Congress is quietly trying to put ‘DEI’ quotas back into college admissions and every aspect of American life. They hope you don’t notice…

From Revolver.news (May 17, 2024):

When the Supreme Court put the brakes on Harvard’s race-based admissions practices, the backlash from the left was loud. What else is new? However, the bulk of the American people agree with the Supreme Court, and while the left is very loud, they’re actually a vocal minority, convinced they have some moral authority to dictate the rules the rest of us live by. Despite how unpopular the DEI movement is, the left is pushing to reinstate this unfair practice in college and all over the US with a sneaky legislative move. A bill currently slithering its way through Congress will embed racial, gender, and religious quotas into nearly every part of American life—housing, employment, healthcare, insurance, and credit decisions are all on the chopping block—and is set to become battlegrounds for DEI if this new bill passes.

But here’s the kicker: this push is disguised as a bipartisan “victory” for privacy rights. It’s not at all. But it’s so cleverly disguised that once again, Republicans have been duped into believing they’re championing a long-overdue resolution to privacy disputes and have already thrown their support behind it.

Typical GOP move. Nobody actually reads these massive bills, do they? However, what the GOP—and much of the public—fail to realize is that the “American Privacy Act of 2024” is nothing but a Trojan horse, sneakily reintroducing massive DEI quotas under the radar. It’s a classic wolf in sheep’s clothing scenario, where what’s being promoted as privacy protection is actually drastically reshaping society under the banner of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

The Volokh Conspiracy:

More than two-thirds of Americans think the Supreme Court was right to hold Harvard’s race-based admissions policy unlawful. But the minority who disagree have no doubt about their own moral authority, and there’s every reason to believe that they intend to undo the Court’s decision at the earliest opportunity.

Which could be as soon as this year. In fact, undoing the Harvard admissions decision is the least of it. Republicans and Democrats in Congress have embraced a precooked “privacy” bill that will impose race and gender quotas not just on academic admissions but on practically every private and public decision that matters to ordinary Americans. The provision could be adopted without scrutiny in a matter of weeks; that’s because it is packaged as part of a bipartisan bill setting federal privacy standards—something that has been out of reach in Washington for decades. And it looks as though the bill breaks the deadlock by giving Republicans some of the federal preemption their business allies want while it gives Democrats and left-wing advocacy groups a provision that will quietly overrule the Supreme Court’s Harvard decision and impose identity-based quotas on a wide swath of American life.

Isn’t it amazing, that the only time the two sides can agree and work together is when it’s against what the American people want? What does that tell you about our government? More from Volokh Conspiracy:

This tradeoff first showed up in a 2023 bill that Democratic and Republican members of the House commerce committee approved by an overwhelming 53-2 vote. That bill, however, never won the support of Sen. Cantwell (D-WA), who chairs the Senate commerce committee. This time around, a lightly revised version of the bill has been endorsed by both Sen. Cantwell and her House counterpart, Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA). The bill has a new name, the American Privacy Rights Act of 2024 (APRA), but it retains the earlier bill’s core provision, which uses a “disparate impact” test to impose race, gender, and other quotas on practically every institutional decision of importance to Americans.

“Disparate impact” has a long and controversial history in employment law; it’s controversial because it condemns as discriminatory practices that disproportionately affect racial, ethnic, gender, and other protected groups. Savvy employers soon learn that the easiest way to avoid disparate impact liability is to eliminate the disparity – that is, to hire a work force that is balanced by race and ethnicity. As the Supreme Court pointed out long ago, this is a recipe for discrimination; disparate impact liability can “leave the employer little choice . . . but to engage in a subjective quota system of employment selection.”  Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642, 652-53 (1989), quoting Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 448 (1975) (Blackmun, J., concurring).

[read more]

Sneaky bastards. This is why the republicans should vote "no" on any bill they don't get a chance to read in full. There might be some good in it, but I'll bet there is more bad than good in a massive bill.