Image 01 Image 03

“You can’t assume that there is discrimination just because different groups have different outcomes”

“You can’t assume that there is discrimination just because different groups have different outcomes”

My appearance on Chicago’s Morning Answer about the launch of “as long as each individual is being treated fairly without regard to race, then group outcomes don’t matter. We don’t buy into, I don’t accept, that group measurements are the way to measure fairness.”

I appeared on March 1, 2023, on Chicago’s Morning Answer with Dan Proft and Amy Jacobson (no relation) a show I have been on many times and which I enjoy.

The discussion started with a reference to this tweet:

Then the discussion turned to our the launch of

Partial Transcript (auto-generated, may contain transcription errors)

PROFT (03:59):

What’s your response to the college admissions flap as a lot of parents are befuddled by the academic records their kids have put together, and then the schools that they can gain entrance to with those records?

WAJ (04:16):

Well, we get a lot of reports of similar sort of things. It’s hard to know kind of nationwide or on a mass scale what’s happening, but certainly the statistics that have come out in the Harvard case, you just cited some of them, and they were really foundational to the Asian students. bringing that lawsuit, do seem to indicate that there is racial discrimination in college admissions. And of course, we see it in many different areas, and that’s one of the reasons that we form the Equal Protection Project, because we’re seeing that the foundational goal of our society from the 14th Amendment guarantee of equal protection of the laws down to local ordinances, which is non-discrimination, is being cast aside for political reasons, by people who feel there should be certain racial mixes in various jobs in various universities and elsewhere.

So this concept that we’re not going to discriminate on the basis of race, which we should all be striving for, is being cast aside by this concept that we need to achieve a particular racial mix in a particular job or a particular university, and therefore we’re going discriminate against either white people or Asian people or whoever it happens to be.

And that’s just so damaging to our country. It really tears us apart. That’s why we launched Equal Protection Project, which is is the website.


But do you understand why Harvard’s doing, I mean, if there’s nothing in place, the entire student body would be Asian or mostly, not all. I shouldn’t say that, but is that just, am I wrong in that thinking?

WAJ (05:51):

Well, I don’t know. I certainly don’t think the entire would be, but it would be relative to the population disproportionately of Asian background. But I guess the question is, so what? If you have certain measurements that you consider to be legitimate measures of merit, whether it’s grades or SAT scores or whatever it happens to be, and one group happens to outperform others, so what’s wrong with that?

Our view is as long as each individual is being treated fairly without regard to race, then group outcomes don’t matter. We don’t buy into, I don’t accept, that group measurements are the way to measure fairness. The way to measure fairness is how each individual is treated, which is what, at least until now, the law has always required. While there was a carve out, a little bit of an exception for higher ed, which may go away soon with the US Supreme Court decision in the Harvard case. But individual fairness is what matters. That’s what the Constitution guarantees. That’s what our laws guarantee. And the fact that one group may outperform another is really not a measure of anything. And it’s certainly not a measure of discrimination.

You can’t assume that there is discrimination just because different groups have different outcomes. And all of the people who say, well, what else could it be? Well, you’re asking us to prove, disprove a negative. Why don’t you prove how a particular person was discriminated against? Don’t just assume it.

* * *

PROFT (10:13):

So, this project you’re launching, um, I’m sort of surmising from what you just mentioned about the Providence School system that your soliciting people who have been discriminated against, like the Providence School system example and, is gonna provide legal representation to, uh, fight these sort of discriminatory policies.

WAJ (10:37):

Well, right now we’re looking more at policies and procedures, things that affect large numbers of people. We’re not gonna provide, necessarily, legal representational ourselves. We may find it for people. But if you have a very specific employment problem that’s kind of specific to you, that’s probably not something that we would get involved in. On the other hand, if there is a policy in your school district, there’s a policy in your governmental entity that is affecting a large number of people, then you know, we do certainly want to hear reports of that. And if we can get it resolved without the need for a lawsuit, so much the better. Sometimes a letter resolves it, sometimes a publicity resolves it. Sometimes when bad practices are exposed, people stop doing it, but sometimes they don’t.

But we have seen many governmental policies. The Biden administration had one that was stricken down by the courts for, again, loan forgiveness, but it was only for non-white farmers. Not for white farmers. And [the court] struck that down? So this is, we are mostly focused on policies and procedures that are affecting a large number of people. But if you do have a problem, you know, you certainly can reach out to us, us, and we might be able to connect you to somebody. But that’s our main focus, is not being employment lawyers. Our main focus is stopping bad policies and procedures that are now spread everywhere in society


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Profound; disparate efforts result in disparate results. Quick, let’s pass discriminatory laws.

PrincetonAl | March 2, 2023 at 8:45 pm

“Discriminations and Disparities”, Thomas Sowell.

It’s a book by one of the foremost thinkers of our generation that spells this out in detail all the statistical fallacies involved in thinking disparate outcomes are from discrimination.

I admit to being a disparately huge fan of Sowell.

It isn’t ‘discrimination’ that ONE minority has dramatically worse outcomes than everybody else because their ‘culture’ is destroying them.

It’s because culturally, the so-called ‘black community’ not only does not value education, but they actively attack any member of their ‘community’ that DOES value it as ‘acting white’.

When a culture that bases their entire identity on their skin color doesn’t value education, it’s not a shock that they have dramatically lower results in any academic test.

    alaskabob in reply to Olinser. | March 2, 2023 at 10:17 pm

    The Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture had that print out of white values. Everything on it was sound advice for a successful life both now and for…say…all recorded history. It isn’t even a “white” thing but pushing back at the black redneck culture Thomas Sowell has been at odds with. The “black community” in the North prior to the redneck invasion was indistinguishable from the “white community”.

      gonzotx in reply to alaskabob. | March 2, 2023 at 11:06 pm

      Red neck? Really?

        Dathurtz in reply to gonzotx. | March 3, 2023 at 6:53 am

        Deplorables, really. A whole basket full of ’em.

        CommoChief in reply to gonzotx. | March 3, 2023 at 7:20 am

        Sure. Speech patterns, honor culture, clanish, distrust of outsiders, quick to fight, and so on. All these cultural markers were present in the Scottish, Irish, West Country English settlers in the South. These were transferred to/assimilated by slaves in the Southeast.

        There are differences culturally between this group and other sub populations who happen to be ‘black’, Caribbean immigrants as an example. The folks who stubbornly refuse to alter their behavior away from the excesses of ‘redneck’ culture don’t do well in modern society no matter their ‘race’.

          Whitewall in reply to CommoChief. | March 3, 2023 at 10:26 am

          “Born Fighting”

          gonzotx in reply to CommoChief. | March 3, 2023 at 10:49 am

          Yes it’s all western Europes fault that black Americans as a whole, are wanting on most levels.
          Of course there are exceptions such as Thomas, Sowell, Carson… but they are exceptions and the blacks have no one to blame but themselves

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | March 3, 2023 at 11:44 am


          The only person at fault for personal failure is that person. Thomas Sowell has written extensively on this point. In particular his work ‘Black Rednecks and White Liberals’ which makes the exact point I did. I am surprised you would single out Sowell for praise while slamming his work.

        BierceAmbrose in reply to gonzotx. | March 5, 2023 at 3:41 pm

        “black redneck culture”

        Yes, literally. That’s the point. One way to not succeed round here is acting like rednecks, whatever your color.

        It’s from the tile of an essay or book by Dr. Sowell pointing out the commonalities in US black, and rural redneck cultures; tracing both to behaviors and attitudes inherited from lower-class English, and still present there.

        Similar outcomes from similar behavior across time, race, and countries makes a case that it’s the behaviors and attitudes, not the country or race.

    amwick in reply to Olinser. | March 3, 2023 at 6:52 am

    So many members of the black community have been targeted by social programs that provide money as long as there is no father in the household, and more money for more children.. They are getting paid to not have a nuclear family, which would in turn tend to support academic success. That has been happening for so long that it has become part of the culture, with disastrous results. People more familiar with history than I am will know about this.. I had to look it up..

    We are paying the price for this now.. I fully support Professor Jacobson’s Project, I just hope it isn’t too late.

      Dimsdale in reply to amwick. | March 3, 2023 at 8:14 am

      There shouldn’t be dime for any woman that has children without the father present. By that, I mean that the father should be named, positively identified by DNA, and forced to support the child or go to prison.

      Or just go on Maury….

        herm2416 in reply to Dimsdale. | March 3, 2023 at 8:49 am

        Social Security was originally for widows and orphans.
        “Not a dime” for a fatherless household is a very broad statement.

        CommoChief in reply to Dimsdale. | March 3, 2023 at 10:09 am

        How to fix families and relationships.
        Step one – mandatory paternity testing for every child born. No presumption the male listed on a birth certificate is the Father.
        Step two – Create two distinct types of marriage which people could freely choose; including existing marriages.
        A. Traditional in which only infidelity, physical abuse, withholding sex, lack of financial support are ground for divorce. Alimony allowed five year duration. Apply proportional liability to any alimony claim.
        B. Modern – no fault divorce allowed but no alimony may be awarded.
        Step three – Create and enforce the presumption that each Parent is fit and that 50/50 physical custody will be ordered. No child support under this 50/50 physical custody. Presumption must be overcome with evidence. Inability to financially support the child would disqualify the Parent seeking custody.

          daniel_ream in reply to CommoChief. | March 3, 2023 at 11:00 am

          I’d replace step two with the following dichotomy: no minor children resulting from the marriage: no-fault divorce, no alimony, 50-50 split of marital assets only. Minor children resulting from the marriage: traditional divorce laws apply, and proving grounds for divorce follows the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard, not “balance of probabilities”.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | March 3, 2023 at 11:57 am

          Disagree. Let people choose to be modern or traditional. Their choice. Choices have consequences and it is past time to return to embracing that framework.

          Custody should always start from a 50/50 physical custody presumption that must be overcome with evidence as to why one Parent should have less custody.

          Further the ability to independently support the minor children financially should be a factor in determining proportion of physical custody. If a particular Parent can’t do so they should not be granted custody w/o some other factor demonstrating lack of fitness in the other Parent.

          Bottom line is end the perverse incentives of our family law, family court structure that facilitate a culture that views marriage commitments as disposable. Don’t reward either party b/c they bail out of a marriage for a modern reason ‘irreconcilable differences’ v the justifiable traditional reasons.

          M Poppins in reply to CommoChief. | March 3, 2023 at 8:08 pm

          50/50 custody is one of the worst things that has happened to children – it treated them as possessions with no regard for their emotional or intellectual wellbeing. Going back and forth between households every week is unpleasant, destabilizing and stressful for children. It also denies the parents the opportunity to actually divorce, and remove the former spouse from one’s life.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | March 3, 2023 at 9:17 pm

          M Poppins

          How do you propose to determine custody of the children if not beginning from a baseline that each Parent is equally able and then introducing evidence to overcome that presumption?

    We intentionally discriminate based on demonstrated ability and aptitude. That’s why we test. It’s not discrimination that is illegal but the criteria we use to select some people over others. We simply don’t accept race or religion to be acceptable criteria. We want the smartest, most capable people in charge.

“Our view is as long as each individual is being treated fairly without regard to race, then group outcomes don’t matter. We don’t buy into, I don’t accept, that group measurements are the way to measure fairness.”

And this is where “disparate impact” slithers in. And carries with it the leftist nostrum that “all cultures are equally valid.”

And the USSC has bought into it. Texas Dept. of Housing v. The Inclusive Communities Project (5-4 decision; 2015).

I watched our AG testify that the disparity between the DoJ’s harsh treatment of abortion clinic protesters vs the DoJ’s cruel handling of Right to Life people was not a matter of bias.

But . . . But . . . if “Disparate Impact” alone “proves” systemic racism, why doesn’t disparate impact of the DoJ’s harsh treatment of pro vs non treatment of anti abortion folks likewise “prove” systemic bias against the pro life people?

    PrincetonAl in reply to Brian. | March 2, 2023 at 10:05 pm

    Men die younger than women on average.

    Sounds like discrimination.

    Fewer Asians than blacks in the NBA.

    Sounds like discrimination.

    The list goes on and on, but if they aren’t interested in facts or debate …

    Dimsdale in reply to Brian. | March 3, 2023 at 8:17 am

    Garland is a disgrace. I thank God every day that he didn’t get on the SCOTUS.

    Garland says the DOJ is tougher on Catholics who protest abortion clinics because the do it during the daytime. The attacks on churches and pregnancy care centers occur at night. Yep. That’s what he said.

    BierceAmbrose in reply to Brian. | March 5, 2023 at 3:49 pm

    “But . . . But . . . if “Disparate Impact” alone “proves” systemic racism, why doesn’t disparate impact of the DoJ’s harsh treatment of pro vs non treatment of anti abortion folks likewise “prove” systemic bias against the pro life people?”


    File the suit, write the amicus brief, go be talking heads — “Equal Protection” is the point.

    If the game is “unequal protection”, then make them say it. Redress of one group’s grievances on the back of another, because reasons is the game The Screaming D’s have been playing forever. Stopped tryin to hide it under The One. Now, it’s a battle cry.

LukeHandCool | March 2, 2023 at 10:08 pm

“The way to measure fairness is how each individual is treated, which is what, at least until now, the law has always required.”

Exactly and of course.

I’m a billion times more me than I am a white guy.

The reason that it’s important to talk about the average IQ difference between whites and blacks is not to lord it over blacks but to explain why it’s not whites holding them back if on the average they don’t do as well.

The point of that is to get the chip off their shoulder that is what is holding them back more than anything. Whites want blacks to do well – that’s what 50 years of affirmative action is about. Blacks are sabotaging themselves with resentment to do poorly. Good character leads to success, its opposite leads to its opposite.

    CommoChief in reply to rhhardin. | March 3, 2023 at 7:27 am

    Entering the middle class isn’t complicated.
    1. Graduate HS, retaining the subject matter.
    2. Get a job, keep the job until you find a better job.
    3. Don’t have children outside marriage.
    4. Get married and stay married.

    Do those things and your chances of entering into the middle-class and remaining there are incredibly high. Today I would add a fifth; be willing to relocate to a better job, better community for your children’s ED and safety.

      Martin in reply to CommoChief. | March 3, 2023 at 9:14 am

      Last I checked this advice has been determined by “Right Thinking People” as White Privilege. Therefore it must not be followed by anyone without White Privilege.

        CommoChief in reply to Martin. | March 3, 2023 at 9:56 am

        Well of course, grievance grifters and race hustlers gotta eat and if society told them to pound sand they couldn’t. Plus it is so much easier to outsource responsibility for one’s problems and the self anointed possessor of ‘superior virtue’ can feel good about themselves when they join in this cosplay.

        BierceAmbrose in reply to Martin. | March 5, 2023 at 4:10 pm

        Oh, it’s worse than that.

        Daniel Patrick Moynihan predicted exactly the outcomes we’ve seen from the policies developed in his time. Was run out of The Screaming D’s, government, and polite society, for it, in that order.

        Of course, he was right. But his real crime was looking at how the world works, then crafting policies to get what we want, not policies we feel good pronouncing. Can’t have that.

    M Poppins in reply to rhhardin. | March 3, 2023 at 8:25 pm

    the notion of white IQ superiority is a canard; the work of Charles Murray in that field is an embarrassment. And IQ in of itself doesn’t make an Einstein or a Frank Lloyd Wright or a T.S. Eliot – there are just as many high IQ abject failures as there are successes.

      rhhardin in reply to M Poppins. | March 4, 2023 at 9:41 am

      Whites aren’t superior even IQ-wise. East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews beat them by almost 10 points on the average. Amazingly, they do better academically than whites.

RepublicanRJL | March 3, 2023 at 5:26 am

Equity outcomes just bring the median to the level where no one is special, no one excels and no one has the desire to do better.

    Dimsdale in reply to RepublicanRJL. | March 3, 2023 at 8:21 am

    “Affirmative action” is simply affirmative mediocrity or failure.

    As for blacks sabotaging themselves? Agreed. Simply by checking the box, they affirm that blacks can’t achieve without help, and worse, put a shadow over every black doctor, lawyer etc. You simply have to be honest and wonder if they got the position because of achievement or skin color.

    MLK Jr. must be spinning in his grave at hypersonic speeds.

    M Poppins in reply to RepublicanRJL. | March 3, 2023 at 8:27 pm

    you have just articulated the American ethos: the anti-intellectual hatred and fear of excellence and the worship of mediocrity as a symbol of equality.

      BierceAmbrose in reply to M Poppins. | March 5, 2023 at 5:55 pm

      That’s the Ethos of The Apparatus currently, and extends to other countries, and various world-programs. The American Compact is aspirational, and individual; roughly the inverse of everything coming out of Davos, which Gropy Joe just asserted we’ll be beholden to, officially now.

      A friend of mine’s mother died the other week. She “came over” for a better life as a young adult. Spent her last 20-ish years volunteering, as hub of community, because she didn’t have to work any more. Her kid semi-retied at 50. He doesn’t mingle with economic development and startups round here — they’re always after his money. Not bad. My Bulgarian friends finishing advanced degrees, then spun up awesome lives n raising their kid — they came to the US for a better shot, and look at them. My young colleague who found my broken brain useful as a sounding board while navigating early career is kicking all the asses. She fled China, then dumped useless college half-way through.

      I could go on: the barista who left that gig to take his shot full time at a performing career. A bit cliche, since he’s a black kid. Not cliche, as he started rural. That kid’s got talent, discipline, and he’s grounded. With a couple breaks, he’s gonna be a name everybody knows.

      The American Compact is aspirational, and a weird kind of collective — working together holding space to leave everyone alone the same, to pursue what they want: you do you.

E Howard Hunt | March 3, 2023 at 8:19 am

At last, fighting on the proper field of battle. Never relent. Throw their rhetorical “what else can It be’s” right back at them. Never speculate, not ever, on what else it can be. Should you do so your answer will either be a false distraction or a truth that will destroy you.

Under diversity [dogma] of the Pro-Choice ethical religion, there are only color blocs (e.g. “black lives”) that matter.

All of the above.

Plus: The government monopoly bureaucratic school system AND the teachers’ unions. These are America’s best examples of systemic racism and should be labeled as such on every opportunity.

This systemic racism is at its worst in democrat controlled cities because the democrats are implacable supporters of the government schools and the teachers’ unions.

“Niece got 1450 SAT, 4.2 GPA, competitive athlete. She didn’t even get into her safety schools. Going to junior college this year and is very depressed. The POC kids in her class, C students at best, are all headed to Berkeley, UCLA, USC, and Stanford.”

1. This is despicable. But …

2. Niece will probably suffer less damage from leftism and wokeness in a junior college than in any of the other schools listed.

3. Niece may miss out on elite “networking” – one of the few remaining benefits of an elite college education. Is it worth losing your child to leftist wokism?

    M Poppins in reply to gibbie. | March 3, 2023 at 8:29 pm

    to miss out on networking is to miss the key to adult life.

      BierceAmbrose in reply to M Poppins. | March 5, 2023 at 6:05 pm

      Which is why The Nomenclature is so aggressive at allowing only The Right People to filter in.

      henrybowman in reply to M Poppins. | March 6, 2023 at 10:47 am

      Would you rather network with stupid people who have power, or truly diverse people who have ambition?

        BierceAmbrose in reply to henrybowman. | March 6, 2023 at 4:55 pm

        Short term, stable conditions, I’d do instrumentally better with the former. Long term, with novelty and change, the latter.

        For it’s own sake, way more fun to play with the ambitious diverse every time. Those other people are just boring.

2smartforlibs | March 3, 2023 at 11:44 am

The is all about equality of outcome until it affects them.

BierceAmbrose | March 3, 2023 at 5:16 pm

“You can’t assume that there is discrimination just because different groups have different outcomes”

Any division will have different outcomes for different groups. Doesn’t matter how you define the groups or what you measure. Because math.

So much of this discussion, offering community college as a solution, quite misses the point. Which is that university isn’t only about taking classes, but about a class system in which one has the opportunity to know stellar professors who could be mentors, and other students from all over the country who will become part of a professional network. Vladimir Nabokov was lecturing at Cornell, not at Asheville Community College.

    henrybowman in reply to M Poppins. | March 6, 2023 at 11:00 am

    And now he isn’t, because no one would dare invite him.
    Nor are Dorian Abbot, Matt Walsh, Thomas Sowell, Ilya Shapiro, Condoleezza Rice, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Madeline Albright, Rudy Giuliani, or even the freakin’ Dalai Lama.
    You’re describing a meritocratic environment that (in case you missed it) is degrading a hair faster than the life expectancy actuarials in East Palestine OH.
    If you have a kid looking for advanced education, you need to get out ahead of this trend.
    You can’t step into that river anymore… it’s moved on.

Just reading the laser sharp, crystal clear common sense you spoke in that interview was like a breath of the most refreshing, liberating air!!
Kudos to you and God bless you in all your efforts!!

ChrisPeters | March 4, 2023 at 2:03 pm

One of the best arguments is a comparison of the overall population to the prison population.

Women comprise more than 50% of the overall population, yet they comprise less than 7% of the prison population.

Does this mean there is discrimination against men, or is it really just a matter of men being the ones committing the majority of the crimes?

The makeup of the overall population does not necessarily correspond to the makeup of every other population group.

The equality promised in our Constitutional Republic is that of OPPORTUNITY, not OUTCOME.