-
Iran warns civilians as Trump says talks 'going well'
-
Tehran accuses US of 'calculated' assault on school
-
Putin hopes Iran war will shift focus from 'crimes' in Ukraine: German FM
-
Ex-England manager Hodgson, 78, returns as Bristol City boss
-
Police probe firebomb attack on Russian centre in Prague
-
Diamond League athletics meet in Doha still slated for May 8 - organisers
-
Belgium's Goffin to retire at end of season
-
Oil climbs, stocks fall even as Trump extends Iran deadline
-
World Cup boost as late goal earns Australia 1-0 win over Cameroon
-
German state railway loss widens, passengers warned of trouble ahead
-
'I'll never be the same': Iranians recount one month of war
-
Back-to-back World Cup titles a 'dream' for Argentina, says Tagliafico
-
Japan to boost coal-fired power as Mideast war causes energy turmoil
-
Mexico searches for missing boats ferrying aid to Cuba
-
G7 allies press Rubio on US Iran plans
-
Iran Guards warn civilians after Trump pushes Hormuz deadline
-
Beached whale frees itself from German coast
-
Global mohair supply flourishes in South Africa's desert
-
Virus kills tiger cubs in Indonesian zoo
-
Oil rises, stocks mixed as joy over Trump Iran strike pause fades
-
Indonesian kids brace themselves for social media ban
-
No fans, no fireworks as Pakistan T20 league begins with a hush
-
Oil, stocks mixed as traders weigh Trump's latest Iran strike pause
-
Piastri outshines Mercedes duo to go fastest in Japan practice
-
Nepali rapper Shah sworn in as prime minister
-
New Zealand, Australia say Olympic gender rules bring 'clarity'
-
Gabon battles for baby sea turtles' survival
-
Hungarians' growing anger at living in EU's 'most corrupt state'
-
Mexico's navy says two boats ferrying aid to Cuba are missing
-
Germany eyes Australian 'Ghost Bat' for drone combat era
-
Nepali rapper to be sworn in as new prime minister
-
Cryptocurrencies aiding Iran during war
-
Myanmar travellers ride the rails as fuel prices rise
-
Trump moves deadline for striking Iran energy sites
-
Bolivia, Jamaica close in on World Cup after playoff wins
-
Tech-equipped Indigenous firefighters protect Thai forests
-
Sacred leaf offers hope for Vanuatu's threatened forests
-
Mercedes' Russell fastest in first practice for Japan GP
-
Sabalenka, Sinner keep 'Sunshine Double' in sight with Miami Open wins
-
AI used to make 'fetishised' images of disabled women
-
Oil drops as Trump pauses Iran strikes, but stock traders nervous
-
Parents sacrificed all for 15-year-old India prodigy Suryavanshi
-
Sabalenka subdues Rybakina to reach Miami Open final
-
Newcomers could threaten Christiania's hippie soul, locals fear
-
Hornets sting Knicks to maintain playoff push
-
German 'green village' rides out Mideast energy storm
-
US in the spotlight at WTO meet
-
Cyclone triggers outages at major Australian LNG plants
-
US judge suspends govt sanctions on AI company Anthropic
-
US currency to bear Trump's signature, Treasury says
US Supreme Court's right-wing skeptical of using race in college admissions
The conservative-majority US Supreme Court appeared poised on Monday to ban the use of race as a factor in deciding who gets into America's elite universities.
The top US court heard nearly five hours of arguments on the use of race in admissions to Harvard and the University of North Carolina (UNC) -- respectively the oldest private and public institutions of higher education in the country.
Harvard and UNC, like a number of other top US schools, consider an applicant's race as a factor in trying to ensure a diverse student body and representation of minorities, a policy known as "affirmative action."
It emerged from the Civil Rights Movement in the late 1960s to help address the legacy of discrimination in higher education against African Americans.
The suits against Harvard and UNC were brought by a group known as Students for Fair Admissions, which claims that race-conscious admissions policies discriminate against equally qualified applicants of Asian American origin.
"The racial preference is operating to the disadvantage of Asian American applicants," Patrick Strawbridge, attorney for Students for Fair Admissions, told the court.
"When you use race, you're telling applicants that their race matters," Strawbridge said, calling it "inherently divisive."
"It gets us further away from a world where the government treats race as irrelevant," he said.
Strawbridge's arguments appeared to get a sympathetic hearing from the conservative justices on the court, setting the stage for another potential historic reversal like in June, when the high court overturned its landmark 1973 "Roe v. Wade" decision guaranteeing a woman's right to abortion.
Conservatives currently enjoy a solid 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court, including three justices nominated by former president Donald Trump, a Republican.
- 'Don't have a clue what it means' -
Justice Clarence Thomas, a longtime opponent of affirmative action, said he could not think of another case "where the court deferred to the alleged discriminator."
"I've heard the word diversity quite a few times and I don't have a clue what it means," he added. "It seems to mean everything for everyone."
Conservative justices John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett repeatedly pressed the attorneys for Harvard and UNC about when there would be an "end point" to affirmative action.
"Your position is that race matters because it's necessary for diversity," Roberts said. "It's not going to stop mattering at some particular point.
"You're always going to have to look at race because you say race matters to give us the necessary diversity."
Justice Elena Kagan and the other two liberal justices on the court pushed back against the arguments put forward by Students for Fair Admissions.
"For decades, this court has rightly recognized that student body diversity is a compelling interest that can justify limited consideration of race in university admissions," Kagan said.
"That holding recognizes a simple but profound truth -- when students of all races and backgrounds come to college and live together and learn together they become better colleagues, better citizens and better leaders," she said.
"In your view, it really wouldn't matter if there was a precipitous decline in minority admissions," Kagan said to Strawbridge. "Your brief says it just doesn't matter if our institutions look like America.
"Doesn't it?" she asked.
- 'Cause racial diversity to plummet' -
The administration of Democratic President Joe Biden and dozens of major American companies have weighed in on the side of the universities.
"A blanket ban on race-conscious admissions would cause racial diversity to plummet at many of our nation's leading educational institutions," US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the court.
Previous courts have upheld affirmative action -- in 2016 by a single vote -- but the policy has been controversial from the start, and a number of white students have mounted legal challenges over the years, claiming "reverse discrimination."
Nine states have banned affirmative action at public universities including California, where voters did so in a ballot proposition in 1996 and rebuffed an attempt to revive the policy in 2020.
In a 1978 decision -- Regents of the University of California v. Bakke -- the Supreme Court banned the use of quotas in university admissions as unconstitutional.
But the court said race or ethnic origin can be considered as one factor among others in admitting students to ensure a diverse student body and to combat previous discrimination that could have prevented marginalized students from being accepted to those schools.
Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman on the Supreme Court, sat out the Harvard case because she has served previously on the Board of Overseers at the school.
P.Tamimi--SF-PST