Judge: You can't ban DEI grants without bothering to define DEI

(arstechnica.com)
17 points bundie | 5 comments | 05 Jul 25 08:38 UTC | HN request time: 0.998s | source
1. ggm ◴[05 Jul 25 08:55 UTC] No.44471199[source]▶
"I know it when I see it"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it

replies(1): >>44471494 #
2. motorest ◴[05 Jul 25 09:46 UTC] No.44471448[source]▶
From the article.

> So, while the decision restores money to individual research programs, it does nothing to reverse the larger damage caused by the politicization of funding decisions.

3. vanderZwan ◴[05 Jul 25 09:54 UTC] No.44471494[source]▶
That doesn't work when dealing with people who are arguing in bad faith that the card says moops

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMabpBvtXr4

replies(1): >>44471772 #
4. torbid ◴[05 Jul 25 10:48 UTC] No.44471772{3}[source]▶
It doesn't work at all, Potter Stewart wasn't stupid or uninformed about what a secular republic is, so he was acting in bad faith to push for personal discretion definitions that will mostly be performed by people in the majority faith.