RSS Feed
August 21st, 2021 
Awake Goy Supposedly civil rights were supposed to make everyone equal under the law. The blindfolded goddess Justice was not supposed to view the race of an individual when weighing whether or not someone is guilty. In practice, we know that this has not been the case, as civil rights never really applied to Whites.
Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of white men and do not apply to them.” – Mary Frances Berry, former Chairwoman, US Commission on Civil Rights
Now the American Bar Association, which sets the standards for law schools, is poised to make diversity training and affirmative action (racial discrimination against White people) mandatory.
From The Washington Free Beacon:
The American Bar Association is poised to mandate diversity training and affirmative action at all of its accredited law schools, a move top legal scholars say could jeopardize academic freedom and force schools to violate federal law.
The association, which accredits nearly every law school in the United States, is mulling a plan that would require schools to “provide education to law students on bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism,” including a mandatory ethics course instructing students that they have an obligation to fight “racism in the law.” Schools would also be required to “take effective actions” to “diversify” their student bodies—even when doing so risks violating a law that “purports to prohibit consideration of” race or ethnicity.
The whole article is fairly interesting. One point that is made is that this mandate will actually cause some schools to potentially break (or at least “bend”) the law in order to comply.
There are fewer than 250 law schools in the United States, and 199 of them are accredited by the association. In most states, attending an ABA-accredited school is a prerequisite for taking the bar exam. So when the association sets standards for law schools, it is effectively setting them for the entire legal system: corporate lawyers, criminal prosecutors, state judges, and Supreme Court justices will all be educated in whatever ideology the association dictates—even if it is indifferent to the rule of law itself.
The proposed standards would institutionalize that indifference throughout legal academia. Laws prohibiting schools from considering race in admissions are “not a justification for a school’s non-compliance” with the diversity requirement, one standard reads. According to the Yale professors, “It would appear that [this language] instructs schools to risk violating state or federal law in order to retain certification.” Though the plan does tell schools to pursue diversity “by means other than those prohibited,” it never specifies what those means are, an omission the Yale professors say could encourage legally dubious activities.
Such activities might include using “personal ratings” to establish unofficial racial quotas, a practice that has landed Harvard in the Supreme Court. Though universities can use race as a “plus factor” in admissions, they cannot set hard floors or ceilings for any particular racial group. The ABA’s accreditation plan would encourage law schools to set those ceilings anyway, through the same sort of chicanery Harvard allegedly employs.
The existing laws of the United States are supposedly legacies of White supremacy, so they must be viewed as illegitimate anyway. The new crop of activist lawyers should not care as much about actual “laws” as they do about social justice!
It would also encourage students to see existing law as illegitimate. The plan mandates a course on “professional responsibility” that stresses lawyers’ “obligation” to fight racism in the legal system—implying the legal system is racist—and requires students to learn about “bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism” at least two other times before graduating. “Courses on racism and bias in the law” are one way of satisfying that second requirement. Insofar as this curriculum assumes the law is unjust, it supplies a justification for disobeying it.
So the association that is responsible for making sure lawyers are properly educated in the legal system is going to tell students that the legal system is racist? Sounds about par for the course.
Apparently there are some law professors who are not too fond of this new direction being taken by the ABA, but a few objections never stopped the anti-White agenda from rolling full steam ahead.
So who is behind this? Let’s take a look at Wikipedia.
Reginald m. Turner just got added as president, and he appears to be a light-skinned Black man. Let’s see about Executive Director and COO Jack L. Rives, though.
Every single time!
If it was not already hard enough for a pro-White activist to get a fair hearing in court, it will certainly become more difficult in the years to come. Far from being colorblind, the legal system has set its sights on targeting Whites.
Related posts:
Views: 0
Posted in 
Tags: 
