edward blum, an american enterprise institute scholar and the man behind the botched attempt to rollback admissions policies at the university of texas at austin in the usa by abigail fisher is at it again. this time his new test case for the US supreme court (which he is hoping to make it to) also focuses on affirmative action. this time he is using asian americans as a straw man. why not just use a white dude? or does he think women and asians work as better props or are more easily manipulated?
fisher was raked over the coals by the media when she momentarily became the face of white angst. now edward blum is back and supposedly leading the charge with supposed angst-ridden asian americans who feel reverse discrimination is keeping them out of elite american universities such as harvard. but actually he has created an organization and accepted (according to a 2015 article from reuters) more than 500K to bring this case to court. despite his not being a lawyer. the “activist” may not even have clients. the plaintiff is called “students for fair admission.”
our question is not whether or not anyone has a legitimate gripe. if blum wants to throw away millions of the hard-earned money he made working his ass off as an investment banker, we would say let him do it. but apparently finding and /or creating plaintiffs to front his lawsuits could also be a great job for him. in the reuters article he also claims to have lined up another 900K on top of the 500K his non-profit organization has already accepted. we wonder what type of six figure salary he gets from this non-profit, which according to reuters only has 1 employee, blum.
our question is why file a lawsuit with nameless faceless plaintiffs? given that fisher became the face of a failed legal challenge that lasted more than
3 8 years and went to the supreme court, this time around blum has filed the lawsuit on behalf of an organization and not the individual citizens. again, according to a 2015 article from reuters At a court hearing in Boston on April 30, Harvard’s lawyer, Seth Waxman, raised questions about the anonymity. “What we have is a plaintiff that was created for the avowed and exclusive reason of suing Harvard,” he said.
what are the odds that these so-called aggrieved asian dudes and dudettes all belong to the same group? according to reuters, the defense was not initiated by asian americans, but by blum. who is neither asian nor buddhist. and how will the defense be able to challenge this case if they don’t have the individual names of the students who claim they are being shafted by affirmative action in the US?
and what is blum’s aims? we know that he funded a lawsuit to erode the rights of poor and working class whites, blacks and latinos. is he still pissed that he was forced to go to the university of texas at austin when in his head he should have went to harvard? given that his politics are on the far right-wing and harvard has been never known to operate on that perspective, every time the dude files a new lawsuit it re-validates that the committee tasked with deciding his fate 30 or so years ago probably made the right choice.
americans filing bogus lawsuits does not actually help the american people. but the lawsuits definitely help to continue to divide the american people and waste tax payer money.
that being said, we think that the UT austin way of admiting the top 10% of students in class from all schools makes sense. it evens out the playing field. but harvard is a private university, the school can do what it wants. the school could decide to only accept legacies. which used to be the case. a private university could also decide to not charge tuition and only admit students from impoverished families. the ivies in the usa, like the elite schools in france feel like they are educating the leaders of the future like ted cruz or supreme court justices. but some might argue that they made a mistake with ex googler james damore.