{"id":1121343,"date":"2024-01-23T17:44:49","date_gmt":"2024-01-23T22:44:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/uncategorized\/california-democrats-work-to-make-discrimination-legal-again-the-federalist\/"},"modified":"2024-01-23T17:44:49","modified_gmt":"2024-01-23T22:44:49","slug":"california-democrats-work-to-make-discrimination-legal-again-the-federalist","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/federalist\/california-democrats-work-to-make-discrimination-legal-again-the-federalist\/","title":{"rendered":"California Democrats Work To Make Discrimination Legal (Again) &#8211; The Federalist"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    Californias Democrat legislators are trying to make    discrimination legal again. A bill called ACA7    seeks to go around the states constitutional ban on    affirmative action and legalize discrimination. The state    Assembly has passed the bill, and it is under consideration in    the state Senate.  <\/p>\n<p>    Californias voters passed Proposition 209 in 1996 with an    overwhelming majority. The proposition banned affirmative    action in the states Constitution and mandated that California    shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential    treatment to, any individual or group based on race, sex,    color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public    employment, public education, or public contracting.  <\/p>\n<p>    Democrats predicted that Prop 209 would have detrimental    effects on the minorities in the state. They thought that    without racial preference in college admissions, minority    students enrollment at the University of California (UC)    system would drop significantly.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Democrats fearmongering didnt come true.Research by    Charles L. Geshekter, an emeritus professor of history at    California State University-Chico, shows that since Prop 209s    passage, minority students enrollment in the UC system has    increased, and their graduation rates have also improved.    Geshekter credited the ban on racial preferences in college    admissions with leading to a redistribution of minority    students among UC campuses. More of them achieved better    academic outcomes when they attended a college that offered an    apparently better match for their academic backgrounds and    preparation.  <\/p>\n<p>    Even the Los Angeles Times had to admit that UCs student body    ismore racially    diverse today. For example, UCs 2020 freshman class was    composed of 36 percent Hispanics, 35 percent Asians, 5 percent    blacks, and 21 percent whites.Additionally, about 44% of    admitted students were low-income, while 45% were the first in    their families to attend a four-year university.  <\/p>\n<p>    Californias Democrats and their allies, however, never let    inconvenient truths stand in the way. They insisted (without    proof) that Prop 209 was a barrier to remedying the states    systemic racism and tried to overturn Prop 209 through Prop 16    in 2020.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Yes on 16 campaign had the support of Democrat Gov. Gavin    Newsom,tech billionaires in    Silicon Valley, corporate media, and leftist organizations    in the state. They demonized the No on Prop 16 campaign as    awhite supremacist    effort, though racially diverse groups, including Asians    and African Americans, supported the No campaign. The Yes    campaign also outspent the No campaign 14 to 1. Still,    California votersrejected Prop 16    decisively.  <\/p>\n<p>    Prop 16s defeat was not an outlier. In 2019, voters in    Washington, another blue state,defeatedtheir    Democrat-controlled legislatures attempt to repeal the states    decade-long ban on affirmative action.    Additionally,Pew    Researchfinds that 74 percent [of Americans] think    race and ethnicity should not be considered in admissions    decisions. For gender, 82 percent think it shouldnt be    considered. The results extend to every racial group and to    Democrats as well as Republicans.  <\/p>\n<p>    Californias Democrat legislators should have accepted defeat    graciously, respected voters wishes, and shifted their energy    and resources to other pressing issues. Instead, they couldnt    take no for an answer. They chose to try to repeal Prop 209    again.  <\/p>\n<p>    Last February, Assemblyman Corey A. Jackson, D-Perris,    introduced Assembly Constitution Amendment 7, or ACA7. The    bill would amend Prop    209 by authorizing the governor of California to issue    waivers to public entities that wish to use state funds for    evidence-based or research-informed and culturally specific    programs to increase life expectancy, improve educational    outcomes, and lift specific ethnic groups and marginalized    genders out of poverty.  <\/p>\n<p>    Clearly, ACA7 is a sly attempt to gut Prop 209 and make    discrimination legal again in California. No wonder supporters    referred to ACA7    as a skinnier affirmative-action measure.  <\/p>\n<p>    Fellow Assemblyman Bill Essayli, R-Corona, voiced his objection    to ACA7. He stated, We need to be treating each other equally,    with dignity and respect, and stop the division. In response,    Jackson referred to    Essayli, the first Muslim member of the California Assembly, as    a white supremacist.  <\/p>\n<p>    Earlier this year, the California Reparations Task Force, a    committee created by legislation and backed by Newsom, gave    ACA7 a boost. The committee included the    repeal of Prop 209 as one of its recommendations to the    California Legislature in May 2023.  <\/p>\n<p>    But a month later, the U.S. Supreme Courtruled that    Harvard University and the University of North Carolinas    race-based college admissions were unconstitutional, violating    the 14th Amendments equal protection clause. The ruling    effectively bans affirmative action.  <\/p>\n<p>    Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, The color of a persons skin is    irrelevant to that individuals equal status as a citizen of    this nation. To treat him differently on the basis of such a    legally irrelevant trait is, therefore, a deviation from the    equality principle and a constitutional injury. All racial    stereotypes harm and demean individuals.  <\/p>\n<p>    A Gallup pollfound that 68    percent of U.S. adults, including 63 percent of Asians, 68    percent of Hispanics, and 52 percent of black respondents,    support the Supreme Courts decision.  <\/p>\n<p>    Since the courts ruling, many state legislatures have    considered bills restricting so-called diversity, equity, and    inclusion (DEI) programs at public colleges and universities.    Five states  Florida, North Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee,    and Texas  passed legislation to ban some DEI programs, such    as affirmative action in hiring and admissions, from their    higher education institutions. Some American corporations have    also begun to reevaluate their DEI initiatives. They have    learned that these initiatives have reinforced stereotypes,    worsened the division of the workforce, and failed to create an    inclusive workplace. Tech giants such as Google and Meta    havemade cuts to their    DEI initiatives and laid off DEI-focused employees.  <\/p>\n<p>    Jackson and his Democrat colleagues in the California    Legislature should have dropped ACA7 into a recycle bin and    focused on other issues voters prioritize, such as drug    overdose deaths, rampant crime, a growing homeless population,    unaffordable energy and housing, and the rising cost of doing    business in the state. Instead, Democrats doubled down and    passed the bill in the California Assembly last September. ACA7    has now advanced to the Senate. If the Senate approves it by    June 2024, ACA7 will appear on the state ballot in November    this year, and Californians must vote again on the same issue    they rejected merely four years ago.  <\/p>\n<p>    Gail Heriot, a commissioner on the U.S. Commission on Civil    Rights and a law professor at the University of San Diego, is a    proponent of Prop 209. She believes that Proposition 209 says    something fundamental  that our laws should not discriminate    on the basis of race, ethnicity, or sex. Its not a matter of    which groups get the benefit and which bear the burden. Its a    matter of principle.  <\/p>\n<p>    Heriot has launched aNo on ACA7    petition at Change.org. Anyone, including non-California    residents, can sign it. Heriot hopes to collect at least 26,000    signatures by next month and send a powerful message to the    Senate: ACA7 is a bad idea, and senators should respect voters    wishes by not moving the bill forward. In a state as diverse    as California, it is all the more important that the government    be prohibited from engaging in preferential treatment, Heriot    said.  <\/p>\n<p>    Since bad ideas that originate in California tend to spread to    the rest of the country, any American who believes that all    men are created equal ought to sign the No on ACA7    petition. Let California legislators know that racial    discrimination in any shape or form is wrong and nothing can    justify it.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Go here to read the rest: <\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2024\/01\/23\/california-democrats-work-to-legalize-discrimination-after-voters-rejected-it-twice\" title=\"California Democrats Work To Make Discrimination Legal (Again) - The Federalist\">California Democrats Work To Make Discrimination Legal (Again) - The Federalist<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Californias Democrat legislators are trying to make discrimination legal again. A bill called ACA7 seeks to go around the states constitutional ban on affirmative action and legalize discrimination. The state Assembly has passed the bill, and it is under consideration in the state Senate.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/federalist\/california-democrats-work-to-make-discrimination-legal-again-the-federalist\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[487839],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1121343","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-federalist"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1121343"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1121343"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1121343\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1121343"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1121343"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1121343"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}