Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Discriminations

Legal Commentary

: Discriminations

Discrimination Based On Heredity

Adam Liptak collects some of the usual criticisms of legacy preferances, as well as some new-fangled ones, in this New York Times column yesterday. (HatTip to reader Jian Li for reminding me that it is worth attention.)

?The usual justification for legacy preferences,? he writes,

is candidly cynical: they generate contributions from alumni. That crass bargain seems a poor substitute for the usual considerations in admissions decisions, like merit and diversity. But private universities are certainly entitled to trade money for principle.

Let?s leave aside the view that a university exercising the prerogatives protected by academic freedom and adopting educational policies that raise money is ?crass.? Let?s even leave aside the conventional wisdom that ?diversity,? i.e., selecting and rejecting students in part on the basis of their race, is now not only ?usual? but is in fact a ?principle? to be contrasted with ?crass? fund-raising.

What should not be left aside, however, is the surprising obtuseness of Liptak?s immediately following remark:

Public universities, which are part of state and city governments, may be another matter. Why in the world should the government be allowed to discriminate based on heredity?

A very good question, but noteworthy here primarily because Liptak is obviously oblivious to the fact that ?diversity? admissions ? choosing some and rejecting others because of their race ? is itself ?to discriminate based on heredity.?

Full post as published by Discriminations on January 16, 2008 (boomark / email).