The Justice Dept made the exact same allegations against Harvard, and last year a Federal Judge found that Harvard was constitutionally in the clear.
SCOTUS has said that race can be narrowly used in admissions to promote diversity, which Yale says they are doing. The fact that the Justice Department wants Yale to cease all uses of race in admissions (despite this interpretation) is suspect.
2. The facts are not entirely clear how Yale is using race but a “disparate impact” analysis may yield some insight.
i say this as someone who would have been directly affected if this claim were true
Its daily work currently consists of fighting sex-trafficking and other inarguably good pursuits... The claim that the DOJ is any more political today than a decade or three ago doesn't seem borne out by the facts, IMO.
Please research from non biased non spin news and look at actual documents unsealed.
There's also a perfectly reasonable argument on the facts to drop the case against Flynn - not least of all what appears to be motivated entrapment and no appropriate cause to investigate in the first place - but this becomes a politically charged argument and I feel it's inappropriate on HN.
There's probably some edgy contrarian aspect going on, but do note that this was spurred by a lawsuit brought in 2014 by those alleging that they were discriminated against.
The DOJ took it up, but at one level it would be obscene if they didn't - imagine the inverse (some evidence of anti-black admissions procedures is found), and the DOJ - who is tasked with prosecuting hate crimes and other civil rights-style issues - did not take it up.
In this case I almost feel like the Republican DOJ is being looked at sideways because one of the alleged victim parties is white... Had it been blacks and Asians, I doubt anyone would've cast aspersions on the Obama DOJ for taking up the charge.
TL;dr this sort of topic is the DOJ's bread and butter, and since it began via lawsuits from the affected parties I don't think there's much cynical "discretion" going on in this particular case.
You mean like publicly abandoning ongoing investigations of systematic racial discrimination by local police departments while dismissing the entire idea of conducting such investigations when there was evidence in hand as an intrusion on law enforcement?
The DOJ did that almost immediately when the current Administration took over.
> this sort of topic is the DOJ's bread and butter, and since it began via lawsuits from the affected parties I don't think there's much cynical "discretion" going on in this particular case.
The DOJ doesn't join or follow every, or even most, discrimination cases filed by private parties which are minimally viable and state claims which would also provide a public cause of action, so I have no idea on what basis you jump from “started by a private lawsuit” to “therefore doesn’t have much cynical discretion involved”.