Connect with us

Politics

Nonprofit Sues Northwestern University Over Discriminatory Affirmative-Action Hiring Practices

Published

on

Whistleblowers from within Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law reported that highly qualified white men were rejected in favor of “mediocre and undistinguished women and racial minorities” in violation of federal anti-discrimination law, according to a lawsuit filed Tuesday.

The nonprofit group Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preferences (FASORP), formed “for the purpose of restoring meritocracy in academia,” is challenging the school’s “affirmative-action” hiring practices in court. Former Texas Solicitor General Jonathan F. Mitchell authored the lawsuit, which alleges Northwestern has violated several federal laws, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Title IX

“Faculty hiring at American universities is a cesspool of corruption and lawlessness. For decades, left-wing faculty and administrators have been thumbing their noses at federal anti-discrimination statutes and openly discriminating on account of race and sex when appointing professors,” Mitchell wrote in the lawsuit. “This practice, known as ‘affirmative action,’ is firmly entrenched at institutions of higher learning and aggressively pushed by leftist ideologues on faculty-appointments committees and in university DEI offices. But it is prohibited by federal law, which bans universities that accept federal funds from discriminating on account of race or sex in their hiring decisions.”

Bad Actors

The suit names a variety of individual bad actors as defendants in addition to Northwestern University. These include law school Dean Hari M. Osofsky, Professors Sarah Lawksy, Janice Nadler, and Daniel Rodriguez, and law review student editors Dheven Unni and Jazmyne Denman.

The lawsuit alleges then-Dean Rodriguez created a mandate 12 years ago

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Politics

Joe Rogan Endorses Trump After Discussing ‘Most Compelling Case For Trump You’ll Hear’ With Elon Musk

Published

on

Popular podcaster and comedian Joe Rogan endorsed former President Donald Trump on the night before the election after a conversation with business magnate Elon Musk.

“If it wasn’t for him we’d be f-cked,” Rogan said of Musk in a post on X. “He makes what I think is the most compelling case for Trump you’ll hear, and I agree with him every step of the way.”

“For the record, yes, that’s an endorsement of Trump,” Rogan added.

The endorsement comes after Rogan had both Trump and his running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio, on his show for lengthy interviews. He apparently tried to get Vice President Kamala Harris on the show as well, but indicated that her campaign had tried to preemptively neuter the interview by limiting the time and scope.

“I view this election as a turning point, like a fork in the road of destiny that is incredibly important,” Musk said. “You know, I’ve not been politically active until this election. And the reason I’ve been politically active this election is because I think if we don’t, if we don’t elect Trump, I think we will lose, we will lose democracy in this country.”

“What I’m saying is like, this election is the last chance to preserve democracy in America. Mark my words,” he added. “Everything they accuse Trump of, they are guilty of. And if Trump doesn’t win, this will be the last real election in America.”

Rogan and Musk marveled at the many hoaxes levied

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Politics

Notorious Wisconsin Election Official Is Ordered To Follow The Law

Published

on

Swing state Wisconsin’s most notorious elections clerk repeatedly failed to follow election integrity laws. Now, on the eve of Election Day, the state’s elections regulator is ordering Green Bay Clerk Celestine Jeffreys to comply. 

The Wisconsin Elections Commission sent a letter to Jeffreys late last week after finally dealing with a complaint filed by the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) on behalf of Green Bay residents. 

According to the complaint, the clerk did not comply with procedures for auditing voters who registered to vote at their polling places on Election Day for 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 elections. 

“In short, and as detailed further in the analysis below, the Commission finds that the Complaint did show probable cause to believe that a violation of law or abuse of discretion occurred with relation to Clerk Jeffreys’s procedural actions,” the WEC order states. 

PILF filed the complaint in April, but the commission is just getting around to issuing its decision and order. 

‘A Lack of Awareness’

So will Jeffreys face any discipline? Not so much. 

The commission, just a few days before the election, ordered Jeffreys to take “affirmative steps” to comply with the law as well as the commission’s updated Election Day Registration postcard guidance issued in February 2023. She must also certify to the commission that she has completed the steps required under law “at the earliest time practicable after the November 5, 2024 election, but no later than Monday, February 3, 2025.”

As The Federalist has reported, Jeffreys earlier

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Politics

Georgia Supreme Court Rules Democrat-Led County Can’t Accept Thousands Of Late Absentee Ballots

Published

on

The Georgia Supreme Court ruled on Monday that Democrat-run Cobb County cannot accept thousands of absentee ballots that arrive after the Election Day deadline.

Cobb County announced on Thursday that as of Oct. 30, “more than 3,000 absentee ballots requested by last Friday’s deadline had not been mailed.”

Cobb County Board of Elections Chairwoman Tori Silas said that the county was “taking every possible step to get these ballots to the voters who requested them” but that the county was “unprepared for the surge in requests and lacked the necessary equipment to process the ballots quickly.” While absentee ballot requests had “been averaging 440 per day … that number surged to 750 per day” during the final week to request an absentee ballot, the county said.

To remedy the issue, the county announced on Thursday that it would overnight the late ballots for a Friday morning (Nov. 1) delivery with “prepaid express return envelopes to ensure voters can return them by Tuesday’s deadline.”

But on Friday, the ACLU and the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a suit arguing that, despite the county taking steps to get the ballots delivered to voters by Friday, voters would be “disenfranchised.”

Cobb County Judge Robert Flournoy bought the bogus argument, ruling on Friday that the 3,000 or so voters who received a late mail-in ballot could return those ballots before 5 p.m. on Nov. 8 — three full days after Election Day — as long as the ballots were postmarked by 7 p.m. on

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Trending