A federal judge has rejected a challenge to the use of race in admissions policies at the Naval Academy

By: Eliot Pierce

Sharing is caring!

A federal judge ruled that the Naval Academy had a strong national security interest in maintaining diversity in the US military, dismissing a complaint against the school’s use of race in admissions practices.

The decision rendered Friday by US Senior District Judge Richard Bennett, a George W. Bush appointee, is a major setback to the legal attempt to overturn the academy’s affirmative action policies, but it also makes it evident that the executive branch, which will soon be headed by a commander in chief who opposes such diversity initiatives, is where decisions on such matters start and finish.

In an interview, Pete Hegseth, the president-elect Donald Trump’s choice to lead the Pentagon, criticized the military’s diversity initiatives, stating, “Woke sh*t has got to go.”

The president said, “The only litmus test we care about is whether you’re in for warfighting and that’s it.” Diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI) and critical race theory (CRT) must be removed from military academies in order to prevent young officers from being indoctrinated into this way of thinking.

Bennett wrote in the 179-page decision: In summary, the Court, taking into account all available evidence, concludes that the military’s interest in expanding and preserving a diverse and highly qualified officer corps is based on history and learned experience, and that such a corps is still essential to military effectiveness and, consequently, to national security.

Bennett referred to the conservative organization Students for Fair Admissions, which brought the complaint in federal court in Maryland, and stated that the plaintiff’s allegation to the contrary goes against decades of widespread historical and military agreement.

See also  Disney World guests jumped in to stop a guy accused of punching a woman

According to the judge, he defers to the executive branch when it comes to judgments about military people since, in accordance with the Constitution, the President of the United States, not any federal judge, has the final say in these matters.

The ruling was made more than a year after the US Supreme Court ruled that, with the exception of US military service academies, schools and universities may no longer utilize race as a stated criterion for admissions, and several months after a nine-day trial in the case. Students for Fair Admissions lawsuits also resulted in that decision.

“The cases before the court did not address the issue and left up the prospect of potentially distinct interests that military academies may present in a future case,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in a footnote in last year’s majority opinion.

Students for Fair Admissions swiftly brought legal challenges against West Point and the Naval Academy, alleging that the institutions’ admissions practices of taking race into account were unconstitutional under the US Constitution.

Citing the Roberts footnote, Bennett said in his ruling that the case’s evidence shows how wise that caution was.

According to the judge, defendants have demonstrated that the Navy and Marine Corps are now more racially diverse as a result of the Naval Academy’s limited use of race in admissions. This has improved national security by enhancing recruitment and retention, unit cohesion and lethality, and domestic and international legitimacy.

According to Students for Fair Admissions, the organization will challenge the ruling first in the federal appeals court located in Richmond, Virginia, and then, if required, in the Supreme Court.

See also  Man who paralyzed his ex-girlfriend and injured her mother in a stabbing sentenced to life in prison: ‘I Need Serious Help’

In a statement, the group’s president, Edward Blum, expressed his hope that the US military academies will eventually be forced to abide by the Supreme Court’s ban on race in college admissions.

Additional details have been added to this story.

Note: Every piece of content is rigorously reviewed by our team of experienced writers and editors to ensure its accuracy. Our writers use credible sources and adhere to strict fact-checking protocols to verify all claims and data before publication. If an error is identified, we promptly correct it and strive for transparency in all updates, feel free to reach out to us via email. We appreciate your trust and support!

Leave a Comment