> I personally can't see the standpoints being equally legitimate I took your point. I was thinking of legitimate as in official decisions. There are already l

> I personally can't see the standpoints being equally legitimate I took your point. I was thinking of legitimate as in official decisions. There are already laws that implement gender or racial quotas in a work environment. Many companies already advertise this [0] and even public institutions were discussing it at least as far back as a decade ago [1]. One would logically have to assume that they're equally valid for a university. If the issue is indeed that Yale is using such quotas to maintain a certain balance between the different groups based on the population ratios but the courts agree with the Feds that this is illegal then we'll be left holding 2 equally (il)legitimate but contradictory views on the problem: quotas are legal, positive measures to achieve balanced participation and representation [2] but at the same time they are illegal because they discriminate against the other groups. Since the details of the Yale case aren't all that clear right now we'll have to wait for the judgement. They may actually do something more onerous than that I assumed above. [0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgenehuang/2017/02/14/seeking-women-40-companies-that-have-set-gender-diversity-targets/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgenehuang/2017/02/14/seekin... [1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_11_219 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH... [2] https://eige.europa.eu/thesaurus/terms/1203 https://eige.europa.eu/thesaurus/terms/1203