This week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard and the Students for Fair Admission v. University of North Carolina cases that brings fairness back to American college admissions by ruling it is unlawful to consider race as the main factor in one’s admission to a U.S. college or university. The racist practice known as “affirmative action” pushes qualified candidates aside and, instead of admitting them, lets potentially less qualified candidates have their places due to various racial attributes.
Leftist University of New Mexico president Garnett Stokes, who assumed the role in 2018, was angered by the Court’s decision, writing on Twitter, “We at @UNM are concerned about the precedent today’s Supreme Court ruling sets for further efforts to curb diversity, accessibility, and social mobility within our institutions and impact access and opportunities for all underrepresented members of our communities.”
“We know the educational and social benefits of inclusivity and will actively participate in exploring new ways that universities, including ours, can ensure diversity on their campuses,” she continued. “We will be examining the legal implications of the ruling and its possible effects on our practices. We will also continue to champion what we already do: build belonging through inclusivity and ensure our doors, experiences, and culture remain accessible and open to everyone.”
Despite the Supreme Court’s majority opinion clearly stating that “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,” Stokes and others have shown bitterness with the anti-racist ruling.
New Mexico House Speaker Javier Martínez claimed the ruling was made by a “rogue Supreme Court” he claims is “endangering Americans’ fundamental rights, freedoms and protections.”
He continued, “By rolling back decades of progress toward racial equity in education, we risk repeating a long, dark history of discrimination and exclusion within the very system intended to foster opportunity.” Notice how Martinez stressed the word “equity” and not “equality.”
“To hollow out affirmative action ignores a history of oppression. The playing field has never been level for marginalized communities,” Democrat U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján said.
During the Black Lives Matter/Antifa riots that plagued the country in 2020, including in Albuquerque, Stokes stood by BLM and said, “Black Lives Matter is more than a social media hashtag. It’s a social movement that compels all of us to listen, stand up, and speak out. It’s a call for positive action to enact meaningful and fundamental change. So, I’m working with my leadership team to take both immediate and long-term action and build upon the efforts we’ve made, and continue to make, to unify our campus, raise and promote different voices, and ensure UNM embodies its foundational principles of strength through diversity, and progress through inclusion.”
It is perfectly clear that when they say “equity”, what they mean is communism.
NO more money coming in to pay Professors for worthless degrees! My daughters worked while they were in college and got good degrees and are enjoying their success.
Of course UNM would! With “loan forgiveness” they know taxpayer money would just keep coming in and they,(UNM), could keep raising tuitions..
If we as a country were serious about black families, we would immediately stop paying black mothers to keep fathers out of their homes (through welfare programs.) The number of back fatherless homes has climbed to as high as 67%. This statistic alone confirms we’ll have a permanent poor underclass. You can have all the affirmative action you want but until that statistic changes, black poverty will remain.