A political commission on racism has been requested by several universities.
The work force wants to inspire Harvard to take action to stop harassing Jewish students on its campus or forfeit its funding for the program.
Advertisement
Harvard responds by saying it won’t get bullied by Washington.
The Trump presidency also advised Harvard to stop using race as a factor in its admittance, hiring, and campaign, contrary to the law, among other things.
Additionally, it directed the school to outlaw the use of masks, which have encouraged harsh demonstrators with secrecy in the post-COVID era of protests.
According to civil rights laws, the government’s decision to stop race-based partiality was in line with the administration’s previous Supreme Court ruling, which particularly forbids affirmative action at Harvard and elsewhere.
No problem. According to Harvard, the Trump presidency violated its First Amendment right. Therefore, it has resisted the government’s commands for a while. Harvard has lost its$ 2.2 billion give of federal money, at least for the moment. Among others, former president Barack Obama praised Harvard’s refusal of the hatred task force’s demands. He argued that the Trump administration’s attempts were futile.
What kind of educational liberation, however, are Harvard and Obama discussing? The right to be discriminated against and segregated based on race in hiring, enrollment, dormitories, and graduations? The right of 500 Harvard individuals to censor other pupils ‘ classes, stifle traffic, and harass students on the grounds of their faith or opinions of Israel?
Advertisement
Despite all of Harvard’s phrases, its rooms are still being stymied. Israeli individuals continue to be afraid. What do Obama state if, for instance, masked disrupters harassed African-American students at Harvard on campus? Or did students who covered their faces with hats as a way to express their hatred in dark studies classes crash? Did he demand that Harvard comply with the federal civil rights laws from the Trump management? Keep in mind that Harvard is a private institution with a mostly exempt fund of over$ 50.2 billion. It is once more also receiving$ 2.2 billion in federal money, which is currently suspended.
Harvard is not subject to the leadership process force’s interpretation of governmental law.
Instead, the Trump commission is merely warning Harvard that if it still wishes to continue receiving about$ 2.2 billion in public money from the federal government, it must adhere to existing laws and executive orders.
Does Harvard recall the terrible testimony of Claudine Gay, its previous president? She allegedly misrepresented to a parliamentary commission that Harvard had taken action against racist student protestors in its growing uprisings.
Advertisement
Does Harvard comprehend why the Supreme Court found it to have violated the” Equal Protection Clause” of the Fourteenth Amendment and had committed discrimination against Asian-Americans? Does Harvard have any idea why it loses$ 150 million in donor giving annually? Given that it still occurs frequently at its numerous professional schools and academic courses, does Harvard realize that no one is also convinced of its pretenses that it” cannot and will not tolerate disturbance” of classes?
Maybe Harvard should adopt the approach of independent Hillsdale College, which has longer aspired to become free of federal regulations. In contrast to Harvard, the university put its legendary money where its mouth was and agreed to give up all federal funding in order to be completely of Washington’s insect appendages.
There is one important difference, though, between Harvard and Hillsdale. Regardless of whether a Democratic or Republican leadership received funding, Hillsdale does no, in any case, accept federal funding. It is sincere in the belief that very frequently, the federal government itself violates justice under the rules when racial and sex differences exist. It also believes that the government violates freedom.
Harvard does not adhere to these rules. Its contention is not about the idea of a federal government that is willing to compel private colleges to adhere to certain rules. It only has a conflict with the Trump percentage or, theoretically, any other comparable traditional administration that might want it to adhere to the law as a prerequisite for being funded by the federal government.
Advertisement
Then, Harvard has no problem with a liberal-liberal federal government that will impose all kinds of Title IX or DEI initiatives on personal and Religious colleges that appear to have lost their independence by accepting federal funding. When state and federal governments in the past blatantly harassed Hillsdale, it has said little.
So Harvard can blatantly set itself free by carrying out its agenda on its own$ 50 billion, just like Hillsdale does quietly with its$ 1 billion, without the taxpayer’s money, whether it be Democrats or Republicans.
Editor’s Note: Unaccountable federal judges are abusing President Trump’s plan and disrespecting the people’s will.
Help us highlight corrupt judges who are determined to put an end to President Trump’s shift agenda. Use the discount code FIGHT to receive 60 % off your account when you become a PJ Media VIP.
