MAGA is fighting back against the mob and so are we… but we need your help. Join our growing army and click here to subscribe to Revolver. Or give the gift of Revolver—simply select the annual subscription and select “This is a gift” on the next page. If you want to give extra during this critical time, you can make a one-time or recurring monthly donation — whether it’s $1 or $1,000, every bit goes towards the battle to save our great nation.

Justice might not be a common sight in our country these days. Yet every now and then, a ray of hope manages to peek through, and those on the side of righteousness get a moment of triumph. And right now, that type of moment is unfolding, all thanks to a remarkably humble surrender from the University of North Carolina. In a recent statement, UNC has pledged their undying commitment to upholding the Supreme Court ruling following their defeat in an affirmative action case.  In addition, UNC has also pledged to extend that same non-racist fairness to their hiring practices as well.

What’s more, they are admitting they spent $35 million in legal fees on a losing case and calling the whole thing a “moment of humility.” What a win for the good guys.

Here an excerpt from the Wall Street Journal piece.

When the Supreme Court struck down the University of North Carolina’s affirmative-action program in June, the trustees of its flagship Chapel Hill campus were quick to respond.

Embracing the letter and spirit of the law, the board passed a nondiscrimination resolution in July that applies not only to admissions but to hiring and contracting as well. The resolution goes beyond race to prohibit discrimination based on “race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, disability, genetic information, or veteran status.”

UNC’s trustees were already trying to move the institution in this direction before the decision. Board member Marty Kotis began advocating a resolution forbidding discrimination in hiring and contracting in 2021. After the Supreme Court ruling, an overwhelming majority of the full board approved a more comprehensive version.

The resolution includes language from Chief Justice John Roberts’s majority opinion to specify that “the University shall not ‘establish through application essays or other means’ any regime of or encourage heuristics and/or proxies premised upon race-based preferences in hiring or admissions. If the University considers the personal experience of applicants for admission, each applicant ‘must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual—not on the basis of race.’ ”

“This is a moment of humility,” said the board’s vice chairman, John Preyer. “For nine years, we’ve spent in the neighborhood of $35 million to lose a high-profile case. Why did we do that? Was that the right thing to do?”

But the fight is just getting started. Many of these s0-called esteemed institutions are hell-bent on continuing their racist ways. The Wall Street Journal piece continues:

Meanwhile, Harvard, UNC’s co-litigant, has looked for ways to keep discriminating, and so have many other institutions. They focus on one sentence of the court’s ruling: “Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.”

Harvard responded to the decision by citing this line in isolation, suggesting it would treat it as a loophole. The university said it would comply with the law but reaffirmed its commitment to diversity, commenting, “we will determine how to preserve, consistent with the Court’s new precedent, our essential values.”

Other institutions responded similarly, indicating they would follow the law but look for ways to skirt it. Now that applications for fall 2024 are open, it is evident these schools are willing to risk further litigation by using admissions essays to continue to discriminate using race and other identity characteristics.

Truthfully, only a small number of colleges, like Harvard, have the financial means and resources to subvert this ruling. Yet, if a significant amount of pressure is applied, even those institutions might find themselves depleted and eventually crumble to the ruling.