Civil Rights Lawyer At Harvard University Acts Like Humpty Dumpty

Has one race exclusive use of the word race? What is the definition of that word? The profiled lawyer does not say. Working with no definition allows any argument to succeed. 



Is that how lawyers argue out of court? Rahsaan D. Hall "defended Harvard’s consideration of race [undefined] as a factor in its admissions processes. [. . .] Hall maintained that Harvard [is] in compliance with the legal precedent set by the Supreme Court" but provides no citation. Perplexed at appeals to law when it suits the argument, but ignoring law as the White House and the Department of Justice do when that suits them. Curious that Hall argues as if progressive voters have difficulty obtaining voter IDs, but non progressive voters do not. Does that mean ability is based on ideology?



[From article]
defended Harvard’s consideration of race as a factor in its admissions processes,
[. . .]



Hall maintained that Harvard’s holistic admissions processes were in compliance with the legal precedent set by the Supreme Court.
[. . .]
Commenting on voter identification laws, Hall questioned whether statistical evidence supports the prevalence of voter fraud.
[. . .]



“The whole notion of the ‘voter integrity movement’ is a ruse to get to the real issue of denying people, most of whom are inclined to vote progressively, access to the polls.”

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2015/10/7/civil-rights-lawyer-admissions/

Civil Rights Lawyer Defends Use of Race in Harvard Admissions
By DAPHNE C. THOMPSON,

Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
October 7, 2015