Harvard Sues For The Right To Discriminate And Still Get Paid

So what is Harvard objecting to exactly>

The letter to Harvard that is conditioning federal funding on the University complying with the demands in the letter can be read here - Letter to Harvard.

Take a moment to read it.

There's really nothing in the demands in the letter that a reasonable person would find objectionable - Harvard needs to end a pattern of discrimination and hire faculty and administration and intake students based on merit alone; end a tolerance for antisemitism and related threats and vilenceeat the University; build up tolerance and viewpoint diversity in higher education; and actually reform and enforce current student disciplinary rules.

Harvard is apparently fighting in order to be allowed to keep on discriminating, not hiring on merit,  and tolerating antisemitism and student disruptions on campus - and to continue to receive Federal funds while doing so.

Quite a noble hill for Harvard to die on, but they can do themselves.

Harvard of course claims it is its first amendment right to make its own rules.  As a private institution it can - and indeed the Federal Government is not saying it cannot.

Instead, it is stating - correctly - that the Federal Government is allowed to condition funds on adherence to federal policy objectives.

For Harvard to be able to claim that the Federal Government cannot condition spending on adoption of certain policies and conditions in return for the funds is ludicrous and  goes against quite established constitutional law.

If Harvard wishes to continue its actions, all it needs to do is forgo Federal funding and then it can be as discriminatory and non-compliant with Federal guidelines as it may wish. 

But instead, Harvard is suing to have its cake and eat it too.

One should note well that Harvard, the Left, and progressives in general didn't make a peep when the Obama administration sent out his "Dear Colleagues" letter to Colleges to change their procedures on Title IX matters -- to reduce the due process due to the accused in such matters -- and "disparate impact on racial groups" in disciplinary actions -- or else.

Harvard's case should be dismissed and Harvard should be required to make the choice everyone else must make when deciding to accept Federal Government funding - accept the strings that come with the dollars, or forgo the dollars.

Seriously? And You Want To Practice Law?

Instapundit points to this real head-scratcher coming out of the Columbia Law School:

Powerline:  Not a parody

Columbia Law School is permitting students claiming to be impaired due to the emotional impact of recent non-indictments in the Michael Brown and Eric Garner matters to postpone taking their final exams.

Columbia, allegedly a first-tier law school, apparently has some real special snowflakes that need to postpone taking their exams to deal with the trauma of the grand jury decisions regarding Michael Brown and Eric Garner.  Not that they're relatives or anything like that, just because they are "particularly, but not only, students of color".

Columbia has even arranged for a trauma specialist to be available for those who can't handle the results of the two grand jury decisions, one of which, in the case of the Brown decision, was by all evidence quite correct.

Look, if you can't handle the outcome of an unfavorable judicial decision of which you were not even a part of and then you become so traumatized that you can't write an exam, you have no business practicing law or even planning to do so.

What are you going to do when you're representing a real client?  Ask for a timeout when you get an adverse decision? State you're too traumatized to go to trial?  Ask for a trauma specialist when the court rules against your motion for summary disposition? Your client will be rather unimpressed, as will the court.

Quick note kids:  In real life, a judge will not give you a hall pass due to unrelated judicial results in another state or even another court that doesn't affect your case.

Sorry, but Columbia should move down a few tiers for this idiocy if this decision is indicative of the caliber of student that they have.

Update: via Legal Insurrection, this insanity has spread to the delicate flowers at Harvard Law School as well.

Got Texans?

Thunder Over Michigan had T-6 Texans in abundance, along with the naval variant the SNJ and their Canadian cousin the Harvard.

A RCAF Harvard number 436

And number 407 (it charges a toll every time you fly it)

RCAF Harvards with aircraft numbers 422 and 426 were also present.

Under the British Commonwealth Air Training Program, Harvards taught many a British Commonwealth pilot and crew how to fly over Canadian skies before engaging in combat in Europe. THE BCATP was an incredible success. By the end of the war in Europe, trained 49,707 pilots, 29,963 various navigators, 15,673 air bombers, 18,696 wireless operator/air gunners, 15,700 air gunners and 1,913 flight engineers. The total number of trained aircrew from the BCATP was 131,552.

The US Navy designated the aircraft the SNJ:

Together they roared through the skies.

And flew In elements of four:

And flew solo passes:

And one SNJ got used for some modelling after the flight was done:

The T-6 Texan/Harvard/SNJ was well represented with the largest number of its type both flying and on the ground at the show and they put on a great display. It's a wonderful aircraft to wtch roaring through the skies, and the formation flying skills of these pilots were very impressive indeed.