Category: US Politics

The DOJ filed a lawsuit against Yale University on Thursday over charges that the university’s admissions office unlawfully discriminates against Asian and white applicants. Yale receives about $600 million in federal funding each year and holds an endowment of $30 billion.

According to a press release, the DOJ has filed a lawsuit against Yale University for allegedly discriminatory practices by the university’s admissions office. The lawsuit claims that the university discriminates against both Asian and white applicants during the admissions process. In fact, the department believes that race is the “determinative factor” in hundreds of admission decisions each year.

In a statement, Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband said that the Justice Department is working diligently to end illegal race discrimination by America’s colleges and universities. Dreiband said that he wants American students to know that they will be judged by colleges and universities based on their merit.

Illegal race discrimination by colleges and universities must end. This nation’s highest ideals include the notion that we are all equal under the law. For centuries, people from all over the world have learned of this ideal, left their ancestral homes, and come to the United States hoping that this country would live up to its ideals and that they and their families could enjoy equal opportunity and pursue the American dream. Countless Americans have pursued their dreams through higher education, and they continue to do so. All persons who apply for admission to colleges and universities should expect and know that they will be judged by their character, talents, and achievements and not the color of their skin. To do otherwise is to permit our institutions to foster stereotypes, bitterness, and division.”

The Justice Department believes that the university has violated Title VI by discriminating against students on this basis of their race. “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, … be subjected to discrimination under any program … receiving Federal financial assistance,” the relevant section of Title VI reads.

The press release points out that Yale University receives approximately $600 million each year in federal funding. The university’s endowment currently sits at over $30 billion.

Breitbart News reported in August that the Department of Justice had begun an investigation into discriminatory practices at Yale. The investigation followed a lawsuit filed against Harvard University over allegations that they, too, discriminated against Asian-American applicants during the admissions process.

Stay tuned to Breitbart News for more updates on this story.

The first Presidential debate and the Vice Presidential debates avoided any mention of the hot-button, trillion-dollar immigration issue that got Donald Trump elected in 2016.

“I’m consistently surprised about the lack of focus on immigration in these debates given Trump’s pitch in 2016,” tweeted Ali Vitali, an NBC reporter.

“Me too!” responded Julia Ainsley, who covers migrants’ issues for NBC. “Would have liked to hear more on Biden’s border plans and Pence’s response to recent reporting on family separation. Trump/Pence should be asked if they would ever separate migrant families again.”

“Agreed!” responded Michael Shear, a White House reporter for the New York Times, who sometimes writes about immigration issues.

The issue is not getting time in the debates because “the question isn’t being asked,” said Kevin Lynn, founder of U.S. Tech Workers. “The questions are being created without input from either of the parties, so it’s really the media and the entities that are putting on the debate that are not talking about immigration.”

“They really should have brought it up because [Trump’s] immigration policy is impacting wages in a positive way,” he added.

“It’s the 2000-lb elephant in the room that’s been egregiously omitted even though this is what got Trump elected,” said an experienced and unemployed network engineer from the Midwest. He continued:

I’m not holding my breath … The moderators get to pick the questions all by themselves, and they’re clearly going to show bias. They’re totally pretending like its not an issue — even with this horrible labor market when there’s still so many foreign workers here.

“I have long past hit the point of accepting that a presidential debate is not going to have the candidates discuss immigration,” tweeted Dara Lind, a former Vox.com writer who is now working at ProPublica.org. She continued:

Or if it does, it will ask a question in such a broad way that it can be answered with the candidate’s single canned talking point on immigration.

This was true in 2016, when Trump was running on immigration far more than he is now.

…

I’m sick of specifics being asked on other policy issues, and immigration being treated as a culture war issue instead of a policy one.

The Vice Presidential debate moderator was Susan Page, the Washington bureau chief for USA Today, which has a pro-migration, pro-business skew.

Page asked about climate change, the coronavirus crash, abortion, President Donald Trump’s willingness to leave office after a defeat, and other questions from an establishment, corporatist perspective. But she did not ask about the public’s preference that employers hire Americans before importing migrants, or the impact of immigration on wages, or the Democrats’ promise to import more immigrants, visa-workers, and refugees, or the GOP’s preference for skilled workers over unskilled migration.

Trump’s campaign is not pressuring the issue in 2020 as it did in 2016, said Jessica Vaughan, policy director at the Center for Immigration Studies. Trump’s “campaign staff seemed to fear offending people,” she said, adding:

But they’re separate from the actual immigration agency officials who understand the issue and how it resonates with Americans. There’s some disconnect there between those in the Trump administration who understand how important this issue is to Americans — and who want to see Trump carry on what he has started with respect to controlling immigration — [versus] the campaign staffers whose goal seems to be to avoid offending anyone, and by doing so, squandering an opportunity to attract support for the president.

“Trump has a lot to talk about, and it’s good,” said Lynn. “When you look at what he did with the Tennessee Valley Authority [workers], and when you look at the H-1B rules that were launched this week … that are going to save America jobs and that are going to save job opportunities for Americans,” he said.

“This is why I believe there’s no mention of it — Immigration is what Trump won on in 2016,” he said, adding:

The Democratic party– the party of labor — is scared to talk about immigration because with so many Americans, either furloughed, unemployed, or underemployed, they know how the public would react to the [Democrats’] concept of open borders. And as our country faces an economic crisis like we have now, and people are not optimistic about the future, they naturally will become more insular when it comes to immigration. So that’s why the Democrats don’t want it mentioned.

Recently released court documents reveal that Google is sharing data on search keywords with police departments. According to the documents, police departments are able to obtain data from Google on every individual who has searched for a specific keyword. If the allegations are true, police departments are using IP addresses provided by Google to connect users to specific crimes. However, privacy experts believe the practice violates the Fourth Amendment.

According to a report by CNET, Google is sharing data on search keywords with police departments around the country. Recently published court documents suggest that Google is handing over the identity of all users that have searched a specific keyword that may be relevant to a police investigation.

The report claims that police in Florida used Google’s keyword search data to link Michael Williams to the burning of a vehicle. Investigators asked Google to provide them with a list of every user that had searched for the victim’s address around the time of the arson.

Privacy experts are concerned that recent trends suggest that police departments can obtain evidence without a proper warrant. Instead of asking Google for data on a specific user, police departments may be able to obtain the IP addresses of the hundreds of users that have searched for a specific keyword.

Albert Fox Cahn, the executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, argues that Google’s practice of sharing data with the police could be unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.

“When a court authorizes a data dump of every person who searched for a specific term or address, it’s likely unconstitutional,” Cahn said.

In a statement, a Google spokesperson said that “keyword warrants” make up less than one percent of the total warrants issued by the courts for Google data.

“We require a warrant and push to narrow the scope of these particular demands when overly broad, including by objecting in court when appropriate,” the spokesperson said. “These data demands represent less than 1% of total warrants and a small fraction of the overall legal demands for user data that we currently receive.”

Stay tuned to Breitbart News for more updates on this story.