Author Topic: After Harvard: The Fight Against Race-Based Admissions at the USNA  (Read 57 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online mountaineer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 62,026
After Harvard: The Fight Against Race-Based Admissions at the US Naval Academy
An in-depth investigation into race-based admissions at America’s elite military academies—and the landmark case that challenged them (and lost)
Zach Goldberg
Apr 09, 2025
Quote
... Race-conscious admissions are illegal in American universities—and, as of February 2025, are now banned at the institutions that train the nation’s military leaders. This dramatic shift followed President Donald Trump’s January 27, 2025, executive order prohibiting race- or sex-based preferences across the U.S. Armed Forces, and a subsequent directive by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth enforcing those principles throughout the Department of Defense. In response, the Superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy (USNA), Vice Admiral Yvette Davids, formally revised the Academy’s admissions policy on February 14, 2025. The new guidance prohibits consideration of race, ethnicity, or sex at any stage of the admissions process—a change confirmed in Senate testimony and a Department of Justice court filing.1

Although USNA has insisted that its use of race was “limited” and “non-determinative,” it also admitted to never having studied the impact of race on the composition of its admitted classes. Moreover, statistical analysis of admissions data tells a different story: a white applicant with a 5% chance of admission would have a 50% chance if evaluated as Black, and more than 70% of Black admits would not have been admitted under a race-neutral system. These findings, among similarly damning others examined in this report, directly contradict USNA’s characterization of its policies. ...

Without stronger institutional safeguards, nothing prevents a future Secretary of Defense—or Academy Superintendent—from reinstating race-based preferences. Second, if allowed to stand, the district court ruling sets a dangerous precedent: that other government agencies in a future administration may invoke vague claims of “national security” to justify racial classifications. The result would be a profound shift in equal protection jurisprudence, granting the executive branch a new and expansive justification for racial classifications in areas far beyond military personnel policy. Finally, the legal, empirical, and policy arguments advanced in SFFA v. USNA offer a critical lens for evaluating the proper role of merit, fairness, and equality in military officer selection. ...
Read full report at https://zachgoldberg.substack.com/p/after-harvard-the-fight-against-race
The abnormal is not the normal just because it is prevalent.
Roger Kimball, in a talk at Hillsdale College, 1/29/25