University of Wisconsin-Madison oncology professor Janet E. Unz '83 in its complaint to support its argument against affirmative action. Students for Fair Admissions supporters rally outside the U.S. “It is a false comparison to link Unz’s opinion to the cases under review,” Blum added. “Moreover, Unz’s recent writings have no bearing on the legality of racial classifications and preferences at Harvard and throughout higher education.” “David Brooks of the New York Times called Unz’s essay one of the most important ones published that year,” Blum wrote. Blum, SFFA’s president, defended the citation of Unz in an emailed statement. In the last seven years, only one major publication - the Guardian - has connected Unz’s work explicitly to the anti-affirmative action cases before the Supreme Court.Įdward J. Unz did not dispute the accusations of antisemitism in an interview with The Crimson, and he has previously defended his donations and endorsements to the Boston Globe. A former Silicon Valley tech entrepreneur, he has donated to VDARE - an organization that he called “quasi-white nationalist” - and extremism watchdog organizations have criticized Unz’s personal writings as antisemitic. Unz, however, is better known for his role as a conservative activist mired in controversy. SFFA, which alleges that Harvard’s admissions policies discriminate against Asian American applicants, introduces Unz as a researcher “who holds an undergraduate physics degree from Harvard and studied theoretical physics at Stanford” and “conducted an extensive study of Ivy League admissions.” Unz ’83 and his 2012 analysis, “The Myth of American Meritocracy,” is cited as evidence of “rampant discrimination against Asian Americans by Ivy League universities generally and Harvard specifically.” On page 49 of the anti-affirmative action complaint Students for Fair Admissions filed against Harvard in 2014, Ron K. Each charity’s name links to a separate page providing even more data, including individual financial efficiency ratios and how much pay its highest compensated individual receives.D eep within the 119-page complaint that could cause the Supreme Court to overturn affirmative action in the coming days is a citation for an essay by a conservative activist who now denies the Holocaust. The full list below can be sorted by the category of mission-for example, domestic needs, international needs, health or environmental. Government grants, payments for services and investment returns don’t count, though each organization’s total revenue is noted. ![]() The rankings are based solely on private contributions. Our list reflects the most recently reported fiscal year for each charity. Congress also helped boost giving with an additional temporary charitable tax break. tax code favors donations of appreciated stock. In addition to Covid, the stock market’s strong performance in 20 contributed to the surge in giving the U.S. 100-was $181 million in donations, up from $167 million in 2021. Combined with the 10% increase the 100 posted last year, this marks the highest two-year gain in the 24 years that Forbes has been putting together this list. In a country with more than one million nonprofits, they received one-eighth of all charitable giving. Overall, the nation’s top 100 charities took in a combined $58.8 billion in private donations in their most recently reported fiscal years, an 8% increase. A record 11 regional food banks also made the list this year. ![]() Much of that haul reflects donated food from large corporations, but it also received cash from more than 750,000 individual donors, reflecting a pandemic heightened awareness of food insecurity in the U.S. It posted $4.06 billion in donations, a 47% increase in its two fiscal years overlapping the pandemic. 1 on Forbes’ annual top charities list: Feeding America, the Chicago-based umbrella that helps supply a network of more than 200 U.S. N the wake of Covid-19, there’s a new No.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |