If it already hasn’t been made plain enough, the federal Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights is getting out of the social justice advocacy business … and will just “enforce the laws that Congress passes as written and in full — no less and no more.”
So reiterates Kenneth Marcus, assistant secretary of education for civil rights who added “We are law enforcement officials.”
According to The Washington Post, this means the DoE has ditched Obama-era guidelines on affirmative action, and is “considering repealing” directives which mandate schools investigate discipline policies which “disproportionately” affect minorities. Among other things.
“The movement to narrow discrimination enforcement,” the Post reports, “reflects a broader ethos at work in the Education Department under [Betsy] DeVos[*], who has sought to reduce federal control over schools, saying oversight is best done by local communities and states.”
Interestingly, DeVos finds herself at odds with GOP lawmakers; last year they rejected her $3.8 million reduction plan and actually increased DoE funding. A similar scenario appears likely this year.
For conservatives, the changes represent what they say is a much-needed rollback of an overly aggressive predecessor. They say the Obama administration tried to impose its own preferences, supplanting local decision-making.
They also argue that forcing schools to make policy based on a racial analysis of the outcomes can lead officials to inject race into what had been race-free decision-making and can even lead to quotas based on race for discipline and other policies.
They also argue that forcing schools to make policy based on a racial analysis of the outcomes can lead officials to inject race into what had been race-free decision-making and can even lead to quotas based on race for discipline and other policies.
“The Obama administration was basically saying, ‘Even if there’s no evidence of discrimination or implicit bias, you can still be found guilty of violating kids’ civil rights,’ ” said Michael Petrilli, president of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute. He said a range of factors help explain different outcomes, including poverty, family structure and neighborhoods. “It would be naive to think we’re not going to see racial differences when the experiences kids are having vary so dramatically.”
The Obama DoE relied on “disparate impact analysis” which, the Post says, “attempts to root out unintentional discrimination by looking for policies that are neutral on their face but unequal in result.” Progressives laud such “analyses,” but conservatives pan them saying “other factors may explain unequal outcomes.”
Marcus says disparate impact can lead to schools “injecting racial considerations” into matters where there are none just to prevent unequal outcomes.
Court decisions back up conservatives’ concerns. They say disparate impact considerations are “supposed to be based on statistical findings that control ‘for various factors that one would expect to be relevant to the likelihood of disciplinary action'” — factors such as poverty and family structure.
MORE: Feds launch sketchy racial ‘disparate impact’ investigation
MORE: ‘Disparate impact’ concerns will only further segregation
IMAGE: Shutterstock.com
Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter
Please join the conversation about our stories on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, MeWe, Rumble, Gab, Minds and Gettr.