The scary part is that a major law firm really thought it would be legal to do this, or perhaps knew it wasn’t legal but thought it could get away with it anyway.
The law firm Morrison Foerster, based in San Francisco, was sued for excluding non-minority students from its so called “diversity fellowships,”described as a program for first-year law students who are members of “a diverse population that has historically been underrepresented in the legal profession,” such as black, Hispanic, Native American and LGBTQ+ individuals. The plaintiff in the suit was the American Alliance for Equal Rights (AAER), founded by same conservative activist who brought the lawsuits that resulted in the Supreme Court finally declaring affirmative action in college admissions what it had always been: unconstitutional racial discrimination.
A few weeks after the lawsuit was filed, the firm removed all references to race from the program page on its website, an implicit statement that “OK, you caught us. Never mind!” The program now is described as
designed to recognize “exceptional first and second-year law students with a demonstrated commitment to diversity and inclusion in the legal profession.” In other words, the firm is substituting viewpoint discrimination for racial discrimination.
Fellowship applicants, under the new criteria, must demonstrate an “ability to bring a diverse perspective to the firm as a result of your adaptability, cultural fluency, resilience, and life experiences” and a “demonstrated commitment to promoting diversity, inclusion, and accessibility.”
Whatever that means. Ann Althouse, who helpfully flagged the story in the Washington Post (an untrustworthy partisan rage which I no longer read unless a story is brought to my attention by others), commented, “How could a white student demonstrate commitment to diversity and inclusion in the legal profession? Isn’t that really just another way of saying don’t apply? By applying, a white student is implicitly proving a lack of commitment to diversity and inclusion.” Good point! What the law firm is really telling everyone is that it just isn’t a very good firm or a well-managed one, and that aspiring lawyers and clients of all races and creeds should look elsewhere.
Ethics Alarms 
As it happens, I wrote an dialogue breaking down the opinions surrounding diversity initiatives, and exploring constructive approaches to the situation: https://ginnungagapfoundation.wordpress.com/2023/07/04/midmorning-zone-approaching-arguments-about-affirmative-action/.
Interesting article. You clearly agree that poverty is the default.
So, do you recall the European institution of serfdom? Would that be a solution to poverty?
The problem that I see with serfdom is it actually perpetuates poverty. It’s essentially another socialist system where you are on your own, with no protection, if you don’t want to depend on the state.
The program is designed to recognize fist and second year students with “a demonstrated commitment to diversity and inclusion in the legal profession”. Oh. Just out of curiosity, how could first or second year law student demonstrate such a commitment? Most law students are recent college graduates. Most recent college graduates haven’t worked in fields or departments where they could demonstrate such commitment. So, what does that even mean?
jvb