

00:23:54.000 The panacea, she counsels, is to unquestioningly accede to the view of elite experts and reallocate society's riches by racial means as necessary to quote-unquote level the playing field, all as judged by racial metrics.

00:24:04.000 I strongly disagree.

00:24:06.000 He says Justice Jackson would replace the second founder's vision with an organizing principle based on race.

00:24:11.000 In fact, on her view, almost all of life's outcomes may be unhesitatingly ascribed to race.

00:24:15.000 This is so, she writes, because of statistical disparities among different racial groups.

00:24:19.000 Even if some whites have a lower household net worth than some blacks, what matters to Justice Jackson is that the average white household has more wealth than the average black household.

00:24:27.000 This lore is not and has never been true.

00:24:29.000 Even in the segregated South where I grew up, individuals were not the sum of their skin color.

00:24:33.000 Then as now, not all disparities are based on race, not all people are racist, and not all differences between individuals are ascribable to race.

00:24:40.000 Put simply, the fate of abstract categories of wealth statistics is not the same as the fate of a given set of flesh and blood human beings.

00:24:45.000 That's a quote from Thomas Sowell.

00:24:48.000 Worse yet, says Thomas, Justice Jackson uses her broad observations about statistical relationships between race and select measures of health, wealth, and well-being to label all blacks as victims.

00:24:56.000 Her desire to do so is unfathomable to me.

00:25:00.000 I cannot deny, says Justice Thomas, the great accomplishments of black Americans, including those who succeeded despite long odds.

00:25:05.000 Nor do Justice Jackson's statistics regarding a correlation between levels of health, wealth, and well-being between selected racial groups prove anything.

00:25:12.000 Of course, none of those statistics are capable of drawing a direct causal link between race rather than socionomic status or any other factor in individual outcomes.

00:25:19.000 In fact, as we'll see, in the opinion, Justice Jackson specifically cites a stat that is just wrong.

00:25:24.000 It's just not a true stat. 0.89

00:25:25.000 Talking about how black patients with black doctors are more likely to suffer maternal health effects, are less likely to suffer bad maternal health effects, so you need black doctors in order to stop black women from their babies dying. 1.00

00:25:38.000 That's rooted in false statistics. 0.94

00:25:40.000 Justice Jackson cites it anyway.

00:25:42.000 Because she's just using Ibram X. Kendi as her Supreme Court guide.

00:25:45.000 Her basic premise is the exact same as Ibram X. Kendi's.

00:25:49.000 Any disparity is the result of discrimination.

00:25:51.000 If black Americans are underperforming on the SATs, that must be slavery and Jim Crow. 1.00

00:25:54.000 It can't be because a bunch of people are dropping out of high school or because they're not studying as much.

00:26:01.000 Justice Jackson supplies the link herself, the legacy of slavery, and the nature of inherited wealth.

00:26:05.000 This, she claims, locks blacks into a seemingly perpetual inferior caste.

00:26:09.000 Such a view is irrational.

00:26:10.000 It is an insult to individual achievement and cancerous to young minds seeking to push through barriers rather than consign themselves to permanent victimhood.

00:26:17.000 If an applicant has less financial means because of generational inheritance or otherwise, then surely a university may take that into account.

00:26:23.000 As Thomas is saying, if you apply to a college and you say, I grew up really poor and I had to work my way Through high school because my parents didn't have enough money to pay for shoes.

00:26:32.000 That obviously is relevant to your college experience and that will be taken into account, but that's not what she's talking about.

00:26:37.000 She says if you just write, I am black on your application, you should get points for that. 1.00

00:26:42.000 If an applicant has medical struggles or a family member with medical concerns, the university may consider that too, says Thomas.

00:26:47.000 What it cannot do is use the applicant's skin color as a heuristic, assuming that because the applicant checks the box for black, he therefore conforms to the university's monolithic and reductionist view of an abstract average black person.

00:26:58.000 Accordingly, Justice Jackson's race-infused worldview falls flat at each step.

00:27:02.000 Individuals are the sum of their unique experiences, challenges, and accomplishments.

00:27:05.000 What matters is not the barriers they face, but how they choose to confront them.

00:27:08.000 And their race is not to blame for everything, good or bad, that happens in their lives.

00:27:11.000 A contrary, myopic worldview based on individual skin color to the total exclusion of their personal choices is nothing short of racial determinism.

00:27:19.000 In a brutal language, and absolutely appropriate in this case, Tom is just ripping into Jackson.

00:27:24.000 He doesn't stop there.

00:27:26.000 He says, unsurprisingly, this tried and failed system defies both law and reason.

00:27:30.000 Start with the obvious.

00:27:31.000 If social reorganization in the name of equality may be justified by the mere fact of statistical disparities among racial groups, then that reorganization must continue until these disparities are fully eliminated, regardless of the reasons for the disparities and the cost of their elimination.

00:27:44.000 If blacks fail a test at higher rates than their white counterparts, regardless of whether the reason for the disparity has anything at all to do with race, the only solution will be race-focused measures. 0.74

00:27:52.000 If those measures were to result in blacks failing at yet higher rates, the only solution would be to double down. 1.00

00:27:57.000 In fact, there would seem to be no logical limit to what the government may do to level the racial playing field.

00:28:01.000 Outright wealth transfers, quota systems, racial preferences would all seem permissible.

00:28:05.000 In such a system, it would not matter how many innocents suffer race-based injuries. 0.53

00:28:09.000 All that would matter is reaching the race-based goal. 0.97

00:28:10.000 Worse, the classifications that Justice Jackson draws are themselves race-based stereotypes.

00:28:15.000 She focuses, in her opinion, on two hypothetical applicants, John and James, competing for admission to University of North Carolina.

00:28:22.000 John is a white seventh-generation legacy at the school, while James is black and would be the first in his family to attend.

00:28:27.000 Justice Jackson argues that race-conscious admission programs are necessary to adequately compare the two applicants.

00:28:32.000 As an initial matter, it's not clear why James' race is the only factor that would encourage UNC to admit him.

00:28:37.000 His status as a first-generation college applicant seems to contextualize his application, says Thomas.

00:28:40.000 Right, you don't have to mention his race, just say he's a first-generation guy trying to get into college.

00:28:43.000 But, setting that aside, why is it that John should be judged based on the action of his great-great-grandparents?

00:28:49.000 And what would Justice Jackson say to John when deeming him not worthy of admission?

00:28:57.000 How, for example, says Thomas, would Justice Jackson explain the need for race-based preferences to the Chinese student who has worked hard his entire life, only to be denied college admission in part because of his skin color?

00:29:08.000 If such a burden would seem difficult to impose on a bright-eyed young person, that's because it should be.

00:29:12.000 History has taught us to abhor theories that call for elites to pick racial winners and losers in the name of sociological experimentation.

00:29:19.000 And then in a ringing endorsement of the meritocratic system, which is absolutely correct, Thomas says, In fact, meritocratic systems have long refuted bigoted misperceptions of what black students can accomplish.

00:29:28.000 I have always viewed higher education's purpose as imparting knowledge and skills to students rather than a communal rubber stamp credentialing process.

00:29:35.000 I continue to strongly believe and have never doubted that blacks can achieve in every avenue of American life without the meddling of university administrators.

00:29:41.000 Meritocratic systems with objective grading scales are critical to that belief.

00:29:45.000 Such skills have always been a great equalizer, offering a metric for achievement that bigotry could not alter.

00:29:49.000 Racial preferences take away this benefit, eliminating the very metric by which those who have the most to prove can clearly demonstrate their accomplishments both to themselves and to others.

00:29:57.000 The point that Thomas is making right there is that if you use a meritocratic system, this means that when you have a black doctor, your first thought isn't, did that guy get in through affirmative action?

00:30:06.000 Do I have to worry about his skill set?

00:30:08.000 Which is a normal thought if the person was admitted based on a group stereotype as opposed to on, you know, the basis of a great score.

00:30:15.000 If we use actual test scores, then this means that I know that everybody who got into Harvard had a 1500 on their SAT.

00:30:21.000 That means everybody who got into Harvard is smart.

00:30:22.000 But if some people are getting in with a 1200, and I know who those people probably are statistically, because only certain groups get the affirmative action benefits, am I more likely to go to the black doctor?

00:30:32.000 Or am I less likely to go to the black doctor?

00:30:34.000 It is a stereotype that black people have to carry around with them throughout their lives, even after having gotten the credential.

00:30:42.000 Okay, so this brings us to Katonji Brown-Jackson's dissent. 0.93

00:30:44.000 It is a disaster area.

00:30:46.000 It is an absolute bleep show and disaster area is Katonji Brown-Jackson's dissent.

00:30:51.000 As you would imagine, there are no less than two justices who are currently sitting on the Supreme Court who are appointed explicitly for their race and for their ethnicity.

00:31:00.000 Sonia Sotomayor was selected by Barack Obama because she was a quote-unquote wise Latina woman Which is not a good reason to be selected for the Supreme Court. 1.00

00:31:07.000 And Ketanji Brown-Jackson, because Joe Biden has decided that in order to reach out to black voters, he was going to select black women for high-ranking slots, including vice president and for the Supreme Court of the United States.

00:31:17.000 He pre-committed to selecting a black woman before actually selecting a qualified candidate.

00:31:22.000 The lack of qualifications of Katonji Brown-Jackson are on full display in her wild opinion, which seems like just a paraphrase of Robin DiAngelo's white privilege.

00:31:32.000 We'll get to more on that in just one second.

00:31:33.000 First, if you're hiring, you probably are dealing with a lot of economic uncertainty.

00:31:36.000 Right now, we all are.

00:31:37.000 Right now, it's important to hire the right people faster and more efficiently to keep costs overall down.

00:31:42.000 Thankfully, ZipRecruiter is a hiring partner who's focused on you and your needs.

00:31:45.000 From pricing to technology, everything ZipRecruiter does is for you.

00:31:48.000 What works best for you.

00:31:49.000 Right now you can try them for free at ziprecruiter.com slash dailywire.

00:31:53.000 ZipRecruiter's smart technology identifies the best matches for your job and lets you invite candidates you really want to apply to your job before other businesses can snag them.

00:32:00.000 I love how their pricing is absolutely straightforward.

00:32:02.000 You know what you pay before you post your job.

00:32:03.000 You can stick to your budget with no surprises.

00:32:05.000 Hire the best with the help of a partner who's all about you with ZipRecruiter.

00:32:08.000 Four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within day one.

00:32:12.000 Just go to this exclusive web address to try ZipRecruiter for free.

00:32:15.000 ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire.

00:32:17.000 Again, that's ZipRecruiter.com slash D-A-I-L-Y-W-I-R-E.

00:32:21.000 ZipRecruiter is indeed the smartest way to hire. 0.73

00:32:23.000 Go check them out right now.

00:32:24.000 We've been using them at DailyWire ourselves since like 2017.

00:32:27.000 You should do the same.

00:32:28.000 There's no reason not to use ZipRecruiter in recruiting the best people for your job.

00:32:31.000 ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire.

00:32:34.000 Also, With the 4th of July rapidly approaching, we think it's time to declare your independence from the woke razor companies.

00:32:39.000 Now I know what you're thinking.

00:32:40.000 Inflation is higher than Hunter Biden in Vegas.

00:32:42.000 That's why we're making it easier for you to say goodbye to your old razors.

00:32:44.000 Head on over to jeremysrazors.com right now.

00:32:46.000 Save 40% on our founders and beard kit.

00:32:49.000 You won't just look good, you'll also feel good knowing you're supporting a company that doesn't hate you for being a dude.

00:32:53.000 But don't wait too long, because unlike the effects of gender-affirming hormone therapy, our sale will not last forever.

00:32:58.000 That's jeremysrazors.com today.

00:33:00.000 Okay, this brings us to the Kitanji Brown-Jackson dissent.

00:33:03.000 And again, she is a perfect case of why affirmative action should not be used in hiring. 0.90

00:33:08.000 Because she is truly a terrible justice.

00:33:10.000 This opinion is egregiously bad.

00:33:12.000 It is Ibram X. Kendi, but just shoved into a legal opinion.

00:33:15.000 I mean, there are factual problems with it.

00:33:17.000 She literally cites statistics that are not true.

00:33:20.000 But the overall argument is it's basically the meme by Ryan Long, the comedian, woke and racist.

00:33:27.000 They think the same thing.

00:33:29.000 That's that's her opinion, because her opinion is indistinguishable if you just switch the races from a Ku Klux Klan or circa 1920.

00:33:37.000 Quote, Gulf size race based gaps exist with respect to the health, wealth and well-being of American citizens.

00:33:43.000 They were created in the distant past, but have indisputably been passed down to the present day through the generations.

00:33:47.000 Every moment these gaps persist is a moment in which this country falls short of actualizing one of its foundational principles, the self-evident truth that all of us are created equal.

00:33:56.000 So, she begins with the premise that a disparity is pure evidence of discrimination.

00:34:01.000 Obviously, any disparity is discrimination whatsoever.

00:34:05.000 Yeah, if black Americans are poorer on average than white Americans, it must be that America is a discriminatory system.

00:34:10.000 She fails to explain, for example, how it's discrimination that rationalizes why 99% of people in prison for violent crime are men.

00:34:18.000 That obviously is a form of discrimination against men or something.

00:34:22.000 She also doesn't explain why white people are far more likely to commit suicide than black people, obviously must be past discrimination or something. 0.93

00:34:29.000 Or why the NBA is largely black, must be discrimination. 0.99

00:34:34.000 Right, obviously her argument makes no sense.

00:34:36.000 Anytime there is a disparity between groups, there are multiplicity of causes.

00:34:39.000 Discrimination could be one of those causes, but you actually have to look at the particular circumstances we are talking about here.

00:34:44.000 She says, history speaks. In some form, it can be heard forever. Forever.

00:34:48.000 The race-based gaps that first developed centuries ago are echoes from the past that still exist today. 0.62

00:34:52.000 By all accounts, they are still stark.

00:34:53.000 So she is here saying that we need racial reparations for the rest of time.

00:34:59.000 Literally forever.

00:35:00.000 Forever.

00:35:01.000 Treat different racial groups differently.

00:35:03.000 Forever.

00:35:04.000 Literally forever.

00:35:06.000 And here's where she gets to the best.

00:35:07.000 This is the worst part of her opinion.

00:35:13.000 Well, no, they didn't announce that.

00:35:17.000 The 14th Amendment announced that.

00:35:18.000 It's literally the 14th Amendment.

00:35:20.000 That's the text of the 14th Amendment.

00:35:21.000 But deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life.

00:35:25.000 Well, I mean, but we're talking about the law.

00:35:27.000 We're not talking about in life.

00:35:29.000 In life, there are lots of reasons why people perform differently.

00:35:31.000 There are lots of reasons why some people are richer than other people.

00:35:35.000 It's not all because of the law.

00:35:36.000 The law is the law.

00:35:37.000 It's not the same thing.

00:35:38.000 Having so detached itself from this country's actual past and present experience, the court has now been lured into interfering with the crucial work UNC and other institutions of higher learning are doing to solve America's real-world problems.

00:35:48.000 No one benefits from ignorance, says Ketanji Brown-Jackson.

00:35:51.000 Yes, clearly Clarence Thomas is ignorant of America's discriminatory past. 0.54

00:35:55.000 Having grown up in the sharecropping South. 0.88

00:35:56.000 Nailed it.

00:35:58.000 Although former race-linked legal barriers are gone.

00:36:00.000 So she acknowledges that you are not allowed to have legal barriers.

00:36:04.000 Like by the Constitution or the Civil Rights Act.

00:36:06.000 Race still matters to the lived experiences of all Americans in innumerable ways.

00:36:10.000 And today's ruling makes things worse, not better.

00:36:13.000 So, lived experiences, if you are a Supreme Court Justice and you're citing lived experiences, you're writing crappy college essays that never should have gotten you into high-profile schools in the first place.

00:36:24.000 Lived experiences are not a legal regimen.

00:36:27.000 Lived experiences.

00:36:28.000 Literally try that in any area of law.

00:36:31.000 You walk in for your hearing with the IRS, and the IRS is like, you owe $100,000, you don't share my lived experience.

00:36:36.000 Do you know my lived experience? 0.99

00:36:37.000 The IRS doesn't give a crap. 0.98

00:36:38.000 If you violate the law, you violate the law. 0.99

00:36:40.000 You know what the law is?

00:36:41.000 We don't treat black people differently than white people in this country.

00:36:43.000 That's what the law should be.

00:36:45.000 And vice versa.

00:36:46.000 But Ketanji Brown-Jackson continues, the best that can be said of the majority's perspective is that it proceeds ostrich-like from the hope that preventing consideration of race will end racism.

00:36:56.000 No, that's not what it says.

00:36:58.000 It says that that is a better corrective than treating people differently based on race, which is clearly true. 0.98

00:37:02.000 But if that is its motivation, the majority proceeds in vain.

00:37:05.000 If the colleges of this country are required to ignore a thing that matters, it will not just go away.

00:37:09.000 It will take longer for racism to leave us.

00:37:11.000 Yes, clearly affirmative action has been a massive corrective to racism in America.

00:37:15.000 Nailed it.

00:37:17.000 Ultimately, says Ketanji Brown-Jackson, ignoring race just makes it matter more.

00:37:21.000 This is the line where I was like, okay, that is just a KKK line.

00:37:24.000 Ignoring race just makes it matter more.

00:37:27.000 This is where you get the meme from Predator.

00:37:30.000 The two fists gripping.

00:37:34.000 Ignoring race makes it matter more?

00:37:36.000 This is literally what all racists think!

00:37:40.000 Those of us who are not racist, we look at disparities and we say, well, there are a lot of reasons for those disparities.

00:37:45.000 Crime disparities, for example. 0.89

00:37:46.000 That's not because black people are black. 0.99

00:37:48.000 That's because there are a lot of black people in poverty. 0.98

00:37:49.000 It's because there's a lot of single motherhood. 1.00

00:37:51.000 Like, there are a bunch of reasons why there are disparities in crime statistics.

00:37:53.000 Ketanji Brown Jacks is like, you're ignoring race.

00:37:55.000 Yeah, you know who agrees?

00:37:56.000 The racists.

00:37:58.000 Quote, the only way out of this morass for all of us is to stare at racial disparity unblinkingly and then do what evidence and experts tell us is required to level the playing field and march forward together, collectively striving to achieve true equality for all Americans.

00:38:11.000 It is no small irony that the judgment the majority hands down today will forestall the end of race-based disparities in this country, making the colorblind world the majority wistfully touts much more difficult to accomplish.

00:38:20.000 Ah, yes, full racial communism is the only way to achieve all of this. 0.93

00:38:24.000 Now, Let's take, for example, let's take her at her word.

00:38:27.000 Let's assume that the United States decided that we were going to implement some form of race-based redistribution system. 0.56

00:38:34.000 We were going to spend trillions of dollars.

00:38:36.000 They say the wealth gap is like $110,000 per family, something like that.

00:38:39.000 Let's say that we were to calculate all of that out, we were to do all the math, and we were to, I believe the Brookings Institute did a calculation, spend a couple of trillion dollars just handing checks to every black household to equalize their wealth with white households. 0.55

00:38:54.000 Within a couple of years, differences would emerge again.

00:38:57.000 Not because of racism.

00:38:59.000 Those differences would emerge because people act differently.

00:39:02.000 People act differently.

00:39:04.000 That's the end of the story.

00:39:06.000 It is not up to the law to then rectify the imbalances in the consequences of how people act on the individual level, even if they are grouped differently within racial groups.

00:39:15.000 Again, you can't take a room of 200 people anywhere, divide it down the middle, and assume that the people on one side of the line are going to be equal in a statistical aspect to the people on the other side of the line in literally any way.

00:39:27.000 It won't work for height.

00:39:28.000 It won't work for weight.

00:39:29.000 It won't work for income.

00:39:29.000 It won't work for educational level.

00:39:31.000 That's not how any of this works.

00:39:32.000 And it has nothing to do with race.

00:39:33.000 That's just you draw a line down the middle of a room. 0.62

00:39:35.000 But Katonji Brown Jackson is, in fact, a racist, and so she writes in racist fashion here.

00:39:41.000 Again, I read you that line once more because it is a racist line and there is no way around it.

00:39:45.000 Quote, ultimately ignoring race just makes it matter more.

00:39:50.000 Oh, OK.

00:39:52.000 Sonia Sotomayor, of course, agrees with Katonji Brown Jackson.

00:39:54.000 Again, not a shock.

00:39:55.000 She touted herself as a wise Latina with different life experiences because of her Latina descent.

00:39:59.000 Quote, ignoring race will not equalize a society that is racially unequal.

00:40:03.000 What was true in the 1860s and again in 1954 is true today. 0.98

00:40:07.000 Equality requires acknowledgment of inequality.

00:40:11.000 Man, again, the lines, if a racist said that, equality requires acknowledgment of inequality?

00:40:16.000 Are we talking about inherent inequality or equality of outcome?

00:40:19.000 Like, what are we talking about here?

00:40:20.000 Because that's real ugly language.

00:40:23.000 She said, my favorite part is when Sonia Sotomayor is like, you're not allowed to overrule precedent.

00:40:27.000 Overruling precedent is bad. 0.99

00:40:29.000 My favorite stupid legal argument is when people are like, sorry, decisive says, yeah, give me a break. 0.99

00:40:34.000 Like seriously, no one cares. 1.00

00:40:35.000 You guys didn't care.

00:40:36.000 You're perfectly willing to overturn Bowers versus Hardwick in Lawrence v. Texas.

00:40:40.000 And then you were willing to overturn literally all of American law in Obergefell.

00:40:45.000 You guys are perfectly willing to overturn American law on a routine basis.

00:40:48.000 Roe versus Wade was overturning all American law for two centuries.

00:40:52.000 Don't pretend you care about stare decisis. 0.98

00:40:53.000 it's ridiculous.

00:40:54.000 But, says Sotomayor, it's not a stereotype to acknowledge the basic truth that young 0.88

00:40:57.000 people's experiences are shaded by a societal structure where race matters.

00:41:01.000 Acknowledging there is something special about a student of color who graduates valedictorium

00:41:04.000 from a predominantly white school is not a stereotype.

00:41:07.000 Nor is it a stereotype to acknowledge that race imposes certain burdens on students of

00:41:10.000 color it does not impose on white students.

00:41:12.000 Now that, those two sentences are disconnected.

00:41:15.000 She gives a specific example of an experience that a black person might have that might be different than an experience a white person has.

00:41:21.000 Right?

00:41:21.000 A black person graduating valedictorian from a white school might have a different experience than a white person graduating valedictorian from a white school.

00:41:28.000 Sure, and you can explain that in an essay.

00:41:30.000 Explain how that impacted you.

00:41:32.000 Okay.

00:41:33.000 That's not the same thing as, it is not a stereotype to acknowledge that race imposes certain burdens on students of color.

00:41:38.000 It does not impose on... Yes, it is.

00:41:41.000 Of course, it's a stereotype.

00:41:43.000 I mean, I can tell you it's a stereotype.

00:41:45.000 The only reason that it would not be a stereotype is, ironically, because of affirmative action, which dictates that a black student may have a different educational experience than a white student by law.

00:41:54.000 The best line in the Sotomayor dissent, and it truly is evil, is what she has to say about Asian-Americans. 0.96

00:41:59.000 Because Asian-Americans, again, are the ones getting skunked by affirmative action. 0.96

00:42:01.000 Quote, There is no question that the Asian-American community continues to struggle against potent and dehumanizing stereotypes in our society.

00:42:09.000 It is precisely because racial discrimination persists in our society, however, that the use of race in college admissions to achieve racially diverse classes is critical to improving cross-racial understanding and breaking down racial stereotypes.

00:42:20.000 Woo boy!

00:42:21.000 So, just to help decode that, she's saying, sure, it's true that we're discriminating against Asians, but it's good discrimination, guys. 1.00

00:42:28.000 We have to discriminate against Asians so everybody understands each other better. 1.00

00:42:31.000 So you, you need to sit over there in the corner because you got the wrong color skin, and that will make all of us understand each other better. 0.94

00:42:38.000 That's what diversity is all about, is you get a 1580 on your SATs, and that dude got a 1200 on his SATs, but he's black, you're Asian, you're out, he's in. 0.99

00:42:46.000 Congratulations, diversity achieved.

00:42:48.000 I hope you feel better about racial America. 0.72

00:42:51.000 The absolute level of disdain for Asian Americans that is replete in that opinion is just, it's just wild.

00:42:57.000 Alrighty, so a 6-3 majority of the Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action in higher education, and the left goes wild.

00:43:02.000 They are absolutely out of their mind angry over this.

00:43:05.000 How dare you say the Constitution does not allow us to preference one racial group over another racial group, even though the Constitution explicitly says you're not allowed to preference one racial group over another racial group?

00:43:15.000 How dare you?

00:43:16.000 Again, the left's perspective on law is basically that the law is just another tool for power.

00:43:20.000 Remember, the same left that's constantly declaring its enemies dictatorial?

00:43:24.000 It's projection.

00:43:25.000 They really, really love the idea that they ought to be able to use every government authority in order to just do what they want without reference to the actual job of that authority.

00:43:35.000 So Joe Biden led the way.

00:43:36.000 By led the way, I mean he stumbled around and drooled on himself.

00:43:39.000 He yesterday said, this is not a normal court.

00:43:41.000 It's not a normal... I'm so sick of hearing it's not a normal... Because for you, a normal court is just one that does your bidding.

00:43:47.000 A normal court is just one that does your bidding.

00:43:49.000 Stop saying this is not normal when you are absolutely abnormal.

00:43:53.000 Like physically, mentally, all abnormal.

00:43:59.000 Supreme Court has thrown into question its own legitimacy.

00:44:02.000 Is this a rogue court?

00:44:04.000 This is not a normal court.

00:44:09.000 Yeah.

00:44:11.000 Undermining institutional legitimacy every day of the week.

00:44:14.000 Joe Biden, that's a dude who loves institutional legitimacy while signing executive orders that are patently illegal and ripping into the Supreme Court.

00:44:21.000 But don't worry, Donald Trump is the threat to democracy and democratic institutions.

00:44:25.000 Meanwhile, Biden did an interview last night.

00:44:27.000 He did a 20-minute interview in which he was not asked at all about his son Hunter's corruption and his own likely corruption.

00:44:33.000 Instead, he was asked a bunch of softballs.

00:44:34.000 It was on MSNBC, so that's what they do over there.

00:44:36.000 And he did his best to undermine the court.

00:44:40.000 You said this court is not normal.

00:44:42.000 What did you mean?

00:44:43.000 What I meant with that is it's done more to unravel basic rights and basic decisions than any court in recent history.

00:44:52.000 And that's what I meant by not normal.

00:44:54.000 It's gone out of its way to... I mean, for example, take a look at overruling Roe v. Wade.

00:45:01.000 Take a look at the decision today.

00:45:03.000 Take a look at how it's How it's ruled on a number of issues that have been precedent for 50, 60 years.

00:45:11.000 I love when they talk about precedent.

00:45:12.000 I love it.

00:45:13.000 It's my favorite thing where they pretend that precedent is something they give absolutely any craps about.

00:45:17.000 It's such a lie.

00:45:18.000 Roe vs. Wade overruled all American law for two centuries.

00:45:21.000 Two centuries.

00:45:23.000 Obergefell overruled all of American law for two and a half centuries.

00:45:27.000 And Joe Biden was super happy about that. 0.99

00:45:29.000 Don't give me precedent, like these people give a crap about precedent. 0.96

00:45:31.000 By the way, you shouldn't give a crap about precedent if the precedent is bad. 0.96

00:45:34.000 Plessy vs. Ferguson was precedent also, and then Brown vs. Board overturned it. 0.94

00:45:39.000 It's so irritating.

00:45:41.000 Whatever brick is behind their back, they just hit you with.

00:45:44.000 Oh, well, you broke a precedent?

00:45:45.000 I'm gonna smack you with that.

00:45:46.000 Wait, the precedent's bad? 0.99

00:45:47.000 I'll smack you with that. 1.00

00:45:48.000 It's ridiculous and silly. 0.99

00:45:50.000 Also, listening to Joe Biden jabber about the law is just amazing. 0.98

00:45:54.000 Here he is mixing up the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence because he is no longer sentient.

00:45:58.000 But you know what?

00:45:59.000 It's not just because he's old.

00:46:00.000 It's because he was never sentient.

00:46:01.000 If you look back to his confirmation hearings for Clarence Thomas, Some of your former Senate colleagues on the Judiciary Committee would go as far as to say that it's anti-democratic.

00:46:08.000 coverage of the law that's also been the case.

00:46:24.000 But it is.

00:46:26.000 Its value system is different.

00:46:29.000 And its respect for institutions is different.

00:46:33.000 And in that sense, it is not as embracing of all Well, I think the Constitution says we hold these truths to be self-evident.

00:46:44.000 All men and women are created equal, endowed by their Creator.

00:46:47.000 It's a uniqueness of America.

00:46:49.000 We never fully lived up to it.

00:46:50.000 We never walked away from it.

00:46:52.000 And this Court seems to say that, no, that's not always the case.

00:46:56.000 I love it.

00:46:57.000 So many problems with this.

00:46:58.000 One, he's citing the Declaration.

00:47:00.000 Literally, the notion that all men and women are created equal, I love how he adds in women, that all men are created equal, endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, means you should not treat them as racial stereotypes.

00:47:10.000 That's literally what it means.

00:47:12.000 When you say we didn't live up to our commitment, you know why?

00:47:15.000 Because we didn't treat people as individuals, we treated them as members of racial castes.

00:47:18.000 That's why.

00:47:20.000 How can, I don't even, the Orwellian insanity of citing a sentence like all men are created equal in pursuit of a policy that says black people should be able to score 250 points lower on the SATs than Asian people and get into the same colleges. 0.70

00:47:34.000 How do you even, how do you hold those two thoughts at the same time?

00:47:37.000 It is not possible.

00:47:39.000 And I love Nicole Walsh.

00:47:40.000 Are they anti-democratic?

00:47:41.000 Of course the Supreme Court is anti-democratic.

00:47:43.000 That's literally what it does for a living.

00:47:45.000 What do you think a judicial branch is?

00:47:47.000 What do you think a judiciary does?

00:47:49.000 The legislature is the democratic branch of government.

00:47:51.000 The judiciary is the anti-democratic branch of government because it overrules popularly elected officials.

00:47:56.000 That's what it does for a living. 1.00

00:48:00.000 Oh, I get irritated about this because not only is it insulting to the intelligence, it's so stupid. 1.00

00:48:06.000 And then here is Joe Biden just babbling nonsensically because, after all, it's a day ending in Y. How did the six get it so wrong? 0.99

00:48:12.000 Well, you know, that's look, remember the Federalist Society when you were in another administration?

00:48:20.000 In another party.

00:48:21.000 Yes.

00:48:22.000 Well, I didn't mean it that way.

00:48:24.000 It's OK.

00:48:24.000 But the Federalist Society had a very, very strict construction of the Constitution.

00:48:32.000 And if it didn't, they used the word, it didn't exist.

00:48:35.000 But this administration, this court has gone beyond that.

00:48:40.000 And I just find it, I don't know how to express it, find it just so out of sorts with the basic value system of the American people.

00:48:52.000 And I think that across the board, the vast majority of the American people don't agree with a lot of the decisions this court is making.

00:48:59.000 Oh, really?

00:49:00.000 The vast majority of people don't agree.

00:49:01.000 So I love they call this anti-democratic.

00:49:03.000 Here is the problem.

00:49:05.000 It's a lie.

00:49:06.000 The vast majority of Americans don't like affirmative action.

00:49:09.000 According to the New York Times yesterday, quote, half of Americans do not support colleges and universities taking race and ethnicity into account in admissions decisions.

00:49:17.000 Only one third approve the practice.

00:49:19.000 But apparently it's anti-democratic, according to Joe Biden.

00:49:21.000 Then he awkwardly walked off the set.

00:49:23.000 Because this is what we do now.

00:49:24.000 Because we have a senile old man who is in charge of the most powerful country in the history of the world.

00:49:29.000 This interview ends, and he just literally gets up and starts hobbling off the set, like Grandpa Simpson, forgetting his hat.

00:49:36.000 We didn't get a lot, but we got a lot of bipartisan things done.

00:49:39.000 And now they're running on your bipartisan accomplishments. 0.99

00:49:43.000 Could Nicole Wallace have her lips plastered any further up Joe Biden's ass? 1.00

00:49:46.000 She can taste his colon at this point. 1.00

00:49:47.000 Whether they voted for me or not.

00:49:49.000 Well, and the ones that didn't vote for your bills, but run on them.

00:49:52.000 That's right.

00:49:53.000 Mr. President, thank you.

00:49:54.000 Thank you.

00:49:55.000 Thank you very much.

00:49:56.000 Great to have you.

00:49:57.000 Thank you.

00:49:59.000 Don't go anywhere.

00:50:00.000 It's a very exciting day around here.

00:50:02.000 A good camera angle there as Joe wobbles off the set.

00:50:05.000 Man, Nicole Wallace, that's some solid reporting there.

00:50:07.000 Okay, meanwhile, Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, he says, well, nothing has changed.

00:50:12.000 We're just going to continue, you know, along these lines.

00:50:15.000 Our intent has not changed, which presumably is to stack higher education with people who are unqualified academically, but are of quote-unquote diverse ethnicity.

00:50:23.000 Here he is.

00:50:25.000 The president, though, in trying to look forward as we head into a new era, said he wants you as the Department of Education to light the way, to find new areas.

00:50:36.000 How is that going to look?

00:50:38.000 How is it going to work?

00:50:39.000 In a few weeks, we're going to convene a national summit on educational opportunity in response to the SCOTUS decision.

00:50:45.000 We're going to bring Thought partners and leaders from across the country to discuss this and in the third thing by September We're gonna put together a report and publish a report on the best practices in college admissions To ensure that while the Supreme Court limited our use of a tool to provide diverse learning communities with the intent has not changed and the passion around making sure that students who have been historically

00:51:14.000 Okay, by the way, plaintiffs are taking down your words as we speak.

00:51:21.000 Secretary Cardona.

00:51:23.000 I mean, that'll end up back at the Supreme Court.

00:51:25.000 Like, in a brief.

00:51:26.000 You saying, yeah, we know what the Supreme Court said, but we're just going to continue doing what we've always been doing.

00:51:31.000 Amazing stuff.

00:51:31.000 Meanwhile, Barack and Michelle Obama are sounding off on this.

00:51:35.000 Michelle Obama is leading the way.

00:51:36.000 She is, by the way, she was always far more radical than Barack.

00:51:39.000 Barack is a very radical person.

00:51:40.000 Michelle Obama was always way more radical.

00:51:42.000 She wrote her entire thesis at Princeton University on how discriminated against she was as a black woman at Princeton University.

00:51:48.000 She had a real rough life.

00:51:49.000 Princeton University, followed by Harvard Law School, followed by a Kush law firm job, followed by being married to the guy who ended up President of the United States.

00:51:55.000 I mean, it's been real rough.

00:51:56.000 Anyway, Michelle Obama writes, quote, back in college, I was one of the few black students

00:52:00.000 on my campus and I was proud of getting into such a respected school.

00:52:03.000 So first of all, I know people who are at Princeton at the same time she was, it's not true.

00:52:06.000 There were a lot of black students on campus.

00:52:07.000 I knew I'd worked hard for it, but still, I sometimes wondered if people thought I got there

00:52:10.000 because of affirmative action.

00:52:12.000 It was a shadow that students like me couldn't shake.

00:52:14.000 Whether those doubts came from outside or inside our own minds.

00:52:17.000 Well, I mean, that's because those doubts are true.

00:52:22.000 I mean, of course people will have doubts about whether you deserve to be there when literally the standard is lowered for people because of their color.

00:52:29.000 Of course, that's true.

00:52:31.000 But the fact is this, I belonged.

00:52:33.000 Well, by whose standard?

00:52:35.000 Really, by whose standard?

00:52:36.000 Not by the meritocratic standards, apparently, according to you.

00:52:39.000 If by I belonged, you mean that you have self-esteem now, I mean, I'm glad you have self-esteem, I suppose.

00:52:45.000 I'm not so glad that somebody who's better qualified didn't get in because you had to have your self-esteem boost or whatever.

00:52:50.000 Semester after semester, decade after decade, for more than half a century, countless students like me showed they belonged too.

00:52:55.000 Well, actually, a ton of them dropped out because they couldn't hack it.

00:52:58.000 But it wasn't just the kids of color who benefited either.

00:53:00.000 Every student who heard a perspective they might not have encountered, who had an assumption challenge, who had their minds and their hearts open, gained a lot as well.

00:53:06.000 Okay, that speaks to life experience.

00:53:08.000 It does not speak to color.

00:53:09.000 It wasn't perfect, but there's no doubt it helped offer new ladders of opportunity for those who, throughout our history, have too often been denied a chance to show how fast they can climb.

00:53:18.000 Of course, as Michelle Obama, students on my campus and countless others across the country were and continue to be granted special consideration for admissions.

00:53:24.000 Some have parents who graduated from the same school.

00:53:26.000 Others have families who can afford coaches to help them run faster or hit a ball harder.

00:53:30.000 Others go to high school with lavish resources for tutors and extensive standardized test prep that help them score higher on college entrance exams.

00:53:36.000 We don't usually question if those students belong.

00:53:38.000 So first of all, I've questioned legacy admissions for literally as long as I've been talking about this.

00:53:42.000 I don't like legacy admissions.

00:53:43.000 There's really no point to them.

00:53:44.000 I assume the idea there is just it's donor-based.

00:53:46.000 They want people to give donations because this is quote-unquote my family school.

00:53:50.000 As for student-athletes, student-athletes, that disproportionately benefits people who could not get in academically, and very often those are people of minority ethnicity.

00:53:59.000 As far as standardized test prep and all the rest of this, a lot of that stuff is now available for free in public schools.

00:54:04.000 It's just that people do not take advantage of those courses at the same rates by race.

00:54:09.000 She says, Well, except that, again, the Supreme Court explicitly says that you can say that there is a class distinction between you and the other applicant.

00:54:15.000 to compete when the ground is anything but level.

00:54:17.000 Well, except that again, the Supreme Court explicitly says that you can say that there is a class distinction

00:54:23.000 between you and the other applicant.

00:54:24.000 I scored 50 points lower on the SAT because I had to teach myself while I was writing to work

00:54:29.000 because I had to help support my family.

00:54:31.000 Hey, that goes in an essay and that will help you undoubtedly.

00:54:34.000 That has nothing to do with race.

00:54:36.000 So today, says Michelle Obama, my heart breaks for any young person out there who's wondering what their future holds, and what kind of chances will be open to them.

00:54:42.000 And while I know the strength and grit that lies inside kids who have always had to sweat a little more to climb the same ladders, I hope and I pray the rest of us are willing to sweat a little too.

00:54:49.000 Today's a reminder, we have to do the work, do the work, not just to enact policies that reflect our values of equity and fairness, but to make those values real in all of our schools, workplaces, and neighborhoods.

00:54:58.000 Except, by giving black kids the opportunity to go to a charter school, Or giving them a school voucher. 0.97

00:55:03.000 Or by breaking the garbage teacher's unions. 1.00

00:55:05.000 Or by making sure that black parents get married at a higher rate. 0.99

00:55:07.000 Or by making sure that black students study more. 0.95

00:55:09.000 All those things we can't do. 0.73

00:55:10.000 What we can do is **** about it.

00:55:11.000 A lot.

00:55:12.000 And we can say that Michelle Obama got to go to Princeton because she scored lower on her SATs, but she was black. 0.88

00:55:17.000 And so should you.

00:55:18.000 Like, don't solve any of the systemic problems that actually lead to the disparity.

00:55:21.000 Just blame race. 0.50

00:55:23.000 And then Barack Obama put out like a two sentence statement, quote, like any policy, affirmative action wasn't perfect, but it allowed generations of students like Michelle and me to prove we belonged.

00:55:31.000 Now it's up to all of us to give young people the opportunities they deserve and help students everywhere benefit from new perspectives.

00:55:37.000 Well, wow, that's, you could prove, you know what's one way to prove you belong at a school?

00:55:41.000 By scoring appropriately to get into that school.

00:55:43.000 It's an amazing way to prove you belong to that school.

00:55:45.000 It really is an incredible thing.

00:55:48.000 Okay, so Barack and Michelle Obama sounding off.

00:55:49.000 Gavin Newsom sounded off as well, which is always fun.

00:55:52.000 The governor of California put out a sweet quote.

00:55:55.000 They want to whitewash our nation's history.

00:55:57.000 They want to bring America back to the era of book bans and segregated campuses.

00:56:00.000 We cannot let them.

00:56:02.000 Well, I did notice one thing, which is that in your state of California, affirmative action has been banned since 1996, and they re-upped that ban in 2020.

00:56:08.000 So, why don't you start at home, my friend?

00:56:12.000 Meanwhile, Elizabeth Warren, who literally touted herself as a Native American despite no Native American background, said, quote, Here's the thing.

00:56:20.000 Nobody on the left actually thinks racial justice is possible to achieve.

00:56:22.000 They don't.

00:56:22.000 back the march toward racial justice and narrowed educational opportunity for all. Here's the thing,

00:56:26.000 nobody on the left actually thinks racial justice is possible to achieve. They don't, 0.63

00:56:31.000 because the minute that happens, their entire gravy train goes away. That is the big problem.

00:56:35.000 You have a massive incentive misalignment here.

00:56:38.000 The same people who are claiming that they wish to pursue racial discrimination in order to end racial discrimination don't want racial discrimination to end because the goal is the means, not the end.

00:56:46.000 They like the racial discrimination.

00:56:48.000 It allows them power.

00:56:49.000 It allows people like Elizabeth Warren to pretend she's fighting for a group of dispossessed youngsters. 1.00

00:56:54.000 Quote, I won't stop fighting for young people with big dreams who deserve an equal chance to pursue their future.

00:56:58.000 And how about all of those actual Native Americans who didn't make it into school because you were the Native American appointment, Elizabeth?

00:57:04.000 How about that?

00:57:06.000 I assume that you took one of their slots.

00:57:08.000 Meanwhile, Harvard University put out a statement basically saying that they won't comply.

00:57:12.000 Segregation now, segregation forever. 0.52

00:57:13.000 Dear members of the Harvard community, we write today to reaffirm the fundamental principle that deep and transformative teaching, learning, and research depends upon a community comprising people of many backgrounds, perspectives, and lived experiences.

00:57:24.000 That principle is as true and important today as it was yesterday.

00:57:28.000 And then they put out, they talk about how terrible this is, how horrifying all of this is.

00:57:34.000 That was statement one.

00:57:35.000 Then they put out a second one, quote, dear members of the Harvard community, a few hours ago, the Supreme Court issued its decision in our admissions case, a decision that carries weight, not only for Harvard as an institution, but for many of us as individuals.

00:57:45.000 Today is a hard day.

00:57:47.000 If you're feeling the gravity of that, I want you to know you're not alone.

00:57:50.000 Oh, oh, well, not alone.

00:57:54.000 So that is solid stuff.

00:57:55.000 Okay, so here is the deal.

00:57:57.000 By the way, I think some of my favorite response here comes from the president of Columbia.

00:58:03.000 So the president of Columbia, Lee Bollinger, he says, test scores are discrimination.

00:58:06.000 You knew they were going in this direction, right?

00:58:08.000 That if you score poorly on a test, this is because of racism, not because maybe you're not as smart as the guy down the hall who scored 300 points higher.

00:58:16.000 So we know that standardized test scores were introduced many decades ago.

00:58:24.000 with the idea that they would help achieve equality of opportunity for students all across the country.

00:58:33.000 It wouldn't connect, wouldn't depend upon connections, wealth of your family, etc.

00:58:40.000 You could take the test, and if you did better than people who were well-connected and wealthy, you could get in.

00:58:48.000 So that was the idea of standardized tests.

00:58:51.000 Increasingly in the past decade or so, it's become fairly clear to everybody that standardized test scores are a way of reinforcing inequality rather than overcoming it.

00:59:05.000 So I have a question.

00:59:05.000 Why are they reinforcing inequality?

00:59:07.000 As Ballinger says, the entire design of a test is that it is colorblind.

00:59:10.000 It is literally a question and you answer the question and then you get a score.

00:59:13.000 So why is it that they have become now racist when they were not racist to begin?

00:59:17.000 The answer is people are underperforming.

00:59:19.000 People are underperforming.

00:59:21.000 Based on race. 0.99

00:59:22.000 And it's not because they are black. 0.96

00:59:24.000 It is because of all the other things that no one wants to actually fix because people on the left don't give a damn about fixing the problem. 0.99

00:59:29.000 All they want to do is b**** about how terrible America is and how racist it is.

00:59:32.000 Because that is how they gain votes.

00:59:34.000 Because it turns out, you know, it's a real easy sell to people.

00:59:35.000 It's not your fault.

00:59:36.000 It's America's fault.

00:59:37.000 That's a super easy sell to people.

00:59:38.000 You know what's a hard sell?

00:59:40.000 Maybe we ought to break the teachers' unions. 1.00

00:59:41.000 Maybe we ought to fix our public schools. 0.99

00:59:43.000 Maybe we ought to give more local control to parents. 0.73

00:59:45.000 Maybe we ought to teach kids reading, writing, and arithmetic as opposed to garbage CRT, Critical Race Theory.

00:59:52.000 Maybe you should do all those things.

00:59:53.000 They don't want to do all those things.

00:59:53.000 That is their agenda.

00:59:54.000 Their agenda matters more than the result.

00:59:56.000 And when the result is ugly, they blame the test score, blame the metric.

00:59:59.000 This is like deliberately stunting the growth of an entire population by undernourishing them.

01:00:04.000 And then when you find out that everybody is five inches shorter than they otherwise would have been, you're like, you know, I hate rulers.

01:00:08.000 Rulers are bad.

01:00:10.000 I really hate tape measures. 0.91

01:00:11.000 Those tape measures are racist.

01:00:13.000 Well, maybe it's not the tape measure that's racist. 0.87

01:00:15.000 Maybe it's you. 1.00

01:00:16.000 Because you're the ones who are pursuing these garbage policies. 0.98

01:00:20.000 And then the Columbia president, again, it's amazing. 0.75

01:00:22.000 They're literally saying the things that will then be used in appellate court to challenge their own policies.

01:00:27.000 Here's Lee Bollinger saying a thing that is not legal.

01:00:29.000 He says we have to use affirmative action to correct for past discrimination.

01:00:33.000 That is literally against the opinion of the court.

01:00:36.000 Here he is.

01:00:38.000 Brown versus Board of Education was a great moment in American history.

01:00:43.000 Declaring that the 14th Amendment required equal protection and not separate but equal schooling and other programs in the United States and set off the civil rights era.

01:00:55.000 That was a great moment.

01:00:57.000 But that was only about stopping racial discrimination.

01:01:03.000 Any kind of effort to overcome the effects of racial discrimination are not allowed in his view.

01:01:11.000 To Justices Jackson and Sotomayor, this is, and Thurgood Marshall in the Bakke case, this is wrong thinking.

01:01:19.000 That we've had several hundred years of discrimination against African Americans in particular, and we must as a society find means to try to correct for that because they're ongoing.

01:01:31.000 They haven't stopped.

01:01:33.000 So we have to grade people by race.

01:01:35.000 Good luck with this when Columbia's admissions policy comes up for, I'm sure, judicial review inside the next year or so.

01:01:40.000 Meanwhile, the president of the National Education Association, Rebecca Pringle, of course she doesn't want to actually discuss the actual problems in education.

01:01:46.000 She's just, again, going to say America's racist. 0.98

01:01:48.000 That's why there's a disparity, not because you, the head of the NEA, one of the worst unions in America, is responsible for the garbage education that black kids are receiving across the country. 0.98

01:01:58.000 What do you think about this, Becky? 0.75

01:01:59.000 How much of an uphill climb is it now if this affirmative action program goes away from a university to actually have a diverse student body?

01:02:09.000 In every sense of that word, diversity.

01:02:14.000 So just like your other panelists have said already, the headline for today is Access and Opportunity Denied.

01:02:22.000 As John just said, we know that we are stronger, our schools are stronger, our communities are stronger, our country is stronger.

01:02:29.000 When we have spaces that reflect all of the diversity of this country, it's what makes us strong.

01:02:36.000 And today's decision is taking us backwards.

01:02:41.000 Yes, judging people based on race.

01:02:43.000 That's taking us forward.

01:02:44.000 Saying that we should not judge people based on race, that takes us backward.

01:02:48.000 Amazing, amazing stuff.

01:02:50.000 Members of the media doing the same sort of routine.

01:02:52.000 Al Sharpton, who again, I have no idea why this person is a respected member of the media, when he's one of the worst race baiters in American history, one of the most nefarious racial forces in American modern history.

01:03:02.000 Here he is talking about how it's a dagger in the back.

01:03:06.000 What has gone through your mind in terms of how you believe this will affect specifically the African American community?

01:03:13.000 Well, I think that this is tantamount to sticking a dagger in our back.

01:03:19.000 Because what they have said now is that it is unconstitutional to even consider race.

01:03:26.000 And given the racial history of the country, let's not act like blacks are behind because there's something in our genes that made us behind.

01:03:37.000 It was against the law for us to even read and write until 160 years ago.

01:03:43.000 Okay, you notice where it says 160 years ago?

01:03:47.000 That's 160 years ago, my friend.

01:03:51.000 And so the idea that blacks have not been reading and writing for, you know, almost two centuries is what he's saying right there.

01:03:58.000 And that's why the disparities exist today.

01:04:00.000 Weird, because you know what happened with, say, Asian populations who came over here? 1.00

01:04:03.000 They didn't speak English, and now they're destroying these tests.

01:04:06.000 How about Jewish populations who, when they first arrived in the United States in the early 20th century, were actually considered low IQ because they couldn't read English?

01:04:13.000 And now, they are performing about one standard deviation.

01:04:16.000 Ashkenazi Jews perform about one standard deviation above other people on IQ tests. 0.97

01:04:19.000 Is that because of racial inequality and inequity?

01:04:23.000 Or is it because people learn to read and write?

01:04:26.000 In other words, discrimination of the past and evils of the past are rectifiable, but only by individuals who actually go and do the work to overcome those objections.

01:04:36.000 This notion that people are failing today, in 2023, when it is literally illegal for black people to be discriminated against in the United States.

01:04:44.000 That the failure is because people couldn't read and write 160 years ago? 0.99

01:04:50.000 It's so pathetic on every possible score. 0.99

01:04:54.000 It's not true and it's pathetic. 0.99

01:04:56.000 Perhaps the best media moment of the day yesterday is one of the plaintiffs in this case is an Asian student who was on with Abby Phillip and he just wrecks her. 1.00

01:05:03.000 Abby Phillip is trying to make the case that it would be better if this Asian student weren't able to get into an institution of higher education despite scoring really high on the SATs and he's like, uh, no. 0.70

01:05:13.000 Because of affirmative action, black Americans graduate from law school at the bottom 25% of their classes, largely speaking.

01:05:21.000 And we don't want that.

01:05:22.000 We want black students to succeed.

01:05:24.000 We want every student to succeed.

01:05:26.000 Low-income students to succeed.

01:05:28.000 But you have to put them in scenarios in places where they're likely to succeed.

01:05:32.000 And lowering your standard to admit somebody of a socioeconomic status or race would not help them do that.

01:05:39.000 In fact, it would harm their graduation rate and excellence.

01:05:42.000 Well, as the case also points out, the standard isn't necessarily lowered because students are all admitted.

01:05:49.000 The question is whether race can be an added consideration, a tipping point in some of these cases.

01:05:55.000 No, the standard is lowered.

01:05:55.000 The standard is lowered.

01:05:56.000 The standard is lowered, as the student admissions data shows, an Asian has to score 273 points higher on the SAT to have the same chance of admission as a Black person.

01:06:06.000 So the standard is lowered for Black Americans. 0.91

01:06:09.000 Oops! 0.98

01:06:10.000 You're just not going to get around that.

01:06:12.000 But apparently that's okay.

01:06:12.000 Because that Asian guy?

01:06:14.000 After all, he's Asian.

01:06:15.000 He isn't black. 0.89

01:06:15.000 So if he has to suffer according to the left, well, you know, them's just the breaks. 0.89

01:06:20.000 Them's just the breaks.

01:06:21.000 And then presumably, a generation from now, then we can, you know, do some affirmative action for Asian people or something.

01:06:26.000 The never-ending carousel of racial discrimination will continue forever, and it'll just be awesome.

01:06:32.000 Final take goes to Whoopi Goldberg. 0.98

01:06:35.000 Who, uh, comes up with the dumbest possible answer here. 0.98

01:06:39.000 She says, I don't even know how she- I don't even know how she gets here. 0.98

01:06:43.000 And Whoopi Goldberg, that is a- that is a mind upon which inspiration springs.

01:06:47.000 My goodness. 0.98

01:06:48.000 When you have a justice who says something as ridiculous as I don't get it, it just makes a kid, an Asian kid, a Native American kid, a black kid feel like you don't matter. 0.98

01:06:59.000 Right. 0.97

01:06:59.000 Like you didn't you don't understand why my struggle is hard or your struggle or your struggle. 0.97

01:07:05.000 You know, is this leading to no women in colleges soon? 1.00

01:07:08.000 Is this leading to no women in college? 1.00

01:07:10.000 Yes, nailed it, Whoopi.

01:07:12.000 Women constitute a majority of current college and grad school enrollees, by the way. 0.99

01:07:16.000 A sheer majority.

01:07:18.000 Yeah, nailed it, Whoopi, as per our usual arrangement.

01:07:20.000 Probably we should put her on the Supreme Court. 1.00

01:07:22.000 Honestly, she can't write an opinion any worse than Ketanji Brown Jackson did.

01:07:25.000 Alrighty, coming up, we are going to be joined by Coleman Hughes.

01:07:28.000 He has a great piece on the end of affirmative action today.

01:07:31.000 If you're not a member, become a member.

01:07:32.000 Use code SHAPIRO.

01:07:33.000 Check out for two months free on all annual plans.

The Ben Shapiro Show - June 30, 2023

Affirmative Action Is DEAD

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript