Backdoor Affirmative Action

Los Angeles Times, October 6, 2011

As much as this page exhorted Californians to vote against Proposition 209 in 1996, the constitutional amendment that bars affirmative action in state hiring and admissions at public colleges is now the law, having survived numerous legal challenges. A bill passed by the Legislature this year that would allow the University of California and California State University to “consider” race, gender and so forth in the admissions process is a clear attempt to flout that law. {snip}

Sen. Ed Hernandez (D-West Covina) told Times reporters that SB 185 was not in conflict with Proposition 209 because it would only allow universities to consider those factors rather than give preference to them. In fact, the bill specifically says that “no preference shall be given.” But that’s doublespeak. Why would an admissions committee consider race, gender or national origin if not to factor them into its decisions? Indeed, the actual wording of the bill makes it clear that admissions directors wouldn’t just be chatting aimlessly about applicants’ backgrounds.

The bill prods the university systems to take race and similar factors into account “to the maximum extent” allowed by a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the use of affirmative action at the University of Michigan’s law school. {snip}

{snip} Much as we would like to see Proposition 209 repealed, the will of the people cannot be undone by a backdoor act of the Legislature. If Californians are unhappy with the effects of Proposition 209, they should go back to the polls and vote to re-legalize affirmative action or find other legitimate ways of encouraging diversity and fairness in public institutions. {snip}

{snip} We understand the frustration of the initiative’s opponents, after multiple losses in court. Yet as a matter of principle, we also object to flouting the will of the voters who placed the measure into the state Constitution.

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Anonymous

    Probably the mostly white liberals who have kept the LA Times alive as a webpage (after the city became mostly latino and ended the need for an English language print newspaper) realized that their own WHITE kids are probably not going to be admitted to the college of their choice because they are now the persecuted minority. The LA Times has been so pro latino, so anti American for so long, I hope they realize one day how wrong it has been to replace Americans with a foreign people and culture.

  • Question Diversity

    Here’s the problem for us, which is in turn the “solution” for AA supporters – Yes, AA is illegal for public institutions to use, according to the state constitution. But since Prop 209 was passed, the state has been slowly “electing a new people,” as VDare puts it. If the schools won’t obey the law, the politicians won’t enforce the law, and the judges won’t enforce the law, and the cops not enforce the law, then the law might as well not exist. In legal circles, this is called a “dead letter.”

    California’s “new people” don’t want the law to exist, so they’ll just ignore it.

  • Anonymous

    ‘They’ have given us a choice between evil and bigotry and tolerance and acceptance. More and more people are choosing bigotry.

    Perhaps it’s a no-win situation for the road of tolerance and acceptance leads to an evil and bigotry all it’s own. The solution for that, however, is to label this bigotry ‘sensitivity’ and ‘enlightenment’.

  • Anonymous

    Poor, deluded LA Times liberals. They STILL expect that majority Mexicans are going to play fair, and observe the white man’s ideals of impartiality and equal opportunity. How much more evidence do these silly SoCal Eloi need to notice that the hispanics are ONLY out for themselves?

  • Anonymous

    The LA Times is living in a dream world.

    That dream world is a White world. White people are governed by principles. Other races are not, at least to the great extent that Whites are. Certainly not governed by universal principles are the supposedly recently civilized people from Africa and the American continent.

    These peoples are governed by the principle of primitive racial and tribal solidarity. What is good for the tribe is what is good.

    Stopping Affirmative Action is a personal attack on their tribe. These people cannot think on a higher level to an ethical system that judges all mankind as equal.

    If these foolish LA Times editorial writers stick around in LA they will spend their last days as Nicholas II of Russia who before he was killed saw his wife and children murdered by the Bolsheviks, the Multiculturalists of his day.

  • Anonymous

    How many years before the LA Times goes out of business, or at least flips over to being a Spanish Language paper?

    Actually, I kind of doubt it would stay in business long that way, either, for obvious reasons…Mestizos don’t read much.

    Seriously, any takers here? Three years? Four?

  • Anonymous

    This is not out of concern for whites, rather it’s a fear that Asians will be targeted if AA makes a return. And that’s true.

  • June Warren

    Michael Jackson apparently believed in “affirmative action” and hired a doctor on the basis of skin color.

    Look where it got him.

  • margaret

    Question Diviersity is so right when he or she wrote

    ” If the schools won’t obey the law, the politicians won’t enforce the law, and the judges won’t enforce the law, and the cops not enforce the law, then the law might as well not exist. In legal circles, this is called a “dead letter.””

    Prop 209 has never been enforced. A few White contractors have won discrimination against Whites lawsuits using private attorneys and a private legal foundation.

    That does not help an ordinary White who applies for a government or teaching job.

    The affirmative action laws have dozens of government agencies and tax free non profits to enforce discrimination against Whites. Since August 1998 when Prop 209 was declared legal by the federal courts, not 1 not 1 state, county or city agency has processed not 1 complaint of discrimination against Whites.

    I worked hard on Prop 209 and gave money. Should have ripped up the money and thrown it in the trash for all the good it did.

    There was no enforcement provision built into Prop 209. That is why it and the other anti affirmative action initiatives have never been enforced.

    When I consider the outcome of Prop 209 I think it was just a controlled opposition false flag operation. It was created to make Whites think there was still hope of ending the discrimination against us.

    It is not the White Americans who are angry about discrimination against Whites. It is the russian, arab armenian, persian, indian, israeli immigrants who are furious about affirmative action.

    The russians are content to continue with their scams and criminal activities disguised as small businesses. But the rest want their children to be admitted to college. They want jobs in both the private and public sector. They want government contracts.

    They are the only Whites who are truly outraged about affirmative action.

    Good news is that the older generation of White immigrants never read the LA Times. They read their own foreign language papers.

    The middle aged and younger White immigrants are like everybody else. They get their information from the internet.

    That is great. The LaTimes loses circulation every year. The only people who read it are White American liberals over 55. The blacks never did no matter how much the LaTimes worshipped blacks and totally exonerated them for the Rodney King riots.

  • Anonymous

    6 — Anonymous wrote at 1:29 AM on October 8:

    How many years before the LA Times goes out of business, or at least flips over to being a Spanish Language paper?

    LaTimes owns LaOpinion the Spanish language paper. But more and more hispanic immigrants are indians who can’t read Spanish. Remember, there are no school buses in rural mexico. The parents don’t have cars. So unless the kids live within a couple miles of the school they don’t go.

    They don’t learn to read either English or Spanish in the California school system. So I can’t see much future for either LaTimes or LaOpinion.

  • Dave

    As an FYI, the California universities STILL practice affirmative action. They have to in order to prevent their student-bodies from becoming nearly 100% White and Asian (with some light skinned Latinos mixed in). Prop 209 prevents them from discriminating against Whites and Asians as much as they would like to discriminate, but they still do it. Don’t believe for a second Cal Berkeley’s undergraduate enrollment would be even 4% Black and 12% Hispanic under true racial neutral policies. The liberals and anti-White groups in California would love to double those figures, when in reality they should slashed in half.

  • Question Diversity

    9 Margaret:

    On related things, I read on VDare today that California has an “official English only” law on the books. How’s that working out for them? Miami, Florida has a city ordinance like that. Again, how’s that working out for them? Laws can say anything, but demography is destiny.

  • Bon, From the Land of Babble

    However fleeting, at the present time there IS enforcement of Prop 209.

    The small but mighty Pacific Legal Foundation has done a yeoman’s job enforcing 209 and won many important cases against state entities that insist on defying 209s mandate that prohibits race and gender-based preferences. The PLF has not won all Prop 209 cases, but has won a significant number including against school districts such as my own, the LAUSD.

    No one else that I am aware of is filing lawsuits to uphold the provisions of Prop 209.

    LOS ANGELES, CA; August 25, 2010:

    In a legal settlement responding to a Proposition 209 lawsuit by Pacific Legal Foundation attorneys, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) has rescinded its policy of race-based discrimination in teacher assignment. Therefore, PLF announced today that it has dismissed the lawsuit as of this week.

    http://www.pacificlegal.org/page.aspx?pid=1377

    And, in a lawsuit filed against the constitutionality of Prop 209 by the White-hating, racist Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary (known as BAMN), which attempted to re-introduce race-based preferences to the admissions process in UC and CSU admissions:

    SACRAMENTO, CA; December 8, 2010:

    San Francisco-based Federal Judge Samuel Conti today dismissed a lawsuit filed by BAMN, challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 209, the voter-enacted provision of the California Constitution that prohibits preferences and discrimination by race or sex in public education, contracting, and public employment.

    See here for other Prop 209 cases the PLF has won:

    http://goo.gl/MbwhN

    SB 185 is in clear violation of the (current) California Constitution.

    California courts have interpreted the mandates of Section 31 stating that Section 31 not only prohibits the state from granting preferences on the basis of race or gender but also bans the encouragement of race- and gender- based policies.

    In a letter to the idiot California governor, PLF writes:

    SB 185 violates the plain language of Article I, section 31, of the California Constitution by allowing officials at the University of California and California State University to consider race and gender in admissions… it would be irresponsible to sign this bill into law knowing that it would immediately result in a lawsuit. In this time of economic downturn, the taxpayers’ money should be spent on worthwhile activities, not on defending SB 185, which is patently unconstitutional.

    Eventually, Prop 209 WILL be overturned by a new, progressive California Supreme Court loaded up with lefty, White-hating, “social-justice-seeking” appointees.

    As for the perfidy of the LA Times,

    As much as this page exhorted Californians to vote against Proposition 209

    I am glad that I canceled my subscription 10 years ago.

    The LA Times’s weekday circulation has been nearly halved since 2000— in the past four years, the LA Times has lost more subscribers than any U.S. newspaper and it isn’t even close.

    GOOD RIDDANCE. (and may you burn in the same hell as the old Soviet Bosses whom you emulate and so admire).

    Bon

  • Anonymous

    This attempt to reinsert affirmative action back into what is supposed to be a performance based system originates in the La Raza movement. The fact that maybe 10% of those pushed into seats that displace students who should be in them actually graduate with anything is completely immaterial to the La Raza movement’s leaders. They could care less. It’s just give me something at the expense of someone else. That’s all it is.

  • Anonymous

    9 — margaret wrote at 2:05 PM on October 8:

    “It is not the White Americans who are angry about discrimination against Whites. It is the russian, arab armenian, persian, indian, israeli immigrants who are furious about affirmative action.

    The russians are content to continue with their scams and criminal activities disguised as small businesses. But the rest want their children to be admitted to college. They want jobs in both the private and public sector. They want government contracts. ”

    > The fact is that most of the “Russian” crime you refer to is Armenian, Chechen, and other former Soviet nation groups. It was the Armenian community that ran the biggest Medicare scams from LA, not Russians. I have known many, many young Russians who not only attend colleges, but are often the top students, beating out Asians. (I include Ukrainians with Russians).

  • Anonymous

    How the hell has “ultra-liberal” california passed an overall ban on affirmative action (however ineffective…) and we have not even gotten that up for a vote in the US congress?

  • pawcatch

    “(I include Ukrainians with Russians).”

    Really?So you’re claiming that there is very little criminal presence among Ethnic Russians and those from Baltic states.

    It was a Ukrainian who killed Ennis Cosby.